Three-Year Plan - Development Services Group

ATTACHMENT 1: PROGRAM NARRATIVEProject AbstractState of AlabamaAlabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs (ADECA)Law Enforcement and Traffic Safety Division (LETS Division)401 Adams Avenue, Room 466Post Office Box 5690Montgomery, Alabama 36103-5690Phone: (334) 242-5813Fax: (334) 242-0712FY2012 Juvenile Justice Title II Part B Formula Grant ProgramComprehensive Three-Year Plan Program NarrativeAlabama’s Formula Grant funds will be allocated to State, local, and private sectoragencies to implement Purpose Areas 8, 10, 6, 23, and 31, focusing on jail compliancemonitoring and minority overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system. With regard to awaiver of the program’s 33 1/3% and 66 2/3% funding distribution requirement, Alabama hasrequested an 85% waiver under the JABG Program that would allow 85% of the funds to beexpended on State-level programs and 15% to be expended on local-level programs to addressthe four core requirements of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. To achievethis program’s goals and objectives, State activities will include continuing (i) the State courts’improvement of its technology and data collection processes, and (ii) the monitoring of jailfacilities to address issues of compliance with the core requirements of the Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA). Local activities will focus on programs designed toprovide youth mentoring, parent and family assistance initiatives, truancy and dropoutprevention, graduated sanctions available to the courts for adjudicated juveniles, and transitionalresidential placement for youth involved in the juvenile justice system. Progress will bemeasured according to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s Formula performance measures “outputs” and“outcomes” as defined for the above-identified Purpose Areas.Comprehensive Three-Year Plan Components1. Description of Alabama’s Formal Juvenile Justice SystemThe State of Alabama’s formal juvenile justice system was designed to function andoperate within the State’s unified judicial system involving trial courts of limited jurisdiction,trial courts of general jurisdiction, intermediate appellate courts divided into separate civil andcriminal courts of appeal, and one supreme court (court of last resort). A full description of thestructure and function of Alabama’s juvenile justice system is as follows.1

A. Structure and Function of Juvenile Justice SystemAlabama’s system of juvenile courts was created by statutory act of the AlabamaLegislature in 1975 via the passage of Alabama Act No. 75-1205. This system has beenperiodically updated by, among other legislation, the passage of the Juvenile Justice Act(Alabama Acts No. 90-674, and No. 97-621), codified in the Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-1through §12-15-176, as amended, and the most recent passage of the new “Alabama JuvenileJustice Act” (Alabama Act No. 2008-277), codified in the Code of Alabama, 1975, §12-15-101et seq., which became effective on January 1, 2009. These courts are included in the courtadministration process operated as part of the responsibility of the Alabama AdministrativeOffice of Courts (AOC).Pursuant to Alabama’s new statutory law (Code of Alabama, 1975, §12-15-101 et seq.),juvenile cases in Alabama are actions which primarily involve individuals who are under 18years of age (persons who have not yet reached their 18th birthday). In 1994 and in 1996, theAlabama Legislature amended this age limitation by the passage of Alabama Act No. 94-481 andAlabama Act No. 96-571 (Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-34.1) which lowered the age to 16years of age in that any person 16 years or older charged with (i) a capital offense, (ii) a Class Afelony, (iii) a felony which involves the use of a deadly weapon, (iv) a felony which causes adeath or serious physical injury or involves a serious physical injury, (v) use of a dangerousinstrument against a law enforcement / correctional / parole / probation / juvenile court probationofficer, prosecutor, judge / judicial official, court officer, juror, witness, or school employee /teacher / principal, or (vi) trafficking in drugs, shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of thejuvenile court. The new “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act” Code of Alabama, 1975 §12-15-204,which became effective on January 1, 2009, maintains this age limit. For juveniles ages 16 and17 who are charged with traffic offenses, the adult court maintains jurisdiction over those cases,the exception being DUI offenses which will appear under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court.Juvenile cases also include charges that a child is delinquent, is dependent, or is a child inneed of supervision (CHINS). A delinquent child is one who has committed an offense whichwould be considered a crime if that child were an adult. A dependent child is one who isorphaned, neglected, or abused and in need of care. A child in need of supervision (CHINS) isone who committed an act which would not be classified as a crime if the child was an adult, butwhich indicates that the child is in need of care or rehabilitation. A CHINS child may behabitually truant, disobedient, or a runaway. A serious juvenile offender is a child adjudicatedto be delinquent and the delinquent acts charged in the petition would be similar to an adultcommitting a Class A felony, a felony resulting in serious physical injury, or a felony involvingthe use of physical force, a deadly weapon, or a dangerous instrument. A child adjudicated to bea serious juvenile offender must be committed to the Alabama Department of Youth Services(DYS) for a minimum of one year of care. A multiple needs child is a child brought to thecourt’s attention who is at risk of being placed in a more restrictive environment because of thechild’s emotional or mental problems, dependency, delinquency, or alcohol / drug / controlledsubstance abuse / addiction / dependency, and whose needs require the services of two or moreState agencies. These children are referred by the court to the respective county’s childrensservices facilitation team for evaluation and a recommended service plan of action. The court2

