Datasets:

gtfintechlab
/

CoCoHD_transcripts

	<html>
	<title> - PROVIDING VULNERABLE YOUTH THE HOPE OF A BRIGHTER FUTURE THROUGH JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM</title>
	<body><pre>
	[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
	[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]





	PROVIDING VULNERABLE YOUTH THE HOPE
	OF A BRIGHTER FUTURE THROUGH JUVENILE
	JUSTICE REFORM

	=======================================================================

	HEARING

	before the

	SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD,
	ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

	COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
	AND THE WORKFORCE

	U.S. House of Representatives

	ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

	FIRST SESSION

	__________

	HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, FEBRUARY 15, 2017

	__________

	Serial No. 115-5

	__________

	Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce



	[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]




	Available via the World Wide Web:
	www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
	committee.action?chamber=house&committee=education
	or
	Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov
	_______

	U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

	24-499 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
	-----------------------------------------------------------------------
	For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
	Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
	DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
	Washington, DC 20402-0001































	COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE

	VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina, Chairwoman

	Joe Wilson, South Carolina Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
	Duncan Hunter, California Virginia
	David P. Roe, Tennessee Ranking Member
	Glenn ``GT'' Thompson, Pennsylvania Susan A. Davis, California
	Tim Walberg, Michigan Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
	Brett Guthrie, Kentucky Joe Courtney, Connecticut
	Todd Rokita, Indiana Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio
	Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania Jared Polis, Colorado
	Luke Messer, Indiana Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
	Bradley Byrne, Alabama Northern Mariana Islands
	David Brat, Virginia Frederica S. Wilson, Florida
	Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon
	Steve Russell, Oklahoma Mark Takano, California
	Elise Stefanik, New York Alma S. Adams, North Carolina
	Rick W. Allen, Georgia Mark DeSaulnier, California
	Jason Lewis, Minnesota Donald Norcross, New Jersey
	Francis Rooney, Florida Lisa Blunt Rochester, Delaware
	Paul Mitchell, Michigan Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
	Tom Garrett, Jr., Virginia Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire
	Lloyd K. Smucker, Pennsylvania Adriano Espaillat, New York
	A. Drew Ferguson, IV, Georgia

	Brandon Renz, Staff Director
	Denise Forte, Minority Staff Director
	------

	SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

	TODD ROKITA, Indiana, Chairman

	Duncan Hunter, California Jared Polis, Colorado
	David P. Roe, Tennessee Ranking Member
	Glenn ``GT'' Thompson, Pennsylvania Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
	Luke Messer, Indiana Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio
	David Brat, Virginia Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon
	Tom Garrett, Jr., Virginia Susan A. Davis, California
	Frederica S. Wilson, Florida











	C O N T E N T S

	----------
	Page

	Hearing held on February 15, 2017................................ 1

	Statement of Members:
	Polis, Hon. Jared, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Early
	Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education............. 4
	Prepared statement of.................................... 5
	Rokita, Hon. Todd, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early Childhood,
	Elementary, and Secondary Education........................ 1
	Prepared statement of.................................... 3

	Statement of Witnesses:
	Cubbon, Hon. Denise N., Administrative Judge, Lucas County
	Juvenile Division.......................................... 29
	Prepared statement of.................................... 31
	Flannelly, Mr. Patrick J., Chief of Police, Lafayette Police
	Department................................................. 22
	Prepared statement of.................................... 25
	Reed, Mr. Stephen M., Executive Director, Safe Place
	Services, YMCA of Greater Louisville....................... 36
	Prepared statement of.................................... 39
	Williams, Ms. Meg, Manager, Office of Adult and Juvenile
	Justice Assistance, Division of Criminal Justice, Colorado
	Department of Public Safety................................ 13
	Prepared statement of.................................... 16

	Additional Submissions:
	Judge Cubbon, response to questions submitted for the record. 62
	Mr. Polis, letter dated November 22, 2016 from The Secretary
	of Education............................................... 7
	Chairman Rokita:
	Slide: Fast Facts on Juvenile Justice.................... 58
	Questions submitted for the record....................... 61


	PROVIDING VULNERABLE YOUTH THE HOPE
	OF A BRIGHTER FUTURE THROUGH
	JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM

	----------


	Wednesday, February 15, 2017

	House of Representatives

	Committee on Education and the Workforce,

	Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and

	Secondary Education

	Washington, D.C.

	----------

	The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in
	Room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Todd Rokita
	[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
	Present: Representatives Rokita, Roe, Messer, Brat,
	Garrett, Polis, Fudge, and Bonamici.
	Also Present: Representatives Foxx, and Scott.
	Staff Present: Courtney Butcher, Director of Members
	Services and Coalitions; Tyler Hernandez, Deputy Communications
	Director; Amy Raaf Jones, Director of Education and Human
	Resources Policy; Nancy Locke, Chief Clerk; Dominique McKay,
	Deputy Press Secretary; James Mullen, Director of Information
	Technology; Brian Newell, Communications Director; Krisann
	Pearce, General Counsel; James Redstone, Professional Staff
	Member; Mandy Schaumburg, Education Deputy Director and Senior
	Counsel; Alissa Strawcutter, Deputy Clerk; Leslie Tatum,
	Professional Staff Member; Sheariah Yousefi, Legislative
	Assistant; Tylease Alli, Minority Clerk/Intern and Fellow
	Coordinator; Jacque Chevalier, Minority Deputy Education Policy
	Director; Denise Forte, Minority Staff Director; Mishawn
	Freeman, Minority Staff Assistant; and Christian Haines,
	Minority Education Policy Counsel.
	Chairman Rokita. Thank you for reminding me that I am not
	loud, you are the first one in a long time that has said that
	to me.
	A quorum being present, the Subcommittee on Early
	Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education will come to
	order. Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing.
	Like much of the work we do as members of the Education and
	the Workforce Committee, we are here to discuss an effort that
	is all about opportunity and putting individuals on a path that
	will actually help them earn success in life. In this case,
	that effort is reforming the juvenile justice system.
	Of course, juvenile justice reform is not just a concern
	for those of us here today. It is something that has long been
	a national priority.
	Through their juvenile justice systems, State and local
	leaders are working to promote communities that are safe.
	Communities that help children learn and grow into productive
	members of society. Communities that provide opportunities for
	all of our children, regardless of their background or past
	mistakes, to pursue their dreams and achieve their goals.
	For decades, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
	Prevention Act has coordinated Federal resources to help
	improve those State juvenile justice systems.
	The law primarily focuses on education and rehabilitation
	to support efforts keeping at-risk youth out of the system, as
	well as efforts providing juvenile offenders already in the
	system the second chance they need to move forward with their
	lives in more positive ways.
	Today, more than 1 million young men and women across the
	country are involved in the juvenile justice system. That
	includes children as young as 10, all the way to the cusp of
	adulthood, a wide swath.
	One million. That is a noteworthy number on its own, but it
	does not even include the countless others who are at risk of
	becoming involved in the system because of circumstances such
	as poverty, homelessness, or other difficulties at home.
	That statistic provides an idea of the size and scope of
	the system, but it is even more important to understand what
	being a part of the juvenile justice system actually means for
	each of those 2 million kids.
	In many cases, it means being at a disadvantage, not fully
	understanding what the potential of a future holds, and not
	even realizing that opportunities exist to turn things around.
	In fact, youth who have been incarcerated are 26 percent
	less likely to graduate from high school than their peers, and
	26 percent more likely to engage in other unlawful activity and
	return to the system as adults.
	We, as a society, have to help children avoid becoming one
	of those statistics, and we can accomplish that by helping some
	stay out of the system altogether and by helping others come
	out of the system with the opportunities and the motivation
	they need to chart a better course for themselves.
	Given the social and economic challenges facing our
	country, that is no small feat. However, through a
	collaborative effort among parents, teachers, and local
	community members, it can be done.
	That is why we are here today, to discuss our role in that
	collaborative effort and to begin considering what steps
	Congress can take to help State and local leaders better serve
	vulnerable youth.
	Last year, we advanced a number of bipartisan reforms that
	I am particularly proud of, to provide State and local leaders
	the flexibility they need to meet the needs of youth in their
	cities and towns, focus on proven strategies, and improve
	accountability and oversight, both to help kids succeed and
	protect taxpayers, which is also important.
	Ultimately, these reforms would set kids up for long-term
	success, helping them gain the skills they need to become
	productive adults and promoting opportunities for them to
	achieve success. I am certain those common-sense reforms will
	help guide the work ahead as we renew our effort to improve the
	juvenile justice system.
	As a father, I want my children to have every opportunity
	they need to succeed in life, and I work very hard to ensure
	they do. I also work hard to ensure they understand it is their
	responsibility to seize those opportunities. Unfortunately, not
	all children are in the same position, and those are the kids
	we are here to help today. I look forward to continuing our
	work to provide them with the hope for a brighter future.
	With that, I would like to recognize my friend, the ranking
	member, Congressman Polis, for his opening statement.
	[The statement of Mr. Rokita follows:]

	Prepared Statement of Hon. Todd Rokita, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early
	Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

