Agency integration, 2016

Coordination, 2014

  • Uses for coordination
  • Does not use for coordination
  • Data sharing

    Facilitated through the use of statewide information systems allowing for consistent data sharing between systems.

  • Committees or advisory groups

    Multidisciplinary groups that often have regularly scheduled meetings to brainstorm ways to improve systems integration.

  • Formal interagency MOUs

    Collaborative agreements to guide systems integration efforts

  • Informal interagency agreements

    Commonly based on historical practice, mutual trust, and recognition of the need to collaborate in order to serve dual-status youth.

  • Statute and/or rules

    Rules that mandate systems integration efforts


In Hawaii, there is currently no statewide data sharing between Hawaii Child Welfare Services (CWS), who administers child welfare, Family Courts, who administer juvenile probation, and the Office of Youth Services, who administers state commitment and aftercare services. There are examples of data sharing and coordination for dual status youth at the local level in Hawaii through informal means. A standard practice is in place to manually cross check system involvement (CWS and Delinquency) as youth enter the system. The sharing of case planning information and inter-agency planning meetings occur in some local jurisdictions to coordinate case management for dual status youth.

The 1st Circuit Family Court is actively involved in seeking automation opportunities that would likely be expanded to the state level.

Reported data

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 »