has the option to accept or modify the service plan if the court determines it is in the best interestof the child, and the court may then order the provision of the services.How a Juvenile Case BeginsAn individual, who can include a law enforcement officer, parent or legal guardian,relative, neighbor, or other person who has knowledge that a juvenile has committed a delinquentact, or is in need of supervision, or is dependent, may file a complaint with the juvenile court. Ajuvenile intake officer will then review the complaint to determine if it is sufficient, and that thejuvenile court has venue and jurisdiction over the matter. The intake officer then determineswhether a formal petition will be filed with the court, and will notify the juvenile’s parents orlegal guardian(s) of the juvenile’s detention. The intake officer will also advise the juvenile andhis or her parents or legal guardian(s) of their rights, including the right to have an attorneypresent at all of the proceedings.The intake officer also makes the determination whether the juvenile should be releasedto the custody of the parents or legal guardian(s), placed in the custody of a juvenile detentionfacility licensed by the DYS, or placed in the shelter care of the Alabama Department of HumanResources (DHR) in the case of a dependency or CHINS juvenile. Any time at which a juvenileis detained, a hearing must be conducted within 72 hours in order that the juvenile court judgecan determine whether the juvenile should remain in DYS detention, in DHR shelter care, or bereleased to the custody of the parents or legal guardian(s).Juveniles who commit certain minor offenses or who are first time offenders may havetheir cases managed without judicial action. The intake officer can withhold the filing of aformal delinquency petition or a CHINS petition and, with the consent of the juvenile and theparents or legal guardian(s), may attempt to make a satisfactory informal adjustment. In theinformal adjustment process, the juvenile and the parents or legal guardian(s) must voluntarilyagree to abide by certain behavioral conditions established by the intake officer and set forth inan informal adjustment agreement. These behavioral conditions can include requiring attendanceat counseling, imposing a curfew, requiring specific attendance at school, or other conditionswhich the intake officer deems reasonable per the degree of the juvenile’s offense(s). Thisinformal adjustment process may not continue beyond a time period of six months. If thejuvenile and the parents or legal guardian(s) abide by the terms of the informal adjustmentagreement, then the intake officer will not file a petition and the charges against the juvenile willbe dismissed. However, if the juvenile or the parents or legal guardian(s) violate the terms of theinformal adjustment agreement, then the intake officer may proceed with the filing of a formalpetition.When a formal petition is filed by the intake officer, the juvenile’s case is then scheduledfor a trial to be conducted by the juvenile court maintaining jurisdiction over the matter. Suchtrial is termed an “adjudication hearing.” At any time following the filing of a formal petition ina delinquency case or CHINS case, but prior to the conduct of the adjudication hearing, thejuvenile case may be processed via a consent decree. The consent decree is an agreementbetween the juvenile, the parents or legal guardian(s), and the juvenile court judge. Under aconsent decree, the proceedings of the juvenile court are suspended and the juvenile is placed on3

probation in accordance with such terms and conditions as are agreed upon by all of the parties.If the juvenile complies with all conditions of the consent decree, then the formal petition will bedischarged by the juvenile court. However, if the juvenile fails to abide by the terms andconditions of the consent decree, then the formal petition will be reinstated and the case willproceed to the adjudication hearing phase conducted by the juvenile court.The Adjudication Hearing ProcessAll juvenile court proceedings are conducted in a confidential manner. Juvenileadjudication hearings are conducted by a juvenile court judge alone, and are not conducted in thepresence of a jury. The adjudication hearing is closed to the public. Present at the hearing willbe the juvenile, the parents or legal guardian(s), the defense attorney who will represent thejuvenile, the district attorney who will represent the State, the victim(s) of the crime, the juvenileprobation officer, the juvenile court judge, and a representative of the Alabama Department ofHuman Resources (DHR) if the case is a dependency case.At the adjudication hearing, the judge will explain to the parties their rights, the substanceof the petition and the specific allegations contained therein against the juvenile, the nature andproceedings of the adjudication hearing, and the alternatives which are available to the judgeshould the allegations made against the juvenile be admitted by the juvenile or proven by theevidence. The judge will then make inquiry to the juvenile whether he or she admits or deniessome or all of the allegations contained in the petition. If the juvenile admits to the allegations,then the admission is similar to a plea of “guilty” in an adult court. If the juvenile denies theallegations, then the denial is similar to a plea of “not guilty” in an adult court. If the juvenilefails to admit or refuses to admit to the allegations, then the judge will enter into the record a pleaof denial on behalf of the juvenile.If the juvenile denies the allegations contained in the formal petition, then theadjudication hearing will proceed. The district attorney will present the State’s evidence to thecourt, the court will hear the testimony of the witnesses, and the defense attorney will thenpresent the juvenile’s evidence. These procedures for conducting the adjudication hearing aresimilar to those utilized in a civil case bench trial (judge-only trial). At the conclusion of bothsides presenting their evidence, the judge will rule on the case and make a finding that either (1)the facts alleged in the petition are true and the juvenile is dependent, in need of supervision, oris delinquent and in need of care or rehabilitation, or (2) the facts alleged in the petition are nottrue and the juvenile is not dependent, not in need of supervision, or not delinquent and not inneed of care or rehabilitation. If the judge determines that the facts alleged in the petition are nottrue and the juvenile is not dependent, not in need of supervision, or not delinquent and not inneed of care or rehabilitation, then the petition must be dismissed.The Disposition Hearing ProcessIf the juvenile court judge rules that the facts alleged in the petition are true and thejuvenile is dependent, in need of supervision, or is delinquent and in need of care orrehabilitation, then at the conclusion of the adjudication hearing the judge will schedule adisposition hearing to be conducted on the matter. The judge may schedule this disposition4

