FY2010 JJDPA Title V - Attachment 2

Illinois FY2010 JJDPA Title V Grant Application


  1. Attachment 2
    1. Summary:
      1. Figure 1: Overall Trends
      2. Figure 2: Gender of Offender and Victim
      3. Figure 3: Race and Ethnicity (Offender and Victim)
    2. 1. Estimate of the number of new and/or continuation sub grants the state will award
    3. 2. Plan to reach out to eligible units of local government (ULG)
    4. 3. Sub grant award assurances
      1. A. Sub award selection
      2. B. Performance measurement data collection
    5. 4. Plans for ongoing monitoring
    6. 5. Coordination among Title V and other prevention efforts
    7. 6. Collecting and Sharing Juvenile Justice Information
      1. A - Description of Process for Collecting and Sharing Juvenile Justice Information
      2. B - Barriers to Data Collection and Dissemination
    8. 7. SMART

Attachment 2

Summary:

Illinois seeks Title V Community Prevention funds to support policy, practice and programming improvements related to youth domestic battery, which has emerged as a significant juvenile justice issue in Illinois. Between 2000 and 2007, (the latest full year for which data is available) the number of youth in contact with the juvenile justice system has increased significantly. The largest spike occurred between 2005 and 2007, when arrests of juveniles for domestic offenses increased over 60%. The majority of these offenses involved either no injury (76.19%) or minor injury (23.12%) to the victim.(1) Nonetheless, the sharp increase in overall youth contact with the juvenile justice system due to crisis in the home has catalyzed significant discussion and collaboration within Illinois to determine the underlying needs of these youth and families.

Figure 1: Overall Trends

In gathering and analyzing the statewide data available on youth in contact with the justice system for domestic-related offenses, the prevalence of girls and women in the populations of both offender and victim became evident. Just under 22% of youth arrested in 2007 for all offenses in Illinois were girls. For domestic offenses, however, girls comprise over one third (33.5%) of youth arrests. Over 60% of victims of juvenile domestic offenses were women. Most often, the victims were parents or stepparents (38.76%), siblings (12.18%) or other "known" members of the household (27.52%). Alleged battery of a dating partner comprised only 6.98% of these cases.

Figure 2: Gender of Offender and Victim

In gathering and analyzing the statewide data available on youth in contact with the justice system for domestic-related offenses, the prevalence of girls and women in the populations of both offender and victim became evident. Just under 22% of youth arrested in 2007 for all offenses in Illinois were girls. For domestic offenses, however, girls comprise over one third (33.5%) of youth arrests. Over 60% of victims of juvenile domestic offenses were women. Most often, the victims were parents or stepparents (38.76%), siblings (12.18%) or other "known" members of the household (27.52%). Alleged battery of a dating partner comprised only 6.98% of these cases.

Figure 3: Race and Ethnicity (Offender and Victim)

As discussions of this emerging issue developed, juvenile justice practitioners have noted that, although these youth have contact with the juvenile justice system for a significant issue - domestic battery - these cases often reflect families in crisis who simply lack support structures, skills and services to prevent and deescalate interpersonal conflicts between youth and parents or siblings. Practitioners such as community-based providers, probation officers, prosecutors and defenders report that these crises manifest in a number of ways, including youth running away from home or being locked out by the home - which would not give rise to justice system contact - or a conflict which results in law enforcement contact.

Law enforcement partners also report that, when called to a home in which parents / caregivers and children are engaged in conflict, they are often left with few alternatives to arrest and that, for various reasons, the youth is often the one arrested. When girls are involved, the options for community-based approaches to keep them safe and intervene successfully are even more limited, resulting in unnecessary arrests, detention admissions and lengthy stays in secure confinement while the underlying needs of the youth and family remain unaddressed.

However, these practitioners also report that, with policy, practice and programming changes designed to best address the needs of families in crisis, we can prevent these crises from escalating to violence, can prevent youth involvement in the juvenile justice system and - most importantly - can improve outcomes for both the juvenile and his or her family. Therefore, Illinois seeks Title V Community Prevention funds to support efforts to improve local policy, practice and programming in selected sites to pilot and implement approaches which can:

  • Keep youth safely in their homes and divert them from justice system involvement or system penetration, whenever possible (Diversion: Program Area 11)
  • Provide counseling services and / or family support services for at-risk juvenile and / or first-time and nonserious juvenile offenders (Mental Health Services: Program Area 20)
  • Provide programming and policy development which reduces the disproportionate number of juvenile members of minority groups who come into contact with the juvenile justice system, pursuant to the JJDP Act of 2002 (DMC: Program Area 10)
  • Develop these policy, practice and program models with an emphasis on the unique needs of both male and female youth in this population (Gender Services: Program Area 13).

