Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:30 pm
Time: 9:30 pm
Results for juvenile offenders (utah, u.s.)
2 results foundAuthor: Hickert, Audrey O. Title: Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC): Arrest/Referral Assessment Summary: In 1988, 1992, and 2002, Congress amended the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974 to establish and increase requirements that states address disproportionate minority contact (DMC) in their juvenile justice systems (OJJDP, 2009). To help states identify and address their DMC issues the Department of Justice (DOJ) developed a five phase model of “ongoing DMC reduction activities”: 1. Identification 2. Assessment/Diagnosis 3. Intervention 4. Evaluation/Performance Measurement 5. Monitoring As part of the first step, Identification, the Utah Board of Juvenile Justice (UBJJ) DMC Subcommittee has examined the relative rate index (RRI) for Minority youths’ contact with each point of contact in the Utah juvenile justice system from arrest through transfers to adult court (RRI = Minority youth rate of contact/White youth rate of contact). This examination has uncovered a multi-year trend of disproportionately higher arrest and referral to juvenile court for Minority youth. Because of this identified trend, the UBJJ DMC Subcommittee requested that the Utah Criminal Justice Center (UCJC) conduct this assessment of DMC Arrest/Referral in Cache, Weber, Salt Lake, and Utah counties as part of the second step, Assessment/Diagnosis. The purpose of this study is to conduct an assessment of local jurisdictions to identify potential explanations for why disproportionate minority contact (DMC) occurs among juveniles at the point of arrest and referral by law enforcement for follow-up data analyses and to explore possible solutions to address the disparity. This study was comprised of two phases: 1) interviews with local Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) to identify potential explanations for why DMC occurs among juveniles at the point of arrest/referral and identify potential data sources to confirm or disprove those hypotheses, 2) collection of de-identified data from each of the LEAs to examine DMC issues/explanations proposed in Phase 1. Details: Salt Lake City: University of Utah, Utah Criminal Justice Center, 2012. 84p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2013 at: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/DMC-Arrest_FinalReport_v101812.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/DMC-Arrest_FinalReport_v101812.pdf Shelf Number: 129527 Keywords: DiscriminationDisproportionate Minority ContactJuvenile Offenders (Utah, U.S.)Minority Groups |
Author: Hickert, Audrey O. Title: Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) Diversion Assessment: Fiscal Year 2009 Juvenile Court Referrals Summary: The Utah Criminal Justice Center (UCJC) has assisted the Utah Board of Juvenile Justice’s (UBJJ) Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) Advisory Committee with calculating the DMC Relative Rate Index (RRI) since Fiscal Year (FY) 2003. The RRI has consistently shown DMC at the point of diversion in the juvenile justice system. Minority youth have a lower rate of diversion than White youth after being referred to juvenile court. Because of this ongoing disparity, the UBJJ DMC Advisory Committee asked UCJC to study the factors that may influence the disproportionately lower rate of diversion for minority youth. This assessment seeks to answer the following questions: 1. What are diversion criteria? 2. How many episodes meet diversion criteria? 3. How many of diversion-qualified episodes are diverted by RRI categories? How many of diversion-qualified episodes are not diverted by RRI categories? 4. How do those that are not diverted differ from those that are? a. By delinquency history b. By presenting offense severity & type c. By risk (pending availability of PSRA & PRA on this group) d. Stratified by age 5. What is the failure rate of diverted/not-diverted (but qualified) episodes by RRI categories? a. Failure rate = diverted cases turned to petitioned (pending availability of data) b. Failure rate = any new referral within 12 months of diversion. This assessment was comprised of two main research tasks: 1) the compilation of diversion policy and practices, and 2) the analysis of juvenile court CARE data to examine diversion rates in relation to diversion policies and practices, youth and case factors, and minority status. Details: Salt Lake City: University of Utah, Utah Criminal Justice Center, 2011. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2013 at: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/DMC_Diversion_082311.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/DMC_Diversion_082311.pdf Shelf Number: 129528 Keywords: Disproportionate Minority ContactJuvenile CourtJuvenile DiversionJuvenile Offenders (Utah, U.S.)Minority Groups |