	Good morning and welcome to today's hearing. Like much of the work
	we do as members of the Education and the Workforce Committee, we're
	here to discuss an effort that is all about opportunity and putting
	individuals on a path that will help them earn success in life. In this
	case, that effort is reforming the juvenile justice system.
	Of course, juvenile justice reform isn't just a concern for those
	of us here today. It's something that has long been a national
	priority. Through their juvenile justice systems, state and local
	leaders are working to promote communities that are safe. Communities
	that help children learn and grow into productive members of society.
	Communities that provide opportunities for all children--regardless of
	their background or past mistakes--to pursue their dreams and achieve
	their goals.
	For decades, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act
	has coordinated federal resources to help improve those state juvenile
	justice systems. The law primarily focuses on education and
	rehabilitation to support efforts keeping at-risk youth out of the
	system, as well as efforts providing juvenile offenders already in the
	system the second chance they need to move forward with their lives in
	positive ways.
	Today, more than one million young men and women across the country
	are involved in the juvenile justice system. That includes children as
	young as ten all the way to those on the cusp of adulthood. That's a
	noteworthy number on its own, but it doesn't even include the countless
	others who are at risk of becoming involved in the system because of
	circumstances such as poverty, homelessness, or difficulties at home.
	That statistic provides an idea of the size and scope of the
	juvenile justice system, but it's even more important to understand
	what being a part of the juvenile justice system actually means for
	each of those two million kids. In many cases, it means being at a
	disadvantage, not fully understanding what potential the future holds,
	and not realizing that opportunities exist to turn things around.
	In fact, youth who have been incarcerated are 26 percent less
	likely to graduate from high school than their peers and 26 percent
	more likely to engage in other unlawful activity and return to jail as
	adults.
	We, as a society, have to help children avoid becoming one of those
	statistics, and we can accomplish that by helping some stay out of the
	system all together and by helping others come out of the system with
	the opportunities and the motivation they need to chart a better course
	for themselves. Given the social and economic challenges facing our
	country, that's no small feat. However--through a collaborative effort
	among parents, teachers, and local community members--it can be done.
	That's why we are here today--to discuss our role in that
	collaborative effort and to begin considering what steps Congress can
	take to help state and local leaders better serve vulnerable youth in
	their communities.
	Last year, we advanced a number of bipartisan reforms to provide
	state and local leaders the flexibility they need to meet the needs of
	youth in their cities and towns, focus on proven strategies, and
	improve accountability and oversight both to help kids succeed and
	protect taxpayers. Ultimately, these reforms would set kids up for
	long-term success, helping them gain the skills they need to become
	productive adults and promoting opportunities for them to achieve
	success throughout their lives. I'm certain those commonsense reforms
	will help guide the work ahead as we renew our effort to improve the
	juvenile justice system.
	As a father, I want my children to have every opportunity they need
	to succeed in life, and I work very hard to ensure they do. I also work
	hard to ensure they understand it's their responsibility to seize those
	opportunities. Unfortunately, not all children are in the same
	position, and those are the kids we are here for today. I look forward
	to continuing our work to provide them the hope of a brighter future.
	With that, I will now recognize the ranking member, Congressman
	Polis, for his opening remarks.
	______

	Mr. Polis. Thank you, Chairman Rokita, for organizing this
	bipartisan hearing today. I want to thank our terrific
	witnesses. I am especially honored to have Ms. Williams from
	Colorado to talk about my home State's efforts to engage in
	meaningful prevention and intervention services.
	While Congress is often portrayed as hyperpartisan, where
	many issues divide along party lines, juvenile justice is among
	the many issues where both parties have traditionally been able
	to work together and develop policies with broad stakeholder
	support.
	Just last Congress, our committee reported out a bill to
	reauthorize the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
	Act, or JJDPA, and that bill went on to pass the whole House
	382 to 29. That was the first time in the last 15 years either
	chamber of Congress got a bill to authorize the Juvenile
	Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act on the floor.
	Unfortunately, it was not able to make it across the finish
	line in the Senate. This session I hope we can come together
	again, get a vehicle to authorize the Juvenile Justice and
	Delinquency Prevention Act out of the committee, out of the
	House, out of the Senate, to the President's desk for
	signature, to make a difference for children.
	It has been over 100 years since we established a juvenile
	court system in our country. The juvenile system was designed
	based on the idea that children were not merely smaller
	versions of adults, and our response to their misconduct should
	be aimed at intervention and rehabilitation as opposed to a
	more typical criminal justice response.
	Over the 20th century, State juvenile justice systems
	evolved separately and in different ways without significant
	Federal oversight. In time, many actually came to resemble
	adult systems with little focus on children or rehabilitation.
	In response, Congress passed the Juvenile Justice and
	Delinquency Prevention Act in 1974. It created important
	guardrails that protect children in the juvenile justice
	system.
	The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act has
	three main components. First, to establish core requirements
	that States must adhere to regarding the treatment of children
	in the juvenile justice system. It authorized formula and
	competitive grants to help States run their juvenile justice
	systems in line with the requirements and provide delinquency
	prevention programs. Finally, it created a Federal office, the
	Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, to
	oversee juvenile justice programs.
	Since its adoption in 1974, the Juvenile Justice and
	Delinquency Prevention Act has truly helped improve treatment
	for juveniles in the justice system, and helped reduce
	disparities in treatments across the States.
	A reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
	Prevention Act would create an opportunity to codify best
	practices that have been engaged in by various States over the
	last 15 years, including important elements of the bill, like
	using evidence-based practices, unique needs of girls in the
	juvenile justice system, implementation of trauma-informed
	care, cost-effective alternatives to incarceration that don't
	harm public safety, and efforts to end the school-to-prison
	pipeline by allowing school discipline policies with the
	juvenile justice system.
	In my own State of Colorado, we have made progress by
	reforming the procedures that prosecutors use to charge
	juveniles in court, and just this year, we were able to
	authorize retroactive elimination of juvenile life without
	parole for many young offenders.
	While I think there are some things to celebrate, there are
	also serious issues we need to address in both the juvenile
	justice system and discipline procedures used within our public
	education system.
	One of those is the continued use of corporal punishment,
	seclusion, and restraints in both our education and juvenile
	justice systems. There is no logical reason that in 2017
	children can go to school in this country and still be subject
	to physical punishments, but in 19 States, that is still the
	case. Research shows us that corporal punishment is used
	disproportionately against minority students and students with
	disabilities.
	Former Education Secretary John King, in November 2016,
	sent a letter to State governors and chief school officers
	calling for the elimination of corporal punishment, suggesting
	that in some States the punishment could legally be classified
	as assault or battery.
	At this time, I would like to introduce the letter from
	Secretary King into the record.
	Chairman Rokita. Without objection.
	Mr. Polis. Again, this Congress, my good friend, Alcee
	Hastings of Florida, introduced bipartisan legislation to
	outlaw corporal punishment in U.S. schools. Just like the core
	protections of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
	Act, we need to enact a Federal protection for students in
	schools and in juvenile facilities from physical abuse.
	In closing, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses
	and determining how we can support our work here in Congress to
	get to the point where we can reauthorize the Juvenile Justice
	and Delinquency Prevention Act and get it across the finish
	line.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
	[The statement Mr. Polis follows:]

	Prepared Statement of Hon. Jared Polis, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
	Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

	Thank you Chairman Rokita, for organizing this hearing this
	morning, and I'd like to thank the witnesses for agreeing to testify
	today. I'm especially honored to have Ms. Williams on the panel to
	speak about the work being done in our home state of Colorado to
	provide meaningful prevention and intervention services to Colorado's
	juveniles.
	While Congress is often seen as a hyper-partisan setting where many
	issues are divided along party lines, juvenile justice is an issue
	where both parties have traditionally worked together and developed
	policies with broad support. Just last Congress, our Committee reported
	out a bill to reauthorize the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
	Prevention Act or JJDPA, and that bill went on to pass the whole House
	by a vote of 38229. That was the first time in the last 15 years that
	either chamber of Congress got a bill to reauthorize JJDPA passed on
	their floor. In the spirit with which we came together to accomplish
	that last year, I hope that we can come together again this year and
	get a vehicle to reauthorize JJDPA out of our committee, passed out of
	both chambers, and onto the President's desk for signature.
	It has been over 100 years since we established a juvenile court
	system in America. The juvenile system was designed based on the idea
	that children were not merely small adults, and our response to their
	misconduct should be aimed at intervention and rehabilitation as
	opposed to a criminal justice response. Over the 20th century, state
	juvenile justice systems evolved separately and without federal
	oversight. In time, many came to resemble adult systems, with little
	focus on children and their rehabilitation.
	In response, Congress passed the Juvenile Justice Delinquency and
	Prevention Act in 1974. It creates the federal guardrails that protect
	our children in the juvenile justice systems in each state. JJDPA has 3
	main components. The act first established core requirements and other
	mandates states must adhere to regarding the treatment of children in
	the juvenile justice system. It authorized formula and competitive
	grants to help states run their juvenile justice systems in line with
	the federal requirements and provide delinquency prevention programs.
	Finally, it created the Federal Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency
	Prevention (OJJDP) to oversee juvenile justice programs.
	Since its adoption in 1974, JJDPA has improved treatment overall
	for juveniles in the justice system and helped reduce disparities in
	treatment across states. A reauthorization of JJDPA creates an
	opportunity to codify best practices that have emerged in various
	states over the past 15 years including, the use of evidence-based
	practices, the unique needs of girls in the juvenile justice system,
	the implementation of trauma-informed care, cost-effective alternatives
	to incarceration that do not harm public safety, and efforts to end the
	``School to Prison'' pipeline by aligning school discipline policies
	and juvenile justice systems.
	In my home state of Colorado we have made progress by reforming the
	procedures prosecutors use to charge juveniles in adult court. And just
	this year we were able to authorize retroactive elimination of juvenile
	life without parole for many young offenders.
	And while I think that there are many things to celebrate, there
	are still some serious issues that we need to address in both the
	juvenile justice system and discipline procedures in our education
	system. One of those is the continued use of corporal punishment,
	seclusion and restraints in both our educational and juvenile justice
	systems.
	There is no logical reason that in 2017, children can go to school
	in this country and be subject to physical punishments. But in 19
	states that is still the case. Research shows us that corporal
	punishment is used disproportionately against minority students and
	students with disabilities. Former Education Secretary John King, in a
	November 2016 letter to state governors and chief school officers,
	called for the elimination of the practice, suggesting that in some
	states, the punishment could be legally classified as assault or
	battery.
	[Committee staff have a copy of the letter to introduce into the
	record.]