hearing to be conducted immediately following the conclusion of the adjudication hearing, or thejudge may schedule it to be conducted at a later date. In delinquency and CHINS cases, the courtcan transfer legal custody of the adjudicated juvenile, require the juvenile to perform communityservice, place the juvenile on probation, and/or require the juvenile to pay restitution to thevictim or to the State. Also in delinquency cases, the judge may commit the juvenile to thecustody of the DYS, but it is the DYS personnel -- and not the judge -- who will determine thelength of time during which the juvenile should and will remain in the custody of the DYS.If the juvenile is adjudicated to be dependent, then the judge will address the issue of thejuvenile’s custody and whether or not such custody should be placed with the parents, with otherguardians, or with the State wherein the juvenile is made a ward of the State. If the juvenile isremoved from the custody of the parents, then the juvenile court will conduct periodic hearingsto review this custody issue. This process of judicial review will continue until the juvenile isreturned to the custody of the parents, until parental rights are terminated and a permanentplacement is made for the juvenile, or until the juvenile reaches 21 years of age. At any point inthese proceedings, the juvenile court may make the parent(s) or legal guardian(s) a party to thecase. Once the parent(s) or legal guardian(s) is joined as a party to the case, the court may thenrequire the juvenile’s parent(s) or legal guardian(s) to perform such acts as are reasonablynecessary to promote the juvenile’s best interests. Examples of these acts include attendance atcounseling sessions and submission to random drug screening tests.Transfer of Juvenile Cases to Criminal CourtsIf a juvenile who is 14 years of age or older commits an act which would constitute acrime if it were committed by an adult, then the prosecuting district attorney may file a formalpetition with the juvenile court to transfer that juvenile’s case to the adult court for criminalprosecution. Once this formal petition to transfer is filed, the juvenile court will conduct ahearing so as to determine whether it is in the best interest of the juvenile and the public to grantthe petition to transfer. After hearing all of the evidence, if the court rules that there arereasonable grounds to believe that the allegations against the juvenile are true and correct, and ifthe court further rules that the juvenile is not amenable to the services provided through thejuvenile court, then the court may grant the petition to transfer the juvenile’s case to the adultcourt. Either a conviction or a youthful offender adjudication of a juvenile who has beentransferred and prosecuted at trial as an adult will terminate the jurisdiction of the juvenile courtover pending and future offenses committed by that juvenile. This practice is referred to a “oncetransferred and convicted, always transferred.”Cases Excepted From the Juvenile Court’s JurisdictionEffective April 15, 1994, if a juvenile who is 16 years of age or older is charged withcommitting a capital offense, a Class A felony, a felony which has as an element the use of adeadly weapon or causing the death or serious physical injury of another person, a felony using adangerous instrument against certain officials, or trafficking in drugs, then that juvenile’s caseshall be expressly excluded from the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. Such juvenile must beprosecuted as an adult in an adult court. If the juvenile is convicted in the adult court, then that5

juvenile may not be prosecuted as a juvenile for any subsequent offenses he or she commits. Insubsequent offenses, that juvenile will be prosecuted as an adult.Venue in Juvenile CasesIn delinquency cases and CHINS cases, the court case proceedings are conducted in thecounty wherein the act constituting the alleged offense occurred. In dependency cases, the courtcase proceedings may be conducted in the county wherein the juvenile resides or in the countywherein the juvenile was present when the case proceedings commenced.Cases Involving Minors and Adults in the Juvenile CourtThe juvenile court primarily exercises jurisdiction over cases involving individuals whoare under 18 years of age (persons who have not yet reached their 18th birthday). In someinstances, minors and adults may come under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. In theseinstances, the term “minor” is defined as an individual who is under 19 years of age but who isnot a child (for example, an 18 year old), and the term “adult” is defined as an individual who is19 years of age or older. Cases involving minors and adults who are classified according to thesedefinitions include the following: (i) a charge that a minor or adult contributed to thedelinquency, dependency, or need of supervision of a child, (ii) proceedings conducted toestablish the paternity of a child, (iii) charges of desertion or non-support of a child, and (iv)proceedings for the commitment of a mentally ill or mentally retarded minor child. After makinga preliminary investigation of such case, the court may attempt to resolve the case throughinformal adjustment without prosecution. If the case cannot be resolved informally, then thecase will be prosecuted in the same manner as similar cases in an adult court, but the case will beprosecuted in a judge-only bench trial and will not be prosecuted before a jury.Appeals From Juvenile CourtAny aggrieved party, including the State or any subdivision of the State (except incriminal cases, delinquency cases, and CHINS cases), may appeal the decision of the juvenilecourt. An appeal taken from the juvenile court’s decision shall be taken to one of Alabama’s twointermediate appellate courts (the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals or the Alabama Court ofCriminal Appeals) if there is an adequate record of the juvenile court’s proceedings or if theparties stipulate that only questions of law and not questions of fact are involved in the appeal.In those cases that involve minors or adults, the right to a trial by jury must first be waivedbefore an appeal can be brought directly to the respective intermediate appellate court. If thesequalifications are not met, then the appeal must first be brought in the circuit court where thecase will be heard de novo.An appeal may be filed in the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals in those cases when ajuvenile court has adjudicated a juvenile as delinquent or has granted a petition which seeks totransfer a juvenile case to the criminal court. All other cases involving juveniles, includingdependency cases and CHINS cases, are appealed to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals.6

Special Juvenile CasesThere are cases when juveniles requiring special treatment will be brought before ajuvenile court. Examples of such special treatment include a “multiple needs child” and a“serious juvenile offender.” A “multiple needs child” is one considered by the court to possessone or more traits (such as being emotionally disturbed, mentally retarded, dependent on alcoholor drugs, physically disabled, lacking proper supervision, etc.) and such traits would require thejuvenile to be referred to two or more State agencies for assistance, care, or treatment. With theassistance of a special team of personnel assembled within that respective county working tomake recommendations to the court as to the needs of that “multiple needs child,” the juvenilecourt must assess and study each such case so as to provide optional services for the juvenile. A“serious juvenile offender” is a juvenile who has committed either a Class A felony, a felonyresulting in serious physical injury, and/or a felony involving physical force, a deadly weapon, ora dangerous instrument, but who is not quite ready for his or her case to be transferred to an adultcourt for prosecution. A juvenile who is adjudicated as a serious juvenile offender must becommitted to the custody of the DYS for a minimum period of time of one year.B. System FlowHerein below are contained displays (flow charts) of how youth move through the Stateof Alabama’s formal juvenile justice system in the (i) juvenile delinquency process and (ii)juvenile dependency and CHINS process.7