1. Estimate of the number of new and/or continuation sub grants the state will award

DHS anticipates awarding approximately 3 subcontracts with these funds. They will fund crisis intervention, safety planning, family support, individualized services and other program and policy development efforts, with a focus on each of the program areas above and a specific focus on gender specific services. These funds will support communities with significant rates of juvenile domestic battery incidents and with demonstrated capacity to address these unique issues and the underlying needs of youth and family involved.

FFY 2010 Title V grants to address gender specific issues will be solicited in communities with high juvenile and adult domestic violence rates, a trend of high involvement of girls in the juvenile justice system as a result and a demonstrated desire to establish programming and strategies to reduce system involvement, penetration and confinement. In addition to Illinois data obtained in a recently released (5/2009) SAG commissioned study, SMART data will also be utilized to target areas in need of programming.

Once awarded, the Commission and the Department will work to ensure that the program outcomes for these youth will include family support and crisis de-escalation; providing the necessary supports for the youth and family to ensure success; and ultimately diversion from entering the juvenile justice system including secure detention.

2. Plan to reach out to eligible units of local government (ULG)

As a result of past outreach efforts, at-risk youth in rural, urban and suburban communities have benefited from Title V Prevention funded services. Utilizing a competitive application process the Illinois Juvenile Justice Commission (IJJC) has ensured that existing communities, as well as new communities, have an opportunity to participate in Title V Prevention services. To maximize outreach efforts, the IJJC uses a variety of notification formats that include: telephone contact, electronic notification and written notification via mail. In addition, members of the IJJC participate in a myriad of meetings across the state and plan on utilizing this setting for gathering and distributing application information. In this way the IJJC is able to offer grant opportunities to existing and new providers to ensure all facets of the state are represented and youth and families across Illinois have the opportunity to access needed services. Extra effort will also be made to reach and encourage those communities identified by the IJJC as those with the greatest need for such services and capacity to implement new services and practices, based on all available community risk factor data, compliance data and indicators of local collaboration and capacity.

The competitive application process includes eligibility criteria that ensure compliance with the JJDP Act of 2002. If Counties are not in compliance, they are not eligible to receive funding. However, for this grant, a provider with a past history of noncompliance will be considered, provided they make certain assurances that they will maintain compliance under the Act. Compliance monitoring staff prepares regular reports that identify which counties are in compliance and which are not. IDHS staff and the IJJC regularly review this information. If counties become non-compliant, they are notified and funding may be suspended or reduced, while a time period is set for the county to come back into compliance or to take significant steps toward ensuring compliance. If, during that established time frame, the county has not made significant efforts to ensure compliance, funding may be discontinued. To date, this has been an effective measure to ensure compliance and sub grants have not had to be terminated.

3. Sub grant award assurances

A. Sub award selection

IDHS and IJJC give priority to funding applicants that propose to implement evidence-based programs and activities. This priority is written into Request For Proposals, and is subsequently integrated into the evaluation criteria. Where possible, IJJC will only fund providers that implement such programs.

IDHS and IJJC will discontinue funding any sub grant recipient who, after two years, has failed to demonstrate that the program has achieved substantial success in meeting the goals specified in the original sub grant application. The contracts issued through IDHS are written in such a way that funding is awarded one year at a time. Among other things, continued funding is based on performance.

B. Performance measurement data collection

Illinois provides funds to local agency grantees to provide the services and programs funded through the OJJDP Title V Grant funds. IDHS and the IJJC, in the competitive application process, and the continuation funding process, as appropriate, will pre-select performance measures based on the Program Area for which funding is being distributed.

As part of the ongoing technical assistance and monitoring activities, IDHS staff will ensure that these performance measures are being addressed and the appropriate data is being collected and reported. The requirement to collect this data can be found in their contract.