	[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


	And again this Congress, my good friend Alcee Hastings of Florida,
	has introduced bipartisan legislation to outlaw the practice in US
	schools. Just like the core protections of JJDPA, we need to enact a
	federal floor of protection for students in schools and in juvenile
	facilities.
	So in closing, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses and
	determining how we can support their work here in Congress and get to
	the point where children in every juvenile justice system have strong
	protections and the resources they need to turn their life around.
	Thank you Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
	______

	Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Mr. Polis. Pursuant to
	Committee Rule 7(c), all members will be permitted to submit
	written statements to be included in the permanent hearing
	record, and without objection, the hearing record will remain
	open for 14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous
	material referenced during the hearing to be submitted for the
	record.
	I will now turn to the introduction of our distinguished
	witnesses, and I recognize Mr. Polis for the first
	introduction.
	Mr. Polis. Thank you. I am very honored to have Ms. Meg
	Williams from Colorado. She serves as the manager of the Office
	of Adult and Juvenile Justice Assistance within our Division of
	Criminal Justice at the Colorado Department of Public Safety.
	Ms. Williams is responsible for the management of Federal
	and State programs that assist with and improve the criminal
	and juvenile justice systems. Ms. Williams has over 25 years of
	experience in social services, both in adult and juvenile
	justice arenas, in both Ohio and Colorado, and we are thrilled
	to welcome her to the committee today.
	Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Mr. Polis. Let me introduce a
	dear friend of mine who is a good man from a community that I
	am very fond of, and that is Chief Patrick J. Flannelly.
	He serves as the chief of police of Lafayette, Indiana, and
	is the at-large director for the Indiana Association of Chiefs
	of Police. Previous to his role as chief of police, Chief
	Flannelly served on the Gang Response Investigative Team with
	the Lafayette Police Department.
	We also have joining us today Judge Denise Navarre Cubbon,
	who serves as the Lucas County administrative judge in Lucas
	County, Ohio.
	In addition to this position, Judge Cubbon also serves on a
	number of committees and boards, including the National Council
	of Juvenile and Family Court Judges' Board of Trustees, and the
	Supreme Court of Ohio Advisory Committee on Children, Families,
	and the Courts.
	Previous to this, Judge Cubbon served as the Lucas County
	assistant prosecuting attorney where she was assigned to the
	Juvenile Division, Criminal Division, and Senior Protection
	Unit.
	Finally, Mr. Matt Reed serves as the executive director of
	Safe Place Services for the YMCA in Louisville, Kentucky. In
	this position, Mr. Reed oversees the only place in the region
	where teens and their families can obtain immediate and free
	shelter and counseling to support individual circumstances that
	arise from being homeless, running away from home, and being in
	danger, such as in situations dealing with abuse or neglect.
	Welcome, Mr. Reed.
	I will now ask our witnesses to raise your right hand.
	[Witnesses sworn.]
	Chairman Rokita. Let the record reflect that all witnesses
	answered in the affirmative. Thank you.
	Before I recognize you to provide your testimony, let me
	briefly explain our lighting system. I do this for us up here
	as much as for you. You each have 5 minutes to present your
	testimony.
	When you begin, the light in front of you will be green.
	With 1 minute left, it will be yellow, and when it is red, you
	will be expected to have your comments wrapped up or you will
	have to wrap them up. At that point, members will each have 5
	minutes to ask their questions.
	With that, Ms. Williams, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

	TESTIMONY OF MEG WILLIAMS, MANAGER, OFFICE OF ADULT AND
	JUVENILE JUSTICE ASSISTANCE, DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
	COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

	Ms. Williams. Thank you very much, Chairman Rokita and
	Ranking Member Polis. I am very honored to be asked to be here
	today, and I want to provide you information regarding juvenile
	justice, and to describe partnerships in place with States in
	addressing critical concerns.
	Again, my name is Meg Williams. I am here on behalf of the
	Department of Public Safety in Colorado where I serve as the
	designated juvenile justice specialist, and just so that you
	know, all of you within States have someone similar to me in my
	position in your State. Get to know them if you want to learn
	more about what your State is doing.
	In Colorado, not unlike other States, we continue to
	grapple with juvenile crime and the needs of the youth that
	find themselves caught in the justice system. Research has
	found that these juveniles come to us with profound needs due
	to histories of abuse or neglect, trauma, and poverty, some of
	the things you said this morning in your introduction. They
	have educational disabilities and mental health and substance
	abuse issues.
	In Colorado, the population of youth that have penetrated
	to the highest level of services, which is commitment, and that
	is akin to adult prison, are predominately male, and an average
	of almost 17 years old. They have an extensive history of prior
	out-of-home placement, often due to prior social service
	involvement, and they are assessed as needing treatment level
	substance abuse and mental health services.
	How does the Federal Government factor into our work at the
	State? The leadership of the Federal Government through the
	JJDPA--thank you so much for trying to once again pass it--
	provides a roadmap for States to not only serve and protect
	juveniles who come into contact with our justice system, but
	also in preventing future victimization and upholding community
	and public safety. All are equally important.
	The act also established the Office of Juvenile Justice and
	Delinquency Prevention, and they serve as a partner to the
	States. They provide leadership through research evaluation.
	They set rules and regulations regarding the care and custody
	of juveniles, and they provide training and technical
	assistance, as well as necessary funding.
	When States agree to participate in the act, we agree to
	adhere to those four core requirements that you spoke about,
	about the appropriate holding of juveniles, and also to address
	disproportionate minority contact.
	We are also required to establish a State advisory group,
	which is comprised of government, nongovernment experts,
	reflected by the needs of the kids who come into our justice
	system, so that can include the courts, education, social
	services, and mental health.
	Also, we have a requirement of a minimum of one-fifth
	youth. Let me tell you, our youth are amazing in guiding us at
	the State level. We are also required to develop a plan every 3
	years, and through that, we develop it through looking at data.
	What do the kids look like? What are their needs? What is the
	availability of the services that we have identified that they
	need to address their issues and what funding is available, and
	how can we best use our Federal dollars to fill the gaps?
	Although we have seen many improvements in our field, our
	work is not done. Our Nation still needs to have a concerted
	focus on juvenile justice, as the needs of youth appear to be
	more difficult to address.
	We need continued laser vision on addressing juvenile
	justice through the lens of what truly works, grounded in what
	we know about adolescent brain development, and just the period
	of adolescence in which we know kids have a much less developed
	capacity to self-regulate themselves. Anyone who is a parent
	remembers this.
	They are more easily influenced developmentally to external
	influences, peer pressure, and other perceived incentives,
	which are actually sometimes bad incentives for kids, and have
	less ability to make judgments and decisions that are really
	future-oriented. All of this contributes to them potentially
	engaging in risky behavior, and it leads to a higher
	probability of negative and harmful consequences.
	We also know that economically disadvantaged minorities are
	disproportionately represented in our justice system. We are
	now more fully recognizing the prevalence of mental health,
	substance use and abuse, history of child abuse and neglect,
	and trauma to those youths.
	Knowing these facts and transforming our systems in concert
	with these continues to be a challenge. We need your support,
	your assistance, and your partnership in continuing to hold our
	youth accountable for their behaviors, but by also then working
	towards reduced future victimization and increased public
	safety, but we need to do it in ways that recognize and respond
	to the needs of these youth.
	We need you to understand there are other Federal agencies
	that should be involved in juvenile justice and delinquency
	prevention. It is not just a justice issue. It truly isn't. We
	need others from Health and Mental Services, Substance Abuse
	and Mental Health Services, SAMHSA, Workforce Development--
	these kids are going to age into becoming adults--just to name
	a few.
	Those partnerships remain vital to our collective success
	as a Nation and to us as States, but, more importantly, to the
	youth as individuals.
	Thank you very much.
	[The testimony of Ms. Williams follows:]

	[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


	Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Ms. Williams. Chief, you are
	recognized for 5 minutes.