Youth isdetainedALABAMA JUVENILE DELINQUENCY PROCESSDetention determination| | | |Youth isreleased toparentspendingadjudicationhearingComplaint against youth filed withJuvenile Intake OfficerInformaladjustment| |Complaint against youth dismissed,and youth released to parentsPetition filed| | | | |Detention hearingconducted within 72hoursYouth isdetainedpendingadjudicationhearingProbationIfcompletedthencomplaintagainstyouth isdismissedIfviolatedthenpetitionis filedConsent decree issued| | | |Youth is released toparents pendingadjudication hearingYouth admitsallegationsIf completed, thencomplaint against youth isdismissedAdjudication Hearing| |Youth denies allegationsAdjudication hearingIf violated, then youth proceeds toadjudication hearing| | |Youth is adjudicated as delinquentYouth is not adjudicated as delinquent| |Disposition hearingDismissed| |Commitment to AlabamaDepartment of Youth Servicesdetention facility8

ALABAMA JUVENILE DEPENDENCY AND CHINS PROCESSNotification of case is received by AlabamaDepartment of Human Resources (DHR)|Complaint is filed with Juvenile Intake Officer| |Shelter Care Determination is madeComplaint is dismissedYouth is sentto a sheltercare facility| | ||Shelter hearing isconducted within 72hours| |Youthremains inshelter carefacilitypending ahearingYouth is releasedto parents orthird partypending ahearingYouth is releasedto parents or thirdparty pending ahearingPetition is filedYouth is not adjudicated as dependent or CHINSPetition is filed|Adjudication hearing isconducted on abuse and/orneglect charges|Youth is adjudicated as dependent or CHINS| |Case is dismissedCase proceeds to a disposition hearingYouth is placed inthe custody ofparents| | | |Youth is placed inthe custody ofDHRYouth is placed inthe custody of arelativeYouth is placed inthe custody ofother third party9

and guidelines, examines and inspects facilities, trains facility staff members, issues/renewslicenses for qualified facilities, monitors facilities’ services, and financially subsidizes them.DYS establishes and promulgates standards for juvenile probation officers and certifies same,and provides salary subsides for each certified juvenile probation officer. DYS administers theInterstate Compact on Juveniles by providing for the return of juveniles who have run away orescaped to other States via cooperation with those States. DYS provides an annual report whichincludes information on DYS activities, facility needs, juvenile service conditions, and financialreports. DYS processes federal grant funds for its education projects. DYS leases and constructsnecessary facilities to house juveniles committed to its care, custody, and control. And DYSgathers and publishes annual juvenile statistical reports which summarize and analyze juveniledelinquency cases processed by the juvenile courts, and reported cases of abuse / neglect /dependency, and special proceedings cases, during each calendar year from sources that includeDYS, Alabama’s juvenile courts, and the Alabama Department of Human Resources.In addition to DYS serving the needs of the State’s juvenile population, the Legislaturehas also established several departments of government to administer to the specialized needs ofthe State’s citizens, including its juveniles. Among these departments of government are theAOC, the Alabama Department of Human Resources (DHR), the Alabama Criminal JusticeInformation Center (ACJIC), the Alabama Department of Mental Health (ADMH), the AlabamaState Department of Education (SDE), the Alabama Department of Public Health, the AlabamaDepartment of Economic and Community Affairs’ Law Enforcement and Traffic Safety Division(ADECA LETS Division), the Alabama Council of Juvenile Court Judges, and the AlabamaChief Probation Officers Association.The Alabama Administrative Office of CourtsThe Alabama Administrative Office of Courts (AOC) was established by the amendmentof the Alabama Constitution’s Judicial Article, was codified by Alabama Act No. 75-1205passed by the Alabama Legislature in 1975, and became operational in 1977. The AOC isauthorized by statutory law codified at Code of Alabama, 1975 §12-5-1 et seq., to coordinate thedevelopment and implementation of Alabama’s unified judicial system. This entails, in part,developing and providing court administration technical assistance to the State and municipaltrial courts in the areas of automated information management, case management, jurymanagement, uniform traffic ticket procedures, and educational support. The AOC staffs courtreferral programs and provides program education and evaluation for same.The AOC staffs the Alabama Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council which surveys thecounty juvenile justice coordinating councils for their recommendations for improvements to thejuvenile justice system, and then recommends necessary improvements to same. The AOCmanages grants from the United States Department of Health and Human Services for “FamilyPreservation Court Improvement” by overseeing implementation of the grant requirements,assessing how the State’s courts process dependency cases, and devising and implementing plansfor necessary improvements. The AOC provides substance abuse professionals who attendsessions of circuit, district, juvenile, and municipal courts to evaluate defendants for possiblealcohol or drug problems, make recommendations to judges to refer the defendants toappropriate community resources, and monitor the defendants for compliance with court orders.11