Every subgrantee will be required to report performance measure output and outcome data on all required measures and at least two additional outputs and outcomes. The required measures include: number and percentage of program youth who complete program requirements, number and percentage of youth with whom an evidence-based program or practice was used, number and percentage of program youth who offend, and number and percentage of program youth who exhibit desired change in targeted behaviors.

4. Plans for ongoing monitoring

IDHS and IJJC staff will conduct ongoing monitoring and regular site visits to Title V local subgrantees to obtain progress reports, ensure that program requirements are being adhered to and that substantial progress is underway.

5. Coordination among Title V and other prevention efforts

Significant coordination and collaboration has already developed among Illinois stakeholders, service providers and practitioners to examine data and to begin development of model domestic battery policy, protocol and programming. The Models for Change Initiative, supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, has convened and will convene additional "summits" to bring local, state and national partners together to examine data trends, share research on best practices and promising programs, develop appropriate data measures for baseline and progress indicators and develop plans for implementation of new program strategies. With Title V support, programs can be implemented, measured and shared among the statewide collaborative developing to improve our state's response to families in crisis.

6. Collecting and Sharing Juvenile Justice Information

A - Description of Process for Collecting and Sharing Juvenile Justice Information

County level data is sent to the Information Clearinghouse, part of the Illinois Criminal Justice information Authority (ICJIA), on a yearly basis from the following state agencies:

  • The Administrative Office of Illinois Courts sends court data including the number of petitions filed, number of youth adjudicated delinquent, active probation caseloads, number of youth sent to detention centers, number of cases continued under supervision, and number of cases on informal probation supervision.
  • The Department of Juvenile Justice (formerly known as DOC) sends data on the number of juvenile commitments categorized by type of crime (person, property, sex, drug, other), age, race, and sex.
  • The Department of Children and Family Services sends data on reported and indicated abuse/neglect and reported and indicated sexual abuse as well as the number of reported and indicated cases of substance exposed infants.
  • The Illinois Department of Human Services sends data on the number of youth receiving services for alcohol or drug abuse
  • The Illinois State Board of Education sends data on truancies, chronic truancies, suspensions, expulsions, Truants in Need of Servicing (TINS), and dropouts.

Successful working relationships among these agencies have existed for years and these data are provided without question.

In addition to the above, there are case-level information systems or other sources that can provide information on detention and risk factors.

  • The electronic Juvenile Monitoring Information System (eJMIS) provides the number detained by age, race, sex, and offense of youth detained. The average length of stay and average daily population in each detention center and number of youth automatically transferred to adult court can also be obtained from this system.
  • The U.S. Census Bureau and the Illinois Department of Employment security can provide useful information regarding high-risk populations by providing the poverty and median income rate, population, and unemployment rates.

The ICJIA receives a grant from the Illinois Juvenile Justice Commission to prepare an annual report. The most recent is Juvenile Justice System and Risk Factor Data for Illinois: 2005 Annual Report (Published June 2008). The full report, including data tables, can be accessed by the public at http://www.icjia.state.il.us. This report is widely distributed throughout the state and the data contained in these reports are used to develop the IJJC's three-year plan and annual updates. The development of and setting of priorities are directly related to data, or lack thereof, found in these reports. The new report covering 2007 data is expected in early 2010.

B - Barriers to Data Collection and Dissemination

Case-level data on all youth who are involved in the juvenile justice system at all stages of the process would provide great insight into the efforts of local and state agencies. Unfortunately, these data are not readily accessible in a single information system. Instead, juvenile justice data in Illinois are housed in numerous and disparate local and state agencies creating a barrier to a comprehensive understanding of how the youth are served by the Illinois juvenile justice system.

Due to the manner in which data are collected, accurate juvenile arrest data is impossible to obtain. The only arrest data available comes from criminal history records. These numbers are not accurate, as not all arrests on a juvenile's criminal history record have to be reported.

The Illinois State Police (in charge of collecting statewide arrest data) do not collect arrest data by age, race, or sex. Under the Illinois Uniform Crime Reporting (I-UCR) program, all law enforcement agencies in the state are required to report monthly offense and arrest data to the Illinois State Police (ISP). Although in the past the I-UCR program collected more detailed offense and arrest information, since 1993, the I-UCR program has only collected aggregate-level offense and arrest data from law enforcement agencies across the state. These aggregate totals combine offense and arrest data across gender, race, and age. Unfortunately, the collection of offense and arrest data at the aggregate-level prevents researchers from comparing offender characteristics by age and other important variables.