	TESTIMONY OF PATRICK J. FLANNELLY, CHIEF OF POLICE, LAFAYETTE
	POLICE DEPARTMENT

	Chief Flannelly. Chairman Rokita, Ranking Member Polis, and
	all the members of the House Education and Workforce
	Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary
	Education, I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here.
	It is my pleasure. I am honored to be here.
	I serve as the chief of police for the Lafayette, Indiana
	Police Department, and also at-large director for our State
	Chiefs Association.
	Additionally, I am a member of Fight Crime: Invest in Kids,
	a national organization of chiefs of police, sheriffs,
	prosecutors, and violence survivors. We have over 5,000 members
	nationwide and have at least one member represented in 97
	percent of the congressional districts.
	I bring this experience to speak about juvenile justice
	reforms my State has adopted, the positive impact those reforms
	have had on public safety, and how Congress can support the
	efforts by reauthorizing the JJDPA.
	Nationwide, juvenile recidivism remains a serious problem.
	For far too many young people, their first arrest is only the
	beginning of their run-ins with the law. Our studies have shown
	that if a youth 14 years old or younger becomes a second-time
	offender, their likelihood of future brushes with law
	enforcement spikes to 77 percent. Nationwide, 40 percent of
	young people who come in contact with the juvenile court will
	come before the court at least one more time.
	This cycle damages public safety, drains law enforcement
	resources, and does not put at-risk youth back on the right
	track. More needs to be done to ensure that if a youth offends
	and has their first contact with the juvenile justice system,
	it will be their last.
	Recognizing this challenge, Indiana has undergone reforms
	at the State level and at the county level to better address
	juvenile delinquency.
	In 2006, Marion County joined the Juvenile Detention
	Alternatives Initiative, or JDAI. The strategy reprioritizes
	existing funding away from detention facilities and into
	community-based alternative programs. In 2009, my county of
	Tippecanoe joined the initiative. In 2013, these reforms went
	statewide.
	Research has shown that effective community-based
	alternatives to detention for low to moderate risk youth can
	significantly reduce the likelihood that youth will get into
	trouble again.
	These intervention programs engage family, coaching parents
	and youth in the skills they will need to change a young
	person's behavior.
	This is an important part of fixing the problem, since many
	youths we see are following in the footsteps of family members
	or peers who have previously gone down the wrong road.
	Two of the anti-recidivism programs at work in my State are
	functional family therapy and multisystemic therapy. Randomized
	control trials have found that these programs can cut youth
	recidivism by 50 to 62 percent.
	It is important to note that confinement may be necessary
	for some juveniles with a very high risk assessment or due to
	the severity of the offense. However, confinement should be
	reserved for only that small segment of juveniles who pose a
	threat to public safety.
	For the majority of juvenile offenders, the more effective
	approach, and cost-effective, involves community-based
	initiatives that we have described.
	I have seen the positive effects of these juvenile justice
	reforms firsthand. After starting the JDAI in Tippecanoe
	County, we were able to cut juvenile arrests from just over
	1,600 in 2008 to 755 last year. That is a reduction of 891
	arrests in just over 7 years.
	Not only does that save us the costs associated with each
	arrest, we also canceled plans to build a 32-bed security
	detention facility at an anticipated cost of $22 million. Using
	methods such as MST, FFT, and ART programs, beginning in 2008
	and through the end of 2016, 427 youth have successfully
	completed the program, and to date, 51 percent have yet to
	recidivate.
	In early 2014, we implemented two programs, Policing the
	Teen Brain and Juvenile Justice Jeopardy, as strategies to
	enhance how youth approach officers and vice versa. This work
	is paying significant dividends.
	In the 2 subsequent years, we were able to reduce the
	number of arrests involving juveniles that involved battery on
	law enforcement, resisting law enforcement, and disorderly
	conduct by 31 percent. By teaching our officers and youth more
	productive and meaningful ways to interact, we are reducing
	conflict and improving relationships. It is our goal that every
	police officer in the county and eventually the State completes
	this course.
	While States have led the way in juvenile justice reform,
	we cannot do it alone. JJDPA provides critical grants to States
	that help support our juvenile justice systems, including these
	alternatives to detention.
	Reauthorization to update this law is long overdue, to
	ensure the best outcomes for the communities we serve. I was
	excited to see the committee introduce the bill last year to
	reauthorize the JJDPA and the Supporting Youth Opportunity and
	Preventing Delinquency Act. That bipartisan bill made important
	updates to Federal law that would support the advancements made
	in Indiana and many other States.
	The bill also emphasizes continuing programs that help kids
	from involvement in crime in the first place, including
	evidence-based monitoring or mentoring and voluntary home
	visiting. Many States have expanded the use of those programs
	in recent years as well, and support through a Federal
	reauthorization would help continue this work.
	I appreciate this committee's work on behalf of this
	important issue and was encouraged to see such a strong
	bipartisan vote to pass it in the House of Representatives. I
	hope a similar reauthorization will make it into law this
	Congress. I am glad to support you in this effort, and happy to
	answer any questions you may have.
	[The testimony of Chief Flannelly follows:]

	[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


	Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Chief. Judge, you are
	recognized for 5 minutes.

	TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DENISE NAVARRE CUBBON,
	ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE, LUCAS COUNTY JUVENILE DIVISION

	Judge Cubbon. Good morning. Thank you. Chairwoman Foxx and
	Ranking Member Scott, Subcommittee Chair Rokita, and
	Subcommittee Ranking Member Polis, and members of the
	committee, thank you so much for inviting me to come to talk to
	you about the children that I see every day and other judges
	see in their courtrooms and their families, addressing issues
	very personal to their families, and very important for us to
	assist them in making important changes in their lives.
	I am not going to introduce myself because thank you, you
	have done that for me. I can tell you that in my years of
	experience in juvenile justice it became very apparent,
	especially when I took the bench 12 years ago, that our efforts
	in the 1990s to keep communities safe, although it was well-
	intentioned, maybe had a lot of unintended outcomes.
	Walking into my courtroom and other courtrooms across the
	country, looking at the children appearing before me, it was
	very clear we had a disproportionate minority contact. Lots of
	unnecessary use of incarceration to control behavior without
	services accompanying that.
	Programs intended to keep children out of the community
	became programs that were the stepping stone with non-
	compliance, putting them into the juvenile justice system.
	So I say all of that to say that we are an enlightened body
	now. We are a community that understands the value of research.
	We are the community that understands the value of brain
	science, looking at adolescents, where they come from, looking
	at best practices, looking for technical assistance to assist
	each and every one of us as judges in our respective
	communities to help families and children make changes.
	Ironically enough, I took a train down here today. I spent
	a few days in New York City at a meeting with over 400 judges
	and professionals in the area of juvenile justice, a meeting
	where we had an opportunity to engage in judicial and
	professional education looking at juvenile justice, as a matter
	of fact.
	I can tell you there were probably judges and professionals
	from just about every one of your States that were there. I
	know States sitting next to me right now were there for sure.
	It is so exciting to think that you are continuing to carry
	the torch for reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and
	Delinquency Prevention Act, because we spent so much time while
	we were there talking about programs, research, development in
	the area of juvenile justice to address those issues that are
	evidence-based, best practices, innovative, to address the
	needs of the particular children that we serve every day, and
	to be able to develop programming to address the special needs
	of some of those particular subgroups that you talk about, like
	girls, mentally ill children, substance abuse issues impacting
	development, looking for great programming to assist them.
	Judges, we have a unique perspective. We sit in the
	courtroom and we see the families, we hear the stories, and we
	know how important it is to have all these programs and
	opportunities that my colleagues in this room are all obviously
	agreeing with.
	Juvenile justice reform is on its way. The children that we
	see in our courtrooms, many of which should not be in courts,
	they have the opportunity through diversion programs to correct
	those issues that brought them to the court's attention. We
	have children on the other end, those children that have some
	serious behavior issues that are compromising public safety,
	and a secure facility for them is important, but is meaningless
	unless they have specific programming to address their needs.
	All those kids in between that we see regularly, with lots
	of other issues than just their presenting behavior, they may
	have trauma. Many children have trauma today; we know that from
	the work of OJJDP: mental health issues, developmental delays,
	special educational needs, children who are running away from
	their homes because of abuse and neglect, homelessness. We can
	go on and on and on. Those are the issues that we the judges
	want to address with programming so we can help these kids make
	important changes in their lives so they can be productive.
	I hope you ask me some questions about things that are
	going on in my community, and any other questions that can help
	you in doing your important work. Thank you.
	[The testimony of Judge Cubbon follows:]

	[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

	Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Judge. You know, I have to say
	for the record that I am disappointed. I was hoping that you
	would help me meet a milestone today. As a former practicing
	trial attorney, I was waiting for the time in my life where I
	could tell a judge that she was out of time and she needed to
	be quiet. I am going to have to wait.
	Thank you, seriously, for your testimony. It was
	enlightening. I appreciate it, everyone so far.
	Mr. Reed, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

	TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN MATTHEW REED, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SAFE
	PLACE SERVICES, YMCA OF GREATER LOUISVILLE

	Mr. Reed. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Rokita, Ranking
	Member Polis, and all members of the Subcommittee on Early
	Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education for the
	opportunity to testify at today's hearing.
	My name is Matt Reed. I currently serve as the executive
	director of YMCA's Safe Place Services in Louisville, Kentucky.
	I have had the privilege to work with at-risk youth for over 20
	years. Our programs at Safe Place provide judicial and law
	enforcement partners with effective and evidence-based
	alternatives and have tangible and measurable results in
	keeping kids out of the justice system.
	Since 2005, Safe Place has operated a Juvenile Field
	Release Program. The Field Release Program is a partnership
	with law enforcement, juvenile court, and our youth detention
	center. The goal of this program is to provide law enforcement
	a safe release option as an alternative to detention when they
	encounter a juvenile who has committed a misdemeanor or
	nondetainable criminal offense.
	Since full inception, approximately 1,900 juveniles have
	been served by Field Release, helping decrease overall youth
	detention numbers by 60 percent. However, the most significant
	impact of the Field Release Program has been the number of
	youth who gain immediate access to in-house or community
	partner referrals. Fifteen percent of our Field Release youth
	are placed directly in YMCA's Shelter House Program, which is
	our 24-hour residential program for 12- to 17-year-olds. They
	find immediate safety and support.
	Over 76 percent overall of our Field Release youth leave
	our care with either an in-house or community partner service
	referral in place, such as drug treatment, mental health
	therapy, or a mental health evaluation.
	During 2010 and the 2011 school year, Safe Place also
	successfully operated a truancy diversion pilot project in
	response to the increasing number of youth missing more than 10
	days of school per year. The model program served approximately
	40 youth per year. Most entered the program having missed 75 or
	more days of school and were experiencing other challenges such
	as low academic achievement, substance abuse in the home,
	poverty, and unstable housing.
	Before funding was cut at the State level in 2012, this
	program cut truancy rates by 73 percent, and successfully
	diverted 67 youths from commitment to State's custody.
	In 2016, most recently, we have received a Title II grant
	through the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet. Funding
	for this grant was provided by the U.S. Department of Justice's
	Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency and Prevention.
	We are very excited about this opportunity, and it is
	actually called the Opportunity Program. The Opportunity
	Program is designed to engage at-risk youth and first-time
	nonserious offenders, ages 10 to 14, in programs that reduce
	their rate of entry into the juvenile justice system.
	Our program has three service components. First, it has a
	mock truancy court for our middle school youth. We have an
	early elementary school intervention component for children who
	have at least one parent incarcerated. Throughout the program
	we provide intensive case management services through our pods
	of 10 weeks, as we work with the kids and families.
	The results are very positive so far. Forty-eight kids have
	been served since launching in October. Of those, 46 have no
	new involvement with juvenile court, and 65 percent have no
	additional unexcused absences from school.
	With permission, I would like to conclude my remarks by
	sharing a success story that best captures the value of our
	community-based programs.
	This is Cassidy's story. At age 12, Cassidy was living a
	life that no child should ever have to endure. First introduced
	to drugs at the age of 12, Cassidy lived in what is often known
	as a trap house, a haven for drug dealers and buyers,
	constantly streaming in and out at all hours.
	On days Cassidy actually attended school, her experience
	was very difficult when she came home. She would find one drug
	dealer in the living room, one in the kitchen, and another
	propped up in the dining room. There were guns, pot, powders of
	all kinds lining the tables. Smoke was everywhere and noise was
	everywhere, but her mother was nowhere to be found.
	Sometimes transactions even occurred in her bedroom. Those
	were some of the scariest for a 12-year-old girl.
	Cassidy routinely missed 40 to 70 days of school during
	middle school and 92 days of school her freshman year. In the
	summer of 2012, Cassidy's life would change forever. After
	being arrested for possession of a handgun and drug
	paraphernalia, her mom refused to give up the dealers and chose
	to pin it on Cassidy, but this turned out to be the best part
	of this story because it turned things around for Cassidy.
	Those charges were straightened out, and Cassidy came to
	our shelter program. After receiving counseling and being
	placed with her grandparents, Cassidy went on to do wonderful
	in school.
	Because of the support of our case manager, Linda, her word
	was never broken to Cassidy, and after completing tutoring and
	counseling classes, Cassidy graduated high school on time, and
	eventually sat for the ACT. Thinking that she would not score
	well, Cassidy actually scored a 24 on her ACT, still a
	sophomore in high school. Today, Cassidy is at the University
	of Louisville, maintains steady employment, and recently became
	a mom.
	We are very proud of her success and the success of this
	program.
	Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. This
	important and critical reform work is needed, and your
	diligence and dedication is greatly appreciated by all of us
	across the country.
	[The testimony of Mr. Reed follows:]
	[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



	Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Mr. Reed. I am going to hold on
	my questions as chair and recognize the chairwoman of the full
	committee, Dr. Foxx, for 5 minutes of questioning.
	Mrs. Foxx. Thank you, Chairman Rokita, and thanks to all
	the witnesses who are here today. Thank you very much for being
	here.
	Chief Flannelly, you have referenced alternatives to
	incarceration your department is involved in to help at-risk
	and committed youth. Can you discuss the importance of service
	options to ensure a child is placed in the best program to
	prevent him or her from being a repeat offender?
	Chief Flannelly. Thank you, ma'am. Yes. One of the
	processes we have in place in Tippecanoe County, and this was
	the pilot that started in 2009, when a young person would be
	arrested, whether it be for a status offense or any offense,
	they were brought into an intake facility.
	We had specially trained personnel in that intake facility
	that would run them through some questionaires. We can provide
	copies of what those questionnaires look like.
	You get an understanding of what is the core issue with the
	individual that you are dealing with right now. A lot of times
	what we see out on the street in law enforcement are really
	just the symptoms of much larger problems.
	By being able to identify what some of those core issues
	are, we can direct them into the appropriate services at a much
	faster rate. The sooner we get them into the right services,
	the better outcomes we get. The numbers have really just been
	astounding over the last few years.
	Mrs. Foxx. Thank you very much. Ms. Williams, in order to
	ensure that taxpayer funds are well spent, it is important to
	measure accurately the effectiveness of programs. Are there
	particular challenges associated with measuring the
	effectiveness of juvenile justice programs?
	Ms. Williams. Thank you, Representative Foxx. There are
	always challenges in being able to evaluate the effectiveness
	of programs. To do a true evaluation is actually a very
	expensive process, because you need to have control groups to
	actually do the comparison, to be able to attribute change to a
	particular intervention.
	What we do in Colorado is we are very strict about making
	sure that they are collecting data, short of being able to do a
	true scientifically based evaluation. Then we are able to
	collect data. We really take a look at it on a quarterly basis
	to make sure that they are serving the numbers of kids and we
	are beginning to see the outcomes.
	The other thing we do is when there are particular programs
	that show promise, we will use our Federal funds that Congress
	allocates to us in Title II to conduct more in-depth
	evaluations, that we would otherwise not be able to do.
	I think it is incredibly valuable to be able to fund
	programs, and we will only fund programs where there is some
	evidence to suggest that they work, and they can show us
	studies that say this is based on sound science. Then we can
	determine whether or not we are beginning to see such results
	and then determine if we want to invest in an even further more
	scientifically based evaluation.
	Mrs. Foxx. I am very happy to hear that. Several of you
	have talked about evidence-based and best practices. That is
	encouraging to know you are using the evaluations that you have
	to do that.
	Mr. Reed, you talked about the services you provide in your
	community. Is it possible that a young person can learn about
	these services on their own, or is it always when they come
	into the system in some way before they are connected with a
	service?
	Mr. Reed. Actually, we have found that being proactive and
	very active in the community is critical to ensure that the
	kids know about our programs prior to any involvement with the
	justice system.
	I believe a community partnership strategy is very
	important so that the word spreads and we can get to our kids
	and young people much sooner before they begin to commit their
	criminal offense.
	I think it is possible, but it is really incumbent upon the
	organizations and community providers to have a continuum and a
	strategy to get the word out. That is sometimes looked at as
	maybe an indirect resource, but I think it is very critical to
	put resources into the education of young people. We spend a
	lot of time in schools, talking with young people in schools
	about our services. Thank you.
	Mrs. Foxx. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Chairman Rokita. I thank the gentlelady. Mr. Polis, you are
	recognized for 5 minutes.
	Mr. Polis. Thank you, Chairman Rokita. Ms. Williams, in
	both the House and Senate bills that were passed to authorize
	the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, the term
	``dangerous practice'' was defined as, ``An act, procedure, or
	program that creates an unreasonable risk of physical injury,
	pain, or psychological harm to juveniles subjected to the act,
	procedure, or program.''
	Both bills required States in their State plans to,
	``Describe the policies, procedures, and training in effect for
	the staff of juvenile State correctional facilities to
	eliminate the use of dangerous practices, unreasonable
	restraints, such as the shackling of pregnant juveniles during
	labor and delivery, and unreasonable isolation, including by
	developing effective behavior management techniques.''
	My question for you is would Colorado have any trouble
	conforming to this requirement?
	Ms. Williams. Thank you, Representative Polis. I do not
	believe we would have any problems in Colorado. In fact, this
	is something that our State legislature has been addressing,
	and to be quite honest, our Division of Youth Corrections,
	which is responsible for both the detention and commitment of
	juveniles under juvenile justice, has responded quite well to
	the suggestions. We have a representative of Youth Corrections
	on our State advisory group. They are an amazing partner with
	us and are well aware of the JJDP Act.
	Mr. Polis. Given your multi-state experience, do you think
	any State would have trouble conforming to those requirements?
	Ms. Williams. I believe some States--I honestly do not know
	enough about each State. I think there may be some States who
	struggle with it. What I would suggest is that there are enough
	of us other States who have been able to address it.
	That is the beautiful part of the JJDP Act, it really
	provides a learning community among all the States and
	territories and we can help each other. So if there are other
	States who are struggling with this particular issue or any of
	them, I am often called upon to help, and I have called other
	States to help on particular issues, so I would suggest we have
	solutions available.
	Mr. Polis. I ask because we have all seen the horror
	stories about the use of restraints on children in juvenile
	facilities. It was just a year ago this January that Gynna
	McMillen, a 16-year-old girl, died of cardiac arrhythmia in a
	Kentucky juvenile detention center after she was placed in the
	Aikido-styled restraint by center staff for refusing to remove
	her sweatshirt during booking.
	The restraint she was placed in is now one that is outlawed
	in Kentucky public schools, but it is still allowed by the
	Department of Juvenile Justice. While there is a suggestion
	that if the center staff had checked on Gynna through the
	night, every 15 minutes, as required by regulations, she might
	not have died, there is the question of whether the restraint
	played a role in her death, and evidence to that effect has
	been presented in the courts.
	I wanted to raise that story to highlight the need to train
	juvenile justice facilities and faculty to deescalate
	situations, resort to dangerous practices only when necessary,
	and to point out that Gynna was at the secured facility after
	police were called while she was getting into a fight with her
	mother.
	Judge Cubbon, I wanted to ask you about the indiscriminate
	use of shackles in juvenile courts. As you know, in most States
	juveniles are shackled often for court appearances without any
	proof of a flight or safety risk, and that is in contrast to
	adults, where courts have found there usually has to be a
	compelling security interest to necessitate shackling.
	In my home State of Colorado, the individual judicial
	districts have each recently developed their own procedures on
	shackling, and in many other districts there is now the
	rebuttable assumption that a juvenile offender does not need to
	be shackled or the practice has been prohibited except for a
	few violent offenders. I understand that is also the case in
	Ohio where you preside.
	Judge Cubbon. That is correct.
	Mr. Polis. Can you tell me what your experience has been
	with this? Have you felt any less safe in your courtroom when
	juvenile offenders came before you unshackled?
	Judge Cubbon. I can tell you this is another example of how
	education can enlighten parties when you are talking about a
	topic, just like solitary confinement issues, along the same
	lines.
	In the State of Ohio, we had a directive and request from
	the Ohio Supreme Court for the judges to look at the shackling
	procedures. As you can imagine, 88 counties in the State of
	Ohio and 88 different opinions.
	I really believe that once we circulated the research and
	the information, conversations with law enforcement, and
	amongst the judges, core personnel, and the people that we as
	judges have control over in the courthouses, we decided the
	research would indicate that even having a presumption against
	shackling would be beneficial.
	Do I feel frightened in my courtroom? No, I do not. I
	don't. I think as we continue to educate the judges across the
	country on that issue, creating presumptions against shackling,
	I think that will be an example of a procedure that will be
	eliminated across the country. I really do.
	Mr. Polis. Thank you. I yield back.
	Chairman Rokita. I thank the gentleman. Dr. Roe, you are
	recognized for 5 minutes.
	Mr. Roe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, thanks to
	all the panel members. I think you do some of the most
	important work done in this country. You have young people
	whose entire lives are ahead of them that can go in two
	directions. One is not a very good direction.
	Just a personal story. I had an opportunity when my son--
	remember, stupid is on the Y chromosome. He rolled the
	principal's yard at age 12 or 13 and was caught. We had to go
	to juvenile court. God bless Judge Underwood, who sentenced him
	to writing out ``I will never roll a house again'' 1,000 times.
	His father was not real happy about that trip.
	The story ends with he is a successful futures trader/owner
	in Chicago, Illinois. I thank Judge Underwood to this day, and
	had no more problems after that.
	I am a little distressed. We have a system, you are at the
	end of a problem that started to none of your doing. In our
	area now, we have an entire neonatal intensive care unit with
	drug-addicted babies. Twenty-five percent of those babies end
	up in foster care in the State of Tennessee in 1 year.
	It is the saddest thing in the world to see, and it is an
	enormous social cost, and an enormous cost to those children in
	the way they end up in their lives and where they end up.
	Chief, I am just going to ask, and any of you, what do you
	think the main reason for children entering the juvenile
	justice system is? If there is a thing you could put your
	finger on, what would it be?
	Chief Flannelly. I think you just touched on it, sir. It is
	incredibly sad. I think a lot of times for young police
	officers, it is one of the biggest adjustments they have, when
	you enter into the profession, you have a certain amount of
	idealism and you feel really good about the opportunity to go