The AOC’s court referral education programs are used by the courts for referring defendantswith drug, alcohol, and other substance abuse problems identified by court referral officers.The AOC conducts statistical analysis by analyzing trial court caseload statistics andtrends, preparing annual and semiannual caseload reports, performing weighted caseloadstatewide comparisons, and publishing annual court statistics. The statistical analyses are madethrough the collection of data in the Time Standards Monitoring System and the CaseloadReporting System which capture filing and disposition data on all cases filed in the State courtsystem. The AOC provides information to the criminal justice community, social and juvenileservices, and the general public by maintaining the programming and data repository for theStatewide Judicial Information System, and maintaining the Alabama Judicial Data Center whichis the central repository for all programs dealing with the information management of the State’strial courts. These systems process the case jurisdictions and information on traffic, district-levelcriminal, circuit-level criminal, juvenile, small claims, district-level civil, circuit-level civil,domestic relations, and child support cases. The AOC also oversees a project composed ofjudges, clerks, probation officers, detention managers, social workers, and technologists creatingan integrated juvenile justice information system, and provides training, equipment, and planningfor this comprehensive system.The Alabama Department of Human ResourcesThe Alabama Department of Human Resources (DHR) is a department of government ofthe State of Alabama. DHR was created by Alabama Act No. 51-703, passed by the Legislaturein 1951, and by Alabama Act No. 55-341, passed by the Legislature in 1955. DHR is authorizedby statutory law codified at Code of Alabama, 1975 §38-2-1 et seq., and by administrativeregulations published in the Alabama Administrative Code at Rule 660-1-2-.01 et seq., to, in part,administer financial assistance programs that were enacted in 1935 by the federal Social SecurityAct. DHR’s major responsibilities include the Food Stamp Program, the Child SupportEnforcement Program, and protective programs for both adults and children. DHR’s mission isto partner with communities to promote family stability and provide for the safety and selfsufficiencyof vulnerable individuals. DHR operates the Office of Child Protective Serviceswhich administers the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children, reviews and facilitatesapplications for travel, placements, foster care, and adoptions of children entering and leavingAlabama, applies for and monitors grants for protective services projects, provides caseconsultation services, and assists with child protection services program and policy development.DHR maintains the Central Registry on Child Abuse and Neglect / Interstate Compact on thePlacement of Children. DHR operates the Office of Child Abuse and Neglect AdministrativeReviews which manages and conducts administrative record reviews of persons responsible forchild abuse and / or neglect to provide due process to those persons not entitled to a hearing.The Alabama Criminal Justice Information CenterThe Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center (ACJIC) is a department ofgovernment of the State of Alabama. ACJIC was created by Alabama Act No. 75-872, passedby the Legislature in 1975. ACJIC is authorized by statutory law codified at Code of Alabama,1975 §41-9-590 et seq., and by administrative regulations published in the Alabama12

Administrative Code at Rule 265-X-1-.01 et seq., to, in part, collect, store, retrieve, analyze, anddisseminate criminal justice data. The ACJIC maintains criminal justice information in the LawEnforcement Data System (LEDS) on persons, vehicles, boats, license plates, firearms, articles,and securities that are stolen / lost / wanted / missing / unidentified / abandoned / impounded /recovered, and driver license information, vehicle registration and title information, and boatregistration information. Qualified information entered into the LEDS system is automaticallytransmitted to the National Crime Information Center in Clarksburg, WV, where it is madeavailable to criminal justice agencies throughout the nation.The ACJIC maintains the Computerized Criminal History (CCH) System as a database ofcriminal offender information designed to provide complete, statewide criminal offenderinformation to aid in making decisions respecting bail, sentencing, probation, and parole.Information contained in the CCH System includes individual identification, arrest, courtdisposition, and custody / supervision status information. All information entered into CCHSystem is based on positive fingerprint identification of the offender. The ACJIC is an InterstateIdentification Index participant, and a participant in the Felon Identification in Firearms Salesprogram.The ACJIC maintains the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) System by utilizing datacollected from local law enforcement agencies to provide a comprehensive statewide incidentbasedreporting system which allows for information submitted by law enforcement agencies tobe used by appropriate State and local criminal justice officials. Relevant law enforcement datais then submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for inclusion in the national UCRSystem. The ACJIC maintains the Statistical Analysis Center which produces analytical reportscontaining UCR System data, and which manages grants from the DOJ, including the NationalCriminal History Improvement Program designed to improve criminal history records and putthe State of Alabama in line with federal requirements of the national Child Protect Act, theViolence Against Women Act, and the Brady Act.The Alabama Department of Mental HealthThe Alabama Department of Mental Health (ADMH) was created by Alabama Act No.65-881, passed by the Legislature in 1965. The ADMH is authorized by statutory law codified atCode of Alabama, 1975 §22-50-1 et seq., and by administrative regulations published in theAlabama Administrative Code at Rule 580-1-1-.01 et seq., through its commissioner to act in anyprudent way to provide mental health services and mental retardation services for the people ofAlabama. This includes, in part, establishing State plans for the purpose of controlling andtreating all forms of mental and emotional illness and mental retardation, and supervising /coordinating / establishing standards for all operations and activities of the State related toproviding mental health and mental retardation services. The ADMH may also receive andadminister funds for acquiring real property sites for constructing, equipping, maintaining, andoperating mental health centers and community mental retardation programs and facilities forproviding mental health and mental retardation services. The ADMH is designated as the Stateagency to receive and administer funds for training, research, and education in regard to allforms of mental and emotional illness and mental retardation.13

