Basic services, 2022
-
Overall
Locally operated
-
Detention
Locally operated
-
Probation
Locally operated
-
Reentry
Locally operated
|
In California, each county is responsible for administering its own detention, probation and reentry services.
Juvenile probation departments are part of the county government structure and are accountable to each county's Board of Supervisors. With the exception of San Francisco, each of California's 58 counties has a probation department that handles both adults and juveniles. San Francisco has separate departments for adults and juveniles; the adult probation department reports through the Superior Court, while juvenile probation reports through the Mayor's Office and an appointed Commission.
As part of its juvenile justice reinvestment legislation, California is closing its Division of Juvenile Justice, which operated the state's juvenile corrections facilities. Legislation establishing the closure plan (Senate Bill 823) also created a new Office of Youth and Community Restoration (OCYR) within the California Health & Human Services (Cal HHS) to oversee the transition by providing oversight and data and technical assistance concerning evidence-based practices and programming to California counties as responsibility for youth rehabilitation transitions form a state agency closer to home.
|
Purpose clauses, 2016
-
No clause
-
Parens patriae
-
Due process era
-
Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARJ)
-
Developmental Approach
Corrections agency, 2015
-
Independent juvenile corrections agency
-
Family/child welfare agency or division
-
Broad human services agency
-
Adult corrections agency or division
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) administers commitments to state juvenile correctional facilities. Reentry services are administered by each of California's 58 counties.
Intake and diversion, 2016
Initial intake and court diversion decision is at the discretion of the prosecutor or the juvenile court intake officer, divided by offense.
Statutory time limits for pre- & post-petition court diversions exist.
Solitary confinement, 2016
-
Prohibits punitive confinement
-
Limits punitive confinement
-
No limits on punitive confinement
-
Did not respond
Solitary confinement for punitive purposes is allowed in California's juvenile correctional facilities. Punitive room restriction is allowed up to 90 days, with a hearing required for confinement over 24 hours. (Adapted from 51 Jurisdiction Survey of Juvenile Solitary Confinement Rules in Juvenile Justice Systems, 2016. Lowenstein Center for the Public Interest at Lowenstein Sandler LLP)
Release decision, 2016
-
Agency
-
Court
-
Parole board
-
Agency and court
In California, release decisions from the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) are made by an independent juvenile parole board. The parole board does use a risk/needs assessment tool to inform release decisions, however, it is only one factor considered when making discharge/release decisions. The parole board's decisions are based on numerous factors, including public safety, demonstrated behavior, treatment and training needs, education, mental health, employability, and group living components. Once discharged, all youth are returned to their county of commitment, in custody, to await their re-entry disposition hearing with the court. Once the youth attends this hearing, DJJ’s jurisdiction is terminated.
Risk assessment, 2020
| Organization |
2013 |
2017 |
2020 |
| Statewide uniform assessment |
|
|
|
| Layered/regional assessment |
|
|
|
| Locally administered assessment |
|
|
|
In California, juvenile probation is administered locally by each county’s executive branch, and each county is responsible for its own policies and procedures regarding the use of risk/needs assessments. There is no state policy encouraging the consistent application of a risk/needs assessment; however, several counties have incorporated a tool into their practices. For example, Orange County uses an adaptation of the Wisconsin model and applies the results to develop probation case plans. Alameda County uses a criminogenic risk tool to determine how the juvenile should be supervised and the YLS/CMI to inform case plans.
Sex offender registration, 2015
Registers
Risk instruments, 2017
- Risk instruments tool used
- No statewide tool in use
Mental health screening, 2014
Requires a research-based mental health screening
-
Secure detention
-
Probation
-
Corrections
Other: For any youth qualifying for Medicaid.
- Mental health screening tool used
- Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument –Version 2 (MAYSI-2)
California requires the use of a research-based, standardized mental health screening in its state juvenile residential facility regulations (Title 15 Minimum Standards for Juvenile Facilities). These standards are issued by the California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC). A central role of the BSCC is to support public safety realignment in California to community corrections.
The BSCC also is also vested with standard setting authority for county corrections and probation (including juvenile services) and the advancement of evidence based practices. The current regulations require a mental health screening, including suicide risk at intake but do not name or require a specific standardized mental health screening instrument. According to the California Corrections Standards Authority the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument, 2nd Edition (MAYSI-2) is the standardized screening instrument of choice for many county operated juvenile detention (juvenile halls) and probation departments. However, in a decentralized juvenile justice landscape practice varies and knowledge is accumulated by surveying local stakeholders.
California's Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction grant program (MIOCR) is a unifying thread for advancing standardized screening. MIOCR helps to fund the proliferation of standardized mental health assessments and adequate follow up and diagnostic and treatment approaches for both youth in custody and on community supervision.
Frameworks for evidence-based practices, 2014
-
Statute
Supporting commitment to EBPs
-
Administrative regulations
Either in corrections, probation, or the juvenile court
-
Support center
Or collaboration dedicated to coordinating activities around implementing, evaluating, and sustaining EBPs
-
No stance
No official stance on EBPs
-
Did not respond
State did not respond to the survey
California supports the implementation and proliferation of evidence-based programs and practices (EBPs) in the juvenile justice system in state statute, administrative regulation and the establishment of an university-based resource center. The California Courts and the Board of State and Community Correction (BSCC) has a statute defined responsibility for advancing EBPs in state-wide standards-setting, training and public-safety grant-making. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) additionally supports the Center for Evidence Based Corrections at the University of California Irvine. The Center receives additional support beyond CDCR and helps to promote the science of corrections and research based policies and practices with empirical research.
Recidivism reporting, 2016
- Study populations
-
The group(s) of youth being studied in states that publicly report recidivism data.
-
Arrest
-
Court action
-
Supervision
-
Placement
- Re-offense events
-
Events that are used to measure recidivism in states that publicly report recidivism data.
-
Arrest
-
Court action
-
Supervision
-
Placement
- Follow-up periods
-
Details regarding the length of time and frequency that youth are tracked in states that publicly report recidivism data.
36 months with interval and adult systems reporting
- Details
-
Additional levels of analysis provided in states that publicly report recidivism data.
-
County
-
Age
-
Gender
-
Race/ethn.
-
Risk level
-
Initial offense
-
Re-offense
-
Prior history
California publishes two reports on juvenile recidivism. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Office of Research defines recidivism as an individual previously adjudicated and committed to DJJ, released to parole or directly discharged from DJJ and who is subsequently arrested in California or returned/recommitted to DJJ or a CDCR adult institution during a specified follow up period of time, independent of his/her discharge status. Youth are tracked for a maximum of 36 months with recidivism rates presented at 12, 24, and 36 month intervals.
Data sources
- 2010 Juvenile Justice Outcome Evaluation Report: Youth Released from the Division of Juvenile Justice in Fiscal Year 2004-2005
- California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Office of Research
- 2012 Outcome Evaluation Report
- California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Office of Research
