State juvenile justice statutes apply different legal labels to youth who commit status offenses. Researchers at times have associated the labels to legislative intent indicating a child welfare orientation on one side of the spectrum and a public safety approach on the other. In the middle are labels that imply a need for services and supervision. Some states require multiple labels because they split status offenses into more than one category. More information on status offense reform is available at the VERA Institute's Status Offense Reform Center and in a study of the competing underlying philosophies in state status offender legislation, Responding to Troubled Youth (1997).
Spectrum of labelsStates with multiple labels
|In need of aid, assistance, or care||In need of services||In need of supervision||Unruly||Status offender|
No specific label: Other:
- In need of aid, assistance, or care includes labels such as Child in Need of Aid, Child in Need of Care, Child Requiring Assistance, and Families in Need of Assistance.
- In need of services includes labels such as Children in Need of Protection or Services, Child in Need of Services (CHINS), Family in Need of Services (FINS), Family in Need of Court-Ordered Services, Family With Service Needs (FWSN), and Juvenile Alleged to Be in Need of Protection or Services.
- In need of supervision includes labels such as Child in Need of Supervision (CHINS) and Person in Need of Supervision (PINS).
- Unruly includes labels such as incorrigible, undisciplined juvenile, unruly, and wayward.
- Status offender includes labels such as juvenile petty offender, delinquent youth, and status offender.
- Some states have multiple labels for status offenders depending on the type of non-criminal offense or situational factors, such as Alabama (Status Offender and Child in Need of Supervision), Illinois (Minor Requiring Authoritative Intervention and Truant Minor in Need of Supervision), Iowa (Chronic Runaways and Families in Need of Assistance), Minnesota (Juvenile Petty Offender and Children in Need of Protection or Services), Washington (At-Risk Youth, Truant, and Child in Need of Services), and Virginia (Child in Need of Services, Child in Need of Supervision, and Status Offender).
States differ in the age boundaries established for delinquency and status offense jurisdiction. These differences impact how juvenile courts and other social services are organized and resourced. Gaps between the status offense and delinquency age boundary in 9 states create unusual structural contradictions where status offense jurisdiction extends beyond delinquency jurisdiction.
The nation's farthest reaching federal legislation is the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA). Enacted in 1974, the Act states that status offenders shall not be placed in secure detention facilities or secure correctional facilities. The Act was amended in 1984 with a controversial exception known as the valid court order exception (VCO). The VCO relaxes JJDPA secure detention restrictions for youth charged with non-criminal behavior who are in violation of a valid court order. More information is available on the OJJDP Core Requirements website and on the federal policy page of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice's website.
Case flow of petitioned status offense cases by detention, 2013
- Note: Detained case counts for individual race groups can be very small.
Thirty-seven states publicly report information about status offense and delinquency cases. Methods of reporting vary between states such as combining traffic citations with delinquent offenses whereas others include only misdemeanors and felonies in their delinquency figures. Additionally, these states report data about multiple stages of the juvenile justice system, such as referrals, petitions, and adjudications. Case rates for status offense cases are often lower than for delinquency cases in juvenile courts. The units of count for court statistics presented below vary by state, which often makes direct comparisons impractical and inaccurate. Where possible, a count based on the number of cases disposed is displayed. Additionally, 4 states that do not publicly report status offense cases report cases to NCJJ through the Easy Access to State and County Juvenile Court Case Counts online tool (Florida, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Virginia). View each state's profile by clicking on state names for the case totals, detailed footnotes and links to source information. More information concerning delinquency and status offense case counts is also available in the Juvenile Court Statistics report series.
- Status offense rate
- Delinquency rate
Per 1,000 youth from age 10 to the upper age boundary for each state
- Fourteen states do not report data: Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, District of Columbia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, New York, South Carolina, and South Dakota.
Progressive data 2016
As illustrated in table above, state level recidivism reports vary widely in the populations, marker events, and other details included in their analyses. Given the complexities involved in measuring recidivism, most published reports include only one population and one marker event as additional details often require additional data sources and other resources. However, there are a few examples of progressive recidivism research which include multiple populations and marker events and/or include more comprehensive analyses.