With regard to the juvenile justice system, the ADMH is authorized to hold any personaccused of a crime and committed to the custody of the ADMH in one of its facilities in order tohave determined by appropriate members of the medical staff whether the accused person is ableto attain the mental capacity necessary to proceed to trial. If the determination is rendered in thenegative, then the ADMH’s commissioner may petition the judge of probate of the applicablecounty for an order of civil commitment of the accused individual to the ADMH’s facilities, forthat individual to remain in such custody in accordance with State law.The Alabama State Department of EducationThe Alabama State Department of Education (SDE) was created by Alabama Act No. 35-598, passed by the Legislature in 1935. SDE is authorized by statutory law codified at Code ofAlabama, 1975 §16-1-1 et seq., and by administrative regulations published in the AlabamaAdministrative Code at Rule 290-010-020-.01 et seq., through its Superintendent, to assist inexecuting the policies and procedures authorized by law and by regulations of the State Board ofEducation. The Board promulgates, and the SDE implements, all rules governing theimplementation of statutory laws regarding education matters within the State’s elementary andsecondary schools. These matters pertain to teacher education and certification, subjectsrequired to be taught and the student textbooks used to teach those subjects, mandatory studentattendance / truancy / discipline, school buildings and construction, school transportation, schoolmeals / food / nutrition, school administrators and employees, etc.With regard to the juvenile justice system, the State Board of Education requires eachlocal (city or county) board of education to develop a written policy on student discipline andbehavior, which is then disseminated to all teachers, staff, parents, and students. Teachers aremandated to report suspected illegal or criminal activity, including drug use and abuse, by astudent to the appropriate authorities. For those students who are suspended or expelled /excluded from attending their primary school, the State Board of Education is responsible forpromulgating rules regarding the establishment and operation of alternative schools for thesestudents to attend until such time when they can be matriculated back into their primary schoolor until their graduation from the alternative school. The Board may also impose the loss ofdriver license privileges on those students age 16 and over who violate the mandatory schoolattendance rules.The Alabama Department of Public HealthThe Alabama Department of Public Health (DPH) was created by Alabama Act No. 19-658, passed by the Legislature in 1919. DPH is authorized by statutory law codified at Code ofAlabama, 1975 §22-2-1 et seq., and by administrative regulations published in the AlabamaAdministrative Code at Rule 420-1-1-.01 et seq., through its State Board of Public Health and itsState Health Officer, to exercise general control over the enforcement of all of the laws relatingto public health within the State. The DPH may adopt and promulgate rules that provide propermethods of administering the health and quarantine laws of the State.With regard to the juvenile justice system, the DPH is responsible for inspecting allschools, hospitals, jails, courthouses, prisons, stockades where convicts are kept, residences, and14

other places of like character for determining the health conditions of same. If and whereverunsanitary conditions in any of these places present circumstances prejudicial to the health of theoccupants therein, then the DPH takes proper steps to have such conditions corrected or abated.The Alabama Department of Economic and Community AffairsLaw Enforcement and Traffic Safety DivisionThe Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs (ADECA) is adepartment of government of the State of Alabama. ADECA was created by Alabama Act No.83-194, passed by the Legislature in 1983. ADECA is authorized by statutory law codified atCode of Alabama, 1975 §41-23-1 et seq., and by administrative regulations published in theAlabama Administrative Code at Rule 305-0-1-.01 et seq., to, in part, apply to federal agenciesfor federal grant funds to be appropriated to the State of Alabama for further administration anddistribution to the State’s units of local government for implementing the various grant purposes.Pursuant to this statutory and administrative authorization, ADECA administers federal and Stategrant programs and disburses related funds for and on behalf of the State and its units of localgovernment.With regard to the juvenile justice system, ADECA’s Law Enforcement and TrafficSafety Division (LETS Division) is authorized to apply for and administer block grant programfunds, discretionary grant funds, or any other funds appropriated from the federal government orthe State legislature as they pertain to law enforcement and the criminal justice system, includingjuvenile justice and delinquency prevention, and any other federal grant program as designatedby the Governor. The ADECA LETS Division is authorized to establish and submit the State’splans for obtaining such federal grant program funding, including funds to operate juvenilejustice and delinquency prevention programs within the State. The ADECA LETS Division isauthorized to administratively reject any subgrant application which is not in compliance withthe State’s comprehensive plans, the policy directives of the Alabama Advisory Council onJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention [the State Advisory Group (SAG)], the Safe StreetsAct, law enforcement assistance requirements, or any subgrant application which is incorrectwith regard to fiscal computations, as well as when no funds are available to be allocated underthe grant program area for which such subgrant application was submitted.In compliance with the JJDP Act’s purpose of implementing the various law enforcementand juvenile justice / delinquency prevention programs established thereunder [42 U.S.C. §5633,and §5671(c)(1)], Executive Order No. 5 issued on March 30, 1983, by Alabama GovernorGeorge C. Wallace, authorizes ADECA, by and through its Law Enforcement Planning Division(now known as the ADECA LETS Division), to be the sole agency for supervising thepreparation and administration of the State’s plan and the submission of applications to theOJJDP for federal grant funds to be allocated to the State for the purposes of implementing theJJDP Act’s laws, rules, regulations, policies, and program mandates within the State. ExecutiveOrder No. 5 also creates the Alabama Advisory Council on Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention [the State Advisory Group (SAG)] for the purposes of advising and makingrecommendations on matters relating to juvenile justice and delinquency prevention within theState. As such grant programs are funded by the OJJDP, Executive Order No. 5 designates theADECA LETS Division as the sole agency to administer said programs and disburse program15

A. Analysis of juvenile crime problems(1) Juvenile arrests by offense type, gender, age, and raceJuvenile arrests by offense type -- Calendar Year 2011Of the 35,115 total juvenile cases processed by the DYS in Calendar Year 2011, the3,374 Part I violent offenses accounted for 9.61% of this total, the 5,711 Part I property offensesaccounted for 16.26%, the 12,815 Part II offenses accounted for 36.49%, and the 10,058 CHINSoffenses accounted for 28.64% of this total. The 2,694 technical offenses such as probation andaftercare violations accounted for 7.67% of this total, and the 463 cases of other types ofviolations accounted for the remaining 1.32% of this total.Of the 3,374 Part I violent offenses reported, 7 involved murder accounting for 0.2% ofthe total number of reported violent crimes, 4 involved manslaughter accounting for 0.11%, 246involved rape accounting for 7.29%, 56 involved robbery conducted with a weapon accountingfor 1.65%, 161 involved strong-arm robbery accounting for 4.7%, 226 involved aggravatedassault accounting for 6.7%, and 2,676 involved simple assault accounting for 79.3% of thistotal.Of the 5,711 Part I property offenses reported, 2,086 involved burglary accounting for36.5% of the total number of reported property offense crimes, 2,562 involved larcenyaccounting for 44.8% of the total, 945 involved shoplifting accounting for 16.5% of the total, and127 involved automobile theft accounting for 2.2% of this total.Of the 12,815 Part II offenses reported, 48 involved arson accounting for 0.37% of thetotal number of reported Part II offenses, 39 involved forgery accounting for 0.3% of the total,65 involved fraud accounting for 0.5% of the total, 394 involved stolen property accounting for3.0% of the total, 1,066 involved vandalism accounting for 8.3% of the total, 364 involvedweapons offenses accounting for 2.8% of the total, and 2,289 involved disorderly conductaccounting for 17.8% of this total. A total of 2,234 drug offenses were reported accounting for17.4% of the total number of reported Part II offenses, with the majority of 2,102 drug offensesinvolving narcotics possession and accounting for 94% of the total drug offenses. Trafficoffenses totaled 323 accounting for 2.5% of the total number of reported Part II offenses, andliquor law offenses totaled 874 accounting for 6.8% of the total number of reported Part IIoffenses.Of the 10,058 CHINS offenses reported, 7,691 involved truancy accounting for 76.4% ofthe total, 991 involved runaways accounting for 9.8% of the total, 1,308 involved ungovernablebehavior or behavior beyond control accounting for 13% of the total, and 67 involved otherCHINS offenses accounting for 0.66% of the total number of reported CHINS offenses.Of the 2,694 technical offenses reported, 2,412 involved violations of probationaccounting for 89.5% of the total number of reported technical offenses. Aftercare violationsinclude escaping from a detention facility, jail, or attention home to which the juveniles havebeen detained for their commission of violations, and/or other violations of these detention/17