	out and help, and you quickly realize that for some of the
	issues that you are facing, there is no law enforcement
	solution.
	I think over the years through evidence-based practices and
	other means, and just raising the level of professionalism
	across the board, we have made tremendous advances in our
	profession and others.
	I like to talk about in Indiana or in Lafayette in our PD,
	we like to consider ourselves one spoke on a much larger wheel.
	We try to focus on the problem and then look to see what kind
	of community resources we have in place that can help address
	the specific problem.
	I think that is the ultimate question, how do we address
	these issues at the earliest possible time so we can create the
	best outcomes down the road.
	Mr. Roe. Chief, there has obviously been a lot of negative
	aspects of police officers. You have seen this in the last
	couple or 3 years. How do you interact with young people who
	already have a very negative view?
	We have a very active community policing in my hometown. It
	is a small town of 65,000 people. My hat is off to those folks
	who every day go out. There is a resource officer at the
	school. I think children can get trust in by getting to know
	that police officer. How do you cross that bridge?
	Chief Flannelly. Community outreach is a key component to
	that. We have expanded in our agency. We are a midsized agency,
	142 officers. We have dedicated four officers just for that
	purpose alone. We have a school resource officer. We have DARE
	officers. All those things where we can create relationships
	that we know will help.
	Quite frankly, for law enforcement, we are fighting a
	battle on multiple fronts, and it is a perception battle as
	much as anything else. It can be very difficult when you are
	trying to do the best work you can for those best outcomes. A
	lot of times, there is just a lack of understanding of what the
	core issues are.
	I think you mentioned it, we are downstream from those
	issues. By the time the problems come to the attention of law
	enforcement, there were a lot of opportunities where we could
	have probably intervened, a lot of it really starting at the
	family level. What are the conditions in the home? What are the
	conditions in that child's environment that might be affecting
	which path they go?
	Unfortunately, when children are exposed, such as the story
	we heard about with Cassidy, that is an everyday, all-day-long
	thing for police officers in this country.
	Like the YWCA, we have very similar programs in Lafayette
	where we can intervene early. I think that is our best chance
	for success: outreach, trust. Just like the programs I
	mentioned earlier, those are also important parts where we can
	conduct this training. Juvenile Jeopardy is a perfect example
	where we have learned to interact with juveniles.
	Mr. Roe. Chief, thank you. My time has expired. But, Mr.
	Reed, I think you have had a successful career because you
	impacted one person's life. Thank you for that.
	Mr. Reed. Thank you.
	Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expired. Ms.
	Fudge, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
	Ms. Fudge. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
	all so much for your testimony and for your work trying to
	protect our children. I know it is trying but very rewarding
	kind of work.
	I just want to say some years back in another life I was
	the mayor of a small city. Our police chief put in place
	midnight basketball, something very, very simple, for the
	police and for juveniles to interact together. During that hour
	and a half, it received not one call to the police department.
	So, interventions do help.
	Your Honor, thank you for being here. I, too, obviously am
	from Ohio. Pleasure to see you. Certainly, you are aware that
	since the last reauthorization of this act, funding has
	decreased by more than half. Tell me how it has affected your
	work, and what the real cost is if we do not invest in our
	future, in our children.
	Judge Cubbon. Well, first, I would like to respond for a
	second to Mr. Roe to say that being a juvenile court judge is
	probably one of the best jobs around the country, because we
	have an opportunity to participate and walk the walk with the
	family, making important changes in their lives, and the
	successes are enormous. One success at a time keeps us going.
	We are from Ohio. I am from Northwest Ohio. We have had our
	financial times in our community where we had to do a lot of
	cutting of our funding. It was an opportune time for us because
	this is the time when juvenile and adolescent brain science
	research was coming about. People were beginning to look at the
	way they handled children differently, are there better ways
	and practices, best practices, using data to make decisions.
	It was a great opportunity for us to look at resources and
	talk about maybe we should be reallocating them into programs
	that work, and into processes that work.
	There is great value for police officers and departments
	that want to begin diversion programs. They keep those kids out
	of court that probably do not need to be there in the first
	place.
	On the other end of the spectrum, we had an opportunity to
	develop our reentry programming for the kids who were, in fact,
	incarcerated, creating roadmaps for them to come home, using
	our resources wisely, so when they came home they were prepared
	to put into practice the work they had done in the institution,
	like cognitive behavioral therapy, family therapy, and such,
	but all the kids in between.
	We had an opportunity to focus on the children who had
	high-risk needs, investing our money wisely for efforts for
	them to make changes in their lives. And then the lower level
	kids, keeping them out of the system as best we can, supporting
	the families with community-based programming, respecting the
	families, having the community join us as partners so they can
	help us in assisting kids in making those changes in their
	lives, like schools and other organizations, mental health,
	becoming active partners.
	Ms. Fudge. Did the decrease in funding affect these
	programs? That is really my question.
	Judge Cubbon. I would say the decrease in funding has kind
	of limited the opportunities for other communities across the
	country to take advantage of them.
	When you become enlightened and you understand the work and
	you understand what is important in developing your
	programming, like letting the data show your results and such,
	you can kind of lie, but so many jurisdictions across our
	country really need that assistance. Talking about things like
	shackling, educating their communities.
	Ms. Fudge. Thank you very much. Mr. Reed, same question.
	Mr. Reed. Yes, I believe the first part of your question
	was the cost without the program, and it can be answered in
	terms of the State of Kentucky, if I might share, for a young
	person who let's say goes on to prison, for example. Let's say
	that is where they continue to head, that and the loss of
	potential income, that is about $100,000 per youth right now in
	the State of Kentucky.
	There is a significant financial cost. There is obviously a
	social cost when these programs are not available. Folks like
	Cassidy, we will not see those young people in school.
	In terms of how this decrease in funding has affected us,
	from our perspective, it has been a barrier in the sense of not
	being able to establish long-term planning for the programs
	that we have developed that seem successful and have shown
	results. Those are the programs we want to double. Those are
	programs we want to have additional funding for so that when we
	have to reassess and look for different funding sources, I
	think that delays our ability to serve more youth.
	Ms. Fudge. Thank you.
	Chairman Rokita. The gentlelady's time has expired. I thank
	the gentlelady. Mr. Garrett, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
	Mr. Garrett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I want
	to thank each one of the members of the panel for the
	impressive work you do.
	Judge, my hat tipped to you. I served for about 10 years as
	a prosecutor, including time as an elected prosecutor. The
	worse thing that ever happened to me was when the person who
	handled our juvenile court system would be out sick and I would
	have to go in there and navigate that second set of rules and
	understand the purpose of the system is different at that
	level.
	I wanted to ask you about your observations as it relates
	to prosecutors and their training in dealing with juveniles. I
	know we have had some problems with funding for prosecutorial
	training here in the past few years and in continuing to fund
	that.
	Do you see a marked difference based on the attitude,
	education, and experience level of prosecutors as it relates to
	the juveniles with the goal of getting them out of the system,
	and what would your observations and thoughts be about how we
	can help?
	Again, if the goal is diversion and a failure, for lack of
	a better word, or prevention, a much better word, from people
	entering the adult criminal justice system, what sort of things
	do you think we can do to train the people on that end of the
	criminal justice system to get better outcomes for young
	people?
	Judge Cubbon. I can say this first, in my 23 years,
	spending most of my time in the juvenile division, you are
	absolutely correct, there is a difference between being a
	prosecutor in the juvenile division and being a prosecutor in
	the adult division. I am here to tell you that I am one of
	those people who went to the adult division and said no, thank
	you, I am going to go back to juvenile court because this is
	the court of hope, right?
	Mr. Garrett. Right.
	Judge Cubbon. Right? I always say sometimes you have to
	take advantage of opportunities. I seriously believe that
	prosecutors, probation officers, the court, service providers,
	entering into interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary training
	or education is a win-win for the families that we serve, in
	whatever your role or capacity is.
	If you are a prosecutor, you are representing the victim. I
	learned this early on as a prosecutor, victims of juvenile
	cases, juvenile offenses, always want to give the child a
	chance to make changes in their lives. We know so much more now
	that I believe the prosecutors can assist us with that message
	to the victims and to the community, talking about we have to
	keep the public safe. That is their responsibility, the court's
	responsibility, and everybody else's.
	At the same time, having conversations about having
	effective screening tools, assessment tools, to make
	determinations about these risky behaviors a result of a trauma
	trigger, are they a result of maybe some social determinants
	that are getting in the way of them going to school, such as
	hunger, homelessness, is there abuse going on in their homes.
	Prosecutors having conversations and being trained and
	attuned to those kinds of situations can fashion their
	recommendations to the court to make important changes in these
	kids' lives because, let's be honest, if we have high-risk and
	moderate-risk behaving children and we can give them
	appropriate services to change their behaviors, then we have
	the likelihood for a safer community.
	Coming together as a team. I can tell you the National
	Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges has offered
	training for prosecutors, as they do with public defenders and
	others, looking at it as a joint effort to make recommendations
	that are in the best interest of the child and their family
	and, likewise, in the best interest of the community.
	Mr. Garrett. Thank you, Judge. I do not have a lot of time
	remaining. Ms. Williams, you are from Colorado. Colorado has