An alternate source for juvenile arrest data is Illinois's central repository for criminal history record information (CHRI), ISP's Computerized Criminal History (CCH) system. The Illinois Criminal Identification Act mandates that an arrest fingerprint card be submitted for all minors age 10 and over who have been arrested for: 1) an offense which would be a felony if committed by an adult, and 2) any motor vehicle offense (e.g., motor vehicle theft, driving under the influence, and aggravated fleeing and eluding police). Fingerprint-based arrest cards for minors age 10 and over who have committed an offense that would be a class A or B misdemeanor if committed by an adult may be submitted to ISP, but are not required. Further, the Illinois Juvenile Justice Reform Provisions of 1998 mandated that ISP maintain a record of all station adjustments, both formal and informal, for offenses that would be a felony if committed by an adult. The reporting of station adjustments for misdemeanor offenses is also optional.

In 1999, prior to the reporting changes, nearly 40 percent of the largest police departments in the state were not submitting juvenile arrest cards to ISP. By 2001, nearly 90 percent of all police departments in the most populated areas were reporting juvenile arrests. However, even though the percentage of jurisdictions reporting had increased, the volume of arrests expected in a given area, when using Census Bureau population estimates to create a rough benchmark, was found to be adequate in only 22 counties. In other words, while the number of jurisdictions reporting has increased, the number of arrests reported is not as high as expected. Because of these limitations, trends in arrests over the 1999-2001 period cannot be reliably calculated using CCH data.

Further, as with any data reporting system, the CCH data will always be limited to those events it is designed to capture, namely, arrests documented by an arrest fingerprint card submitted to ISP.

An additional limitation of arrest data collected through the CCH system is the lack of data on ethnicity. Although CCH does collect arrestee demographic information by race (e.g., Caucasian, African-American, Asian, American Indian), Hispanic ethnicity is not collected. The omission of ethnicity is a result of all state criminal history systems reporting data electronically to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). As a result, the race categories used by CCH may not be comparable to race categories used by other criminal justice agencies that include ethnicity in their race codes (e.g., detention and corrections). In light of these data quality issues, the number of juvenile arrests and the characteristics of those arrested would be conservative, and not an absolute measure of juvenile crime in Illinois.

Another data collection barrier was encountered when the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts (AOIC) discontinued the collection of transfer data in 1999. Due to the manner in which these data are collected, it is not possible to determine the offenses for which the transfers take place, the eventual sentences of the cases once they were transferred, or the demographic characteristics of the juveniles transferred.

Although transfer data is no longer being reported directly to AOIC, the eJMIS allows the Commission to determine which juveniles admitted to detention had their cases transferred to adult court. However, there are obvious limits to reporting the number of transfers using eJMIS; it can only provide the numbers of youth detained who were transferred to criminal court. But given the criteria through which detention decisions are made and the nature of the offenses, for which juveniles' cases are eligible for transfer to adult court, it is likely that the eJMIS transfer data are a reasonable approximation of the number of transfer cases outside of Cook County.

IDHS and the Illinois Juvenile Justice Commission have allocated a total of $120,000 each of the past few years primarily directed to two areas: preparation of the annual data report, and maintenance of the e-JMIS system. The Commission intends to continue to provide funding for these purposes.

7. SMART

Several queries have been done of the SMART system to determine where might be the most appropriate location for future programs described herein. The only relevant data elements that seem to be available are population data (age, race, and gender), school enrollment, employment and poverty. The Department's use of the system is demonstrated by the analysis appended to this application. At this time, Illinois will also be considering other relevant data available within Illinois to assist the SAG in making program placement decisions. Queries of the SMART system will continue to be done to ensure appropriate decisions are made in the future. It is also anticipated that the value of the system will improve as it becomes more fully developed.


1 Unless otherwise noted, data referred to herein is for the 2000-2007 time period and is compiled by the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, based on Illinois State Police I-UCR Case Level Data.
Go back to beginning of the paragraph with this citation