Basic services, 2022

  • Overall

    State operated

  • Detention

    State operated

  • Probation

    State operated

  • Reentry

    State operated

In Connecticut, administration of delinquency services is split between the executive and judicial branches. The judicial branch, Court Support Services Division (CSSD) administers probation in 12 court locations. The CSSD also operates the two secure detention facilities.

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 Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) administers commitments to state juvenile correctional facilities and aftercare services for youth leaving those facilities.

Intake and diversion, 2016

Initial intake and diversion decision is at the discretion of the juvenile court intake officer.

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 not allowed in Connecticut's juvenile correctional facilities. Solitary confinement is permitted if a threat to safety, property, or order is present. The head of the institution must authorize solitary confinement beyond 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

Release decisions for delinquent youth committed to the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) are most often made by DCF but the court can terminate the commitment as well.

Risk assessment, 2020

Organization 2013 2017 2020
Statewide uniform assessment
Layered/regional assessment
Locally administered assessment

In Connecticut, juvenile probation is overseen by the Court Support Services Division (CSSD), a judicial agency at the state level. Statute and CSSD administrative policy require the use of risk/needs assessment in juvenile probation. Connecticut uses the Brief Risk Assessment Tool, the Juvenile Assessment Generic (JAG), and in some cases a structured interview called Assessing Individual Motivation (AIM).

Information from the Brief Risk Assessment Tool, the JAG, and the AIM is used for developing/informing pre-disposition investigation reports and/or planning, developing probation disposition recommendations to the juvenile court, assigning probation supervision level, and developing probation case plans.

The state is also able to aggregate case level data and uses it to support local reliability and validity testing of the Brief Risk Assessment Tool and the JAG, assist with probation administration and organizational planning, and for ongoing policy research.

Sex offender registration, 2015

Does not register

Risk instruments, 2017

  • Statute or agency policy

    Required by state or administrative regulation

  • Agency recommended

    Recommended by probation oversite agency

Risk instruments tool used
Brief Risk Assessment Tool & Juvenile Assessment Generic

Mental health screening, 2014

Requires a research-based mental health screening

  • Secure detention

  • Probation

  • Corrections

Other: Any juvenile justice agency (diversion, pre-trial)

Mental health screening tool used
Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument –Version 2 (MAYSI-2)

The Judicial Branch, Court Support Services Division (CSSD) administers probation and secure detention and requires the use of the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (MAYSI) through administrative policy for adjudicated youth on probation. The CSSD administrative policy additionally requires the use of the following screening instruments at intake for youth admitted to secure detention, the Suicidal Ideations Questionnaire (SIQ), or the Suicidal Ideations Questionnaire Jr. (SIQ-JR); the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (MAYSI); and the the CRAFFT substance abuse screen. 

In contrast, the Department of Children and Families (DCF) administers youth corrections and through administrative policy requires the use of the Child Adolescent Needs and Strengths (CANS).

Both CSSD and DCF fund the screening instruments (with the exception of the SAVRY), provide automation support for administering the screening instrument, and training and technical assistance to the implementation of evidence-based mental health screening practices.

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

Connecticut supports the proliferation of evidence-based programs and practices (EBPs) in juvenile justice through administrative regulations and technical assistance through the Judicial Branch’s Court Support Services Division (CSSD). In 2002, the CSSD formed the Center for Best Practices to be responsible for coordinating activities around evaluating and sustaining evidence-based programming and practices for both adults and juveniles. However, since its creation, the Center's role has evolved from a single unit focused on EBPs to embedding EBP and quality improvement throughout the CSSD departments. Each contracted program is required to submit process and outcome data through a web-based database as part of their contract to align with framework of the CSSD; this information is available upon request.

The CSSD also supports evidence-based practices by funding specific evidence-based intervention programs, by providing training and technical assistance for contractors implementing EBPs, and by providing quality assurance services. Descriptive information about the type and locations of evidence-based programs is available upon request.

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.

24 months with interval and adult systems reporting


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

Data sources

Program Report Card: Juvenile Probation
State of Connecticut Judicial Branch

About this project

Juvenile Justice GPS (Geography, Policy, Practice, Statistics) is a project to develop a repository providing state policy makers and system stakeholders with a clear understanding of the juvenile justice landscape in the states.

Continue reading »


Tell us what you think of JJGPS. Questions, feedback, or other comments are welcomed.

Questions or feedback »

Follow on Twitter »