	been a leader as it relates to legalization of cannabinoids,
	and it is something where I see a failure on our part here at
	the Federal Government level because essentially if you enforce
	federal law one way in one State and differently in another,
	then you fail to have equal justice by virtue of the fact that
	justice that is not blind is not justice.
	To me, I want to watch and see what happens in Colorado,
	and I'd like to have the states have a stronger purview over
	their own policy vis-a-vis this Tenth Amendment thing. Do you
	have any experience or insight as to the juvenile justice
	experience in Colorado?
	I have been looking at a lot of the data, which some of it
	is actually quite encouraging, actions taken in Colorado with
	relation to cannabinoids.
	Ms. Williams. Thank you very much, Representative Garrett.
	Actually, the division that I work in is responsible for
	collecting data regarding marijuana in our State. To be quite
	honest, it is still very early. We do have conflicting data.
	Some Federal data suggests it is getting worse for young people
	and others that say actually use is going down.
	I think we need more time to decide.
	I do think regardless of whether it is being driven by the
	increased exposure to marijuana, we still have a drug issue in
	our country. Certainly in Colorado, opioids are actually a
	bigger problem than any, and the need for treatment and
	treatment that will work is probably even more important for us
	and for other States in the Nation.
	Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expired.
	Mr. Garrett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Chairman Rokita. The prosecutor did a good job of dropping
	a question with 2 seconds to go. The gentlewoman from Oregon is
	recognized for 5 minutes.
	Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
	ranking member, and thank you to all our witnesses. This is a
	great discussion.
	I wanted to just point out this interconnectedness,
	following up on some of the questions that have been asked.
	Just yesterday I had in my office a group of healthcare
	providers from Oregon.
	With our Medicaid expansion, we have coordinated care
	organizations. These happen to all be from rural areas.
	They talked about the work they are doing really based on
	the CDC-Kaiser adverse childhood experience (ACE) study, which
	is now several years old, but they talked about the recognition
	that childhood abuse and neglect affects later in life, and
	working with early learning hubs and having that coordinated
	care is making such a difference. They call it ``self-healing
	communities.''
	Based on the same model, our neighbor to the north, in one
	county in Washington, they saw teen births down 62 percent,
	youth suicide and attempts down 98 percent, youth arrests for
	violent crimes down 53 percent, and dropout rates down 47
	percent.
	My point is this is something that our healthcare providers
	are working on in rural communities with our Medicaid expansion
	dollars, and I urge all my colleagues to keep things like this
	in mind as we talk about things like health care reform, and
	also as we talk about how we engage students in school.
	For example, our career and technical education bill that
	passed the House, but not the Senate. If we are engaging
	students in school, they are much more likely to stay engaged
	and out of the criminal justice system.
	I wanted to also ask, one of my priorities is for those
	youths who are in the system, I am really concerned about
	preserving the continuity of their education. Making sure they
	have access to quality education while they are in the juvenile
	justice system is really critically important to their reentry.
	We have a great partner in Oregon, our Oregon Youth
	Authority. They are responsible for more than 1,300 young
	adults in the juvenile justice system. They had 150 youth who
	earned their high school diplomas and GEDs last year.
	I wanted to ask the panel, but I will start with Judge
	Cubbon, how can an update to the JJDPA promote the continuity
	of education for youth who are incarcerated? How can we best
	support the youth who are returning to traditional schools
	after they have been incarcerated? I'll start with the Judge.
	Judge Cubbon. Thank you. I would say that we have
	frustrating conversations about education amongst this
	population of kids regularly. We in the State of Ohio are lucky
	that our Department of Youth Services has made a concerted
	effort to help kids get credit recovery, maybe pursue a GED for
	the older children that are incarcerated, and to start to look
	at their special educational needs while they are in the
	institution, so when they can come home, they are better
	prepared for whatever their educational setting is going to be.
	Ms. Bonamici. What are the barriers? Why are not more
	students able to continue their education while they are
	incarcerated?
	Judge Cubbon. I do not want to say it is mandated in Ohio,
	but it is pretty much mandated in Ohio until they are 18 in the
	institutions. To me, the more frustrating part is we have these
	kids that are ready, willing, and able to come back home and
	ready to go into a GED program, continuing ed program, and
	their success is limited in the beginning. They are coming home
	after a period of time, so they have to re-indoctrinate
	themselves in their homes and in the community, and that bad
	kid memory, oh, there is that kid again.
	I think it is really vitally important that we begin
	partnering in a more deliberate way with the education system
	leading the way to help us help those kids and answer those
	questions.
	I know that is really vague, but it is really an area that
	is really very frustrating.
	Ms. Bonamici. Does anyone else have a response in my
	remaining 36 seconds?
	Mr. Reed. I will be very quick. I think one challenge is
	being confined in detention, in secure confinement, would mean
	you are posing a risk to the community. It is for safety. I
	think there is a philosophical difference. You are going into
	the justice system because you are a risk to the community.
	I really feel it is hard to fold education into that
	because the intent of the justice system is to keep the
	communities safe. I think it needs to expand or we need to deal
	with the fact that the intent of justice is safety and,
	therefore, I am a huge believer in let's keep as many out as
	possible.
	Ms. Bonamici. One of the intents, but my time has expired,
	and I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Chairman Rokita. The gentlelady is correct, her time has
	expired. I am going to recognize myself for 5 minutes at this
	time.
	Starting with you, Chief, you talked about a couple of
	programs, Policing the Teen Brain and Juvenile Justice
	Jeopardy, and you have answered questions around that, I
	believe, already.
	Mine is specific. How do these programs impact your
	officers' daily shifts? Is this complementary to it? Is this
	another task? Enlighten us.
	Chief Flannelly. The training that we conduct with the
	officers, we do it in an environment outside of their work day.
	The programs, they typically run 2 to 3 days. We actually have
	peers that will train; we have peer-to-peer trainers.
	Chairman Rokita. Is that good or bad? Do they do that
	willingly?
	Chief Flannelly. Absolutely.
	Chairman Rokita. Is it on their own time?
	Chief Flannelly. No, we do it on department time. At first,
	we were a little concerned as to how it was going to be
	accepted, but once the officers get in there, they realize the
	science behind what they are learning, and this is going to be
	a very effective tool for them when they are having these
	interactions out on the street and in moments of crisis.
	We do not deal with people in the calm moments. We are
	called because something significant has happened, whether it
	is a crime, a fight, whatever that might be.
	It is a great opportunity for officers to understand they
	might not be talking to the prefrontal cortex of a 16-year-old.
	They are talking to the midbrain. For them to understand, okay,
	he may be saying some things right now and he does not really
	mean it. They have just a better understanding.
	Chairman Rokita. Ultimately, this helps them in their daily
	work?
	Chief Flannelly. It helps significantly. We have had
	tremendous feedback, and now we have officers that look forward
	to going through the program.
	Chairman Rokita. Thank you. Mr. Reed, Ms. Williams, and
	perhaps you have talked about various agencies that engage one
	another as they serve the same youth. Talk to me more
	specifically about how that is coordinated, if there is waste
	involved, how you manage that coordination when youths are
	being serviced by more than one program or agency.
	Mr. Reed. I think it is very important to have a central
	agency that is coordinating and staying in communication with
	the other providers. I also think it is important to have--one
	of the things I have with my staff, my staff sit on key
	community advisory boards and coalitions to stay in tune with
	what programming is going on. And on a specific level, I think
	it is important that we as organizations recognize what our
	role is, what we are good at, and bring that to the table.
	I think it is important in partnerships that you have the
	decision makers at the table. There is nothing more frustrating
	when partners come together and folks are not able to follow
	through or make that commitment.
	Chairman Rokita. Is this something, Mr. Reed, where we
	should rely on local leadership and leaders being leaders, or
	is this something that we can legislate here in terms of more
	impactful overlap or no overlap, however it would work?
	Mr. Reed. I think anything that could provide incentive on
	the back end of services from a funding perspective would be a
	wonderful step.
	One of the challenges, I think, for example, if there was
	some sort of incentive-based opportunity to acquire funding,
	that would help galvanize and line people up to this work in a
	way that is not sort of spinning our wheels, that is how it
	feels, to have something to reach for.
	Chairman Rokita. What does ``spinning your wheels'' mean?
	Can you give me an example?
	Mr. Reed. Sure. I will give you an example. When decision
	makers are not at the table, let's say the funding source is
	something that you receive as a result of a grant, for example.
	I think organizations need to be held accountable to the
	commitments they make within those funding proposals.
	I feel like when that accountability is not there, that is
	what I am referring to, it feels like we are spinning our
	wheels. We are not maximizing the opportunity we have with the
	gifts and contributions and the grants that we receive. I have
	been a big proponent of that in our organization.
	Chairman Rokita. Thank you. I have questions for the other
	two witnesses, but there is no way it is going to happen in 15
	seconds. I am going to try to get with you afterwards via email
	or something, and maybe you can respond back. I appreciate it.
	I yield back. Mr. Scott, the ranking member of the
	committee, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
	Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
	holding this hearing. I think it is important to note that all
	of the discussion about how we can effectively reduce crime has
	been focused on prevention, early intervention, and
	rehabilitation, and not in the after-the-fact, simpleminded
	slogans in sound bites of how much punishment we can inflict
	and waste the taxpayers' money.
	Ms. Williams, can you explain why it is cost effective to
	invest in prevention rather than wait until children drop out
	of school, join a gang, get caught, and then impose draconian
	sentences after they get caught? Can you say how expensive it
	is to pay for that strategy when effective prevention and early