esidential facilities’ rules. Of the 2,694 technical offenses reported, 279 involved aftercareviolations accounting for 10.3% of the total number of reported technical offenses.Juvenile arrests by offense type -- Calendar Year 2010Of the 38,690 total juvenile cases processed by the DYS in Calendar Year 2010, the3,894 Part I violent offenses accounted for 10.03% of this total, the 6,142 Part I propertyoffenses accounted for 15.82%, the 13,260 Part II offenses accounted for 34.16%, and the 11,547CHINS offenses accounted for 29.75% of this total. The 3,248 technical offenses such asprobation and aftercare violations accounted for 8.37% of this total, and the 725 cases of othertypes of violations accounted for the remaining 1.87% of this total.Of the 3,894 Part I violent offenses reported, 9 involved murder accounting for 0.23% ofthe total number of reported violent crimes, 5 involved manslaughter accounting for 0.12%, 296involved rape accounting for 7.6%, 71 involved robbery conducted with a weapon accounting for1.8%, 162 involved strong-arm robbery accounting for 4.1%, 269 involved aggravated assaultaccounting for 6.9%, and 3,082 involved simple assault accounting for 79.1% of this total.Of the 6,142 Part I property offenses reported, 2,268 involved burglary accounting for36.9% of the total number of reported property offense crimes, 2,586 involved larcenyaccounting for 42.1% of the total, 1,110 involved shoplifting accounting for 18% of the total, and178 involved automobile theft accounting for 2.8% of this total.Of the 13,260 Part II offenses reported, 35 involved arson accounting for 0.26% of thetotal number of reported Part II offenses, 33 involved forgery accounting for 0.24% of the total,79 involved fraud accounting for 0.59% of the total, 378 involved stolen property accounting for2.8% of the total, 1,058 involved vandalism accounting for 7.9% of the total, 327 involvedweapons offenses accounting for 2.4% of the total, and 2,447 involved disorderly conductaccounting for 18.4% of this total. A total of 2,349 drug offenses were reported accounting for17.7% of the total number of reported Part II offenses, with the majority of 2,216 drug offensesinvolving narcotics possession and accounting for 94.3% of the total drug offenses. Trafficoffenses totaled 496 accounting for 3.7% of the total number of reported Part II offenses, andliquor law offenses totaled 1,024 accounting for 7.7% of the total number of reported Part IIoffenses.Of the 11,547 CHINS offenses reported, 8,565 involved truancy accounting for 74.1% ofthe total, 1,089 involved runaways accounting for 9.4% of the total, 1,856 involved ungovernablebehavior or behavior beyond control accounting for 16% of the total, and 37 involved otherCHINS offenses accounting for 0.32% of the total number of reported CHINS offenses.Of the 3,248 technical offenses reported, 2,927 involved violations of probationaccounting for 90.1% of the total number of reported technical offenses. Aftercare violationsinclude escaping from a detention facility, jail, or attention home to which the juveniles havebeen detained for their commission of violations, and/or other violations of these detention/residential facilities’ rules. Of the 3,248 technical offenses reported, 321 involved aftercareviolations accounting for 9.8% of the total number of reported technical offenses.18