	intervention services can be provided?
	Ms. Williams. Thank you, Representative Scott. Thank you
	for your leadership over the years. I truly appreciate it.
	Yes, you have all heard an ounce of prevention is worth a
	pound of care, correct? When we look at the cost of serving
	youth--I call it ``earning your way deeper into the system,''
	because the kids have obviously done things that they have
	earned their way deeper into the system.
	In Colorado, and I think it is going to be similar
	elsewhere, when youth will earn their way into what is our
	version of youth commitment, which is adult prison, it can run
	upwards of $350 per day per youth, and that includes treatment.
	It can cost $2,300 to $4,800 per case on probation.
	When you add up those numbers against the numbers of youth
	who find their way into our system, it is pretty extreme. And
	yet, if you are working with a young person, if you are working
	with a child that you have identified, for example, in school
	who is starting to struggle, they are starting to not show up,
	even at a young age, and the schools are able to pull in their
	multidisciplinary partners, let me tell you, you get people
	around the table like in a multidisciplinary process, you start
	talking, and you realize you are overlapping and there are ways
	that one system can pull out of doing this and fill this other
	gap, and then you are not wasting funds.
	So, working in a multidisciplinary way where you identify
	these young people as early as possible allows you to get in
	there and provide services to them, but, more importantly at
	that point, you are providing services to the families.
	When a youth goes into our youth justice system, sometimes
	people forget they are going to go home, and if we have not
	addressed those issues that were happening in the home before
	they came to us, they are not going to be real successful when
	they go back.
	I am very proud in our State because they really focus on
	family engagement all the way through, but the earlier we do
	that, the more success we are going to have, because you are
	not going to have behaviors entrenched. The kids are not going
	to be starting to think of themselves as a criminal. They are
	going to see success in developing relationships in their
	communities that are positive rather than negative. I hope that
	helps.
	Mr. Scott. Thank you. You mentioned the Office of Juvenile
	Justice and Delinquency Prevention and Research. Have you been
	getting research from them?
	Ms. Williams. To be quite honest, in the past couple
	months, I have not been looking for it. I am not sure how much
	they have been able to do. Just as States have suffered
	reductions in funding, so have they. Like I said, research
	costs money. I would hope we could all start being able to do
	more of that.
	Mr. Scott. Thank you. Judge Cubbon, can you tell me what
	you can do as a juvenile court judge that a juvenile referred
	to adult court would not get?
	Judge Cubbon. In our State, in order to be tried as an
	adult, the prosecutor or the State has to show that there is no
	opportunity for rehabilitation in the juvenile justice system
	within a finite period of time.
	Mr. Scott. You have to do that before the transfer?
	Judge Cubbon. Yes.
	Mr. Scott. If they are not transferred, are there services
	you can provide that the adult court judge cannot do?
	Judge Cubbon. Yes.
	Mr. Scott. There is a thing called a ``valid court order''
	which allows some judges in some States to lock up children who
	are found in violation of status offenses, offenses that would
	not even be a crime but for their age.
	Does Ohio allow judges to lock up children because of
	status offenses? And is that process important, to be able to
	lock up people for status offenses?
	Judge Cubbon. As you know, the valid court order exception
	is a court order that can be used to hold juveniles who are
	maybe under the jurisdiction of the court for those status
	offenses that you are talking about.
	I am in a jurisdiction where we have actively looked for
	community responses to assist those children who are unruly
	children, are status offenders, and do not need to be
	incarcerated, they do not need to be before the court.
	If you can develop a system of well-intentioned, meaningful
	responses based on their needs, using screening tools and
	assessment tools to address their issues, then incarcerating
	them no longer becomes an option, right?
	The reality is for a lot of these children, incarcerating
	these children hurts them. Many of these children are victims
	of trauma, abuse, neglect, and all sorts of other issues. We
	are not a mental health institution. We are not a disability
	institution. We are not respite care for foster parents.
	When the community understands that, maybe we can develop
	some ways to approach--
	Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expired. The
	ranking member is recognized for closing.
	Mr. Polis. I want to thank the chairman and I want to thank
	our witnesses for being here today, and for each of your
	commitments to our Nation's youth.
	I think it is clear from today's hearing that progress is
	being made in many States across the country that is data-
	driven and science-based.
	For example, Ms. Williams, thanks for sharing some of the
	work you are helping lead in Colorado; Mr. Flannelly,
	describing some of the innovative approaches in Indiana.
	In addition to this progress, we need to do more work to
	reform and improve our juvenile justice system at the Federal
	level.
	As we heard today, youth that are in the juvenile justice
	system are predominately male and people of color. I also want
	to point out that more must be done to protect LGBTQ youth,
	particularly transgender youth, in a gender-appropriate manner.
	Studies have also shown that LGBTQ youth are overrepresented in
	the juvenile justice system and are more vulnerable to
	discrimination and abuse within the system.
	There is also the continued use of dangerous practices,
	including some that have resulted in death, like restraints and
	corporal punishment that occur within the juvenile justice
	system.
	The best way to address these issues is at the Federal
	level through reauthorizing the Juvenile Justice and
	Delinquency Prevention Act, which has not been reauthorized
	since 2002. As we heard today, it needs to be updated to keep
	up with the latest research and best practices for protecting
	vulnerable youth. It needs to be updated so that funding can be
	restored to its full authorization levels.
	I do want to take this opportunity to point out that
	funding for the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act
	has dropped over the past several years, and without a new law,
	we are not only expecting States to comply with outdated
	policy, but we are expecting them to do it with less and less
	funding. That really underscores the need to pass a new law.
	In the last Congress, the committee worked in a bipartisan
	way to mark up and pass the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
	Prevention Act reauthorization. We successfully passed the bill
	on the floor with overwhelming bipartisan support.
	I am optimistic we can do that again this Congress. I look
	forward to working with my Republican and Democratic colleagues
	to achieve that goal, and I yield back the balance of my time.
	Chairman Rokita. I thank the gentleman. I appreciate the
	witnesses' testimony as well. I continue to learn a lot. I am
	grateful for your leadership and the leadership of those you
	represent across the country that do the work that you do, as
	Dr. Roe mentioned during his questioning. You are on the front
	lines and you see this every day, and your leadership is needed
	and appreciated, first and foremost by me.
	To cut through the bureaucracy a little bit, I am going to
	use my closing remarks to get a couple of questions on the
	record. You cannot respond, but we will provide you with a
	transcript if you would like, free of charge, Judge.
	Ms. Williams, actually Mr. Scott asked my question or
	similar to it, and you covered it. I am satisfied there.
	To the judge, you mentioned you are the ``court of hope,''
	and as a former practitioner sometimes in the juvenile system,
	I completely agree. My data point is small, it is one court
	system, and it was probably 13 to 15 years ago now.
	Almost every time when I would bring a client through, my
	goal was to keep them out of the system because, in fact, there
	was no hope, I felt, when they got in there with other
	juveniles, and they came out more hardened criminals, in my
	opinion.
	That does not mean we did not want personal responsibility
	to be upheld. There were lessons to be learned, and I tried to
	craft pleas that reflected that. Sometimes it worked, and
	sometimes I was met with--I do not know how to describe it--
	almost automaton, no. And present company excepted, of course,
	but no, this is the rule, this is how we do it here in this
	county, whether it was law enforcement or the prosecutor, and
	that was sometimes disappointing. Again, 15 years ago. I would
	have hoped that we have learned and got beyond that.
	My question would be--Dr. Roe's example is perhaps a good
	one. His son was made to write 1,000 times as part of his
	punishment. Do you feel that the judges have that kind of
	latitude, to craft creative personal responsibility measures as
	they see fit? Is the discretion there, or do you feel you are
	actually worried about the ACLU or someone like that jumping in
	and saying, no, they cannot shovel that person's driveway as
	part of their punishment, or whatever the creative solution
	might be? They have to go through this or the county is going
	to get charged with more money in a lawsuit that has to be
	defended. So, better to just put them in the system because we
	know the county cannot get sued that way.
	I think you see where I am going with my question. I would
	appreciate your professional opinion in that regard. Thank you
	very much.
	I appreciate the ranking member's comments about the
	bipartisan nature of this. I expect the same this Congress. I
	will say the funding to a large extent was there in the
	solution we had and it was paid for, the other part of this,
	because if you come to my personal office and anywhere you go
	on the Internet, you see that we are $20 trillion in debt.
	And that does not mean our subject today is not a priority.
	It means that if it is a priority, as it should be, we should
	be asked to ask ourselves and the country what is less of a
	priority to pay for this, so we do not give these youth an
	additional problem, which is going to be 30- to $50 trillion in
	debt by the time they are of age. I think that is a reasonable
	balancing act that we should be performing.
	I would like to close my comments by referencing Mr. Reed
	and his accountability comments, his testimony. I think that is
	key to all of us. I think if we are truly leaders, as you are,
	and people you represent, you can find those ways to make that
	happen.
	In fact, we had some accountability reform measures put in
	as a bipartisan act from last time, and I expect we will see it
	again.
	With that, thank you again, I appreciate the witnesses, and
	I appreciate the members who stayed and were able to
	participate today, and I am grateful for the work of this
	committee from last Congress and what is to be done this
	Congress.
	With that, seeing no further business before the committee
	today, we stand adjourned.
	[Additional submission for the record by Mr. Rokita
	follows:]

	[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


	[Questions submitted for the record and their responses
	follows:]

	[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

	[Whereupon, at 11:26 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

	[all]



	</pre></body></html>