Juvenile arrests by offense type -- Calendar Year 2009Of the 40,940 total juvenile cases processed by the DYS in Calendar Year 2009, the4,097 Part I violent offenses accounted for 10.01% of this total, the 6,636 Part I propertyoffenses accounted for 16.21%, the 14,517 Part II offenses accounted for 35.46%, and the 11,566CHINS offenses accounted for 28.25% of this total. The 3,359 technical offenses such asprobation and aftercare violations accounted for 8.20% of this total, and the 765 cases of othertypes of violations accounted for the remaining 1.87% of this total.Of the 4,097 Part I violent offenses reported, 20 involved murder accounting for 0.48%of the total number of reported violent crimes, 1 involved manslaughter accounting for 0.024%,304 involved rape accounting for 7.4%, 108 involved robbery conducted with a weaponaccounting for 2.6%, 179 involved strong-arm robbery accounting for 4.3%, 265 involvedaggravated assault accounting for 6.4%, and 3,220 involved simple assault accounting for 78.6%of this total.Of the 6,636 Part I property offenses reported, 2,242 involved burglary accounting for33.7% of the total number of reported property offense crimes, 2,960 involved larcenyaccounting for 44.6% of the total, 1,256 involved shoplifting accounting for 19% of the total, and178 involved automobile theft accounting for 2.6% of this total.Of the 14,517 Part II offenses reported, 49 involved arson accounting for 0.33% of thetotal number of reported Part II offenses, 60 involved forgery accounting for 0.41% of the total,101 involved fraud accounting for 0.69% of the total, 439 involved stolen property accountingfor 3% of the total, 1,196 involved vandalism accounting for 8.2% of the total, 361 involvedweapons offenses accounting for 2.48% of the total, and 2,928 involved disorderly conductaccounting for 20.16% of this total. A total of 2,408 drug offenses were reported accounting for16.58% of the total number of reported Part II offenses, with the majority of 2,280 drug offensesinvolving narcotics possession and accounting for 94.68% of the total drug offenses. Trafficoffenses totaled 480 accounting for 3.3% of the total number of reported Part II offenses, andliquor law offenses totaled 1,100 accounting for 7.5% of the total number of reported Part IIoffenses.Of the 11,566 CHINS offenses reported, 8,673 involved truancy accounting for 74.98%of the total, 1,165 involved runaways accounting for 10.07% of the total, 1,721 involvedungovernable behavior or behavior beyond control accounting for 14.8% of the total, and 7involved other CHINS offenses accounting for 0.06% of the total number of reported CHINSoffenses.Of the 3,359 technical offenses reported, 3,057 involved violations of probationaccounting for 91% of the total number of reported technical offenses. Aftercare violationsinclude escaping from a detention facility, jail, or attention home to which the juveniles havebeen detained for their commission of violations, and/or other violations of these detention/residential facilities’ rules. Of the 3,359 technical offenses reported, 302 involved aftercareviolations accounting for 8.9% of the total number of reported technical offenses.19

Juvenile arrests by gender, age, and race -- Calendar Year 2011The 35,115 total juvenile cases processed by the DYS in Calendar Year 2011 involved atotal of 23,777 males accounting for 67.71% of the total number of juveniles, and 11,338 femalesaccounting for 32.29% of this total number. Whites total 17,628 accounting for 50.20% of thetotal number of juveniles, and blacks total 16,230 accounting for 46.22% of this total number.The remaining races, comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage,total 1,257 accounting for 3.58% of the total number of juveniles.A more specific gender and ethnicity breakdown for these groups is as follows. Whitemales total 11,469 accounting for 32.66% of the total number of juveniles. Black males total11,503 accounting for 32.76% of the total number of juveniles. The remaining males comprisedof Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage total 805 accounting for 2.29% ofthe total number of juveniles. White females total 6,159 accounting for 17.54% of the totalnumber of juveniles. Black females total 4,727 accounting for 13.46% of the total number ofjuveniles. The remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage total 452 accounting for 1.29% of the total number of juveniles.The juvenile arrests are not categorized by age of the juvenile when compared to theoffense type. However, statistics are available on the age breakdown for 35,115 juveniles whichinvolve the following age groups. The “under 10” age group is comprised of 1,205 juvenilesaccounting for 3.4% of the total number of juveniles. The “10-11” age group is comprised of749 juveniles accounting for 2.11% of the total. The “12-13” age group is comprised of 2,445juveniles accounting for 6.9% of the total. The “14-15” age group is comprised of 7,747juveniles accounting for 21.85% of the total. The “16-17” age group is comprised of 14,966juveniles accounting for 42.21% of the total. The “18 and over” age group is comprised of 8,139juveniles accounting for 22.96% of the total. Thus, the most frequently occurring age group forjuveniles in Calendar Year 2011 is the “16-17” age group (14,966 juveniles, 42.21% of the total),followed in descending order by the “18 and over” age group (8,139 juveniles, 22.96% of thetotal), the “14-15” age group (7,747 juveniles, 21.85% of the total), the “12-13” age group (2,445juveniles, 6.9% of the total), the “under 10” age group (1,205 juveniles, 3.4% of the total), andfinally the “10-11” age group (749 juveniles, 2.11% of the total number of juveniles).Less than 40% of these juveniles (13,216 juveniles, 38.87%) had no prior record ofoffenses, comprised of white males totaling 4,763 and accounting for 36% of the total number ofjuveniles having no prior record of offenses, black males totaling 2,857 and accounting for21.6% of the total number, and the remaining males comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage totaling 366 and accounting for 2.76% of the total number ofjuveniles having no prior record of offenses. White females total 3,140 and account for 23.75%of the total number of juveniles having no prior record of offenses, black females total 1,843 andaccount for 13.9% of the total, and the remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage total 247 and account for 1.86% of the total number ofjuveniles having no prior record of offenses. The remaining 20,783 juveniles did report havinghad a prior record of offenses, comprised of white males totaling 6,428 and accounting for 30.9%of the total number of juveniles having a prior record of offenses, black males totaling 7,944 and20

accounting for 38.2% of the total number, and the remaining males comprised of Hispanic,Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage totaling 436 and accounting for 2.0% of the totalnumber of juveniles having a prior record of offenses. White females total 2,988 and account for14.3% of the total number of juveniles having a prior record of offenses, black females total2,784 and account for 13.3% of the total, and the remaining females comprised of Hispanic,Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage total 203 and account for 0.97% of the totalnumber of juveniles having a prior record of offenses.Juvenile arrests by gender, age, and race -- Calendar Year 2010The 38,690 total juvenile cases processed by the DYS in Calendar Year 2010 involved atotal of 25,774 males accounting for 66.62% of the total number of juveniles, and 12,916 femalesaccounting for 33.38% of this total number. Whites total 19,829 accounting for 51.25% of thetotal number of juveniles, and blacks total 17,543 accounting for 45.34% of this total number.The remaining races, comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage,total 1,318 accounting for 3.41% of the total number of juveniles.A more specific gender and ethnicity breakdown for these groups is as follows. Whitemales total 12,870 accounting for 33.26% of the total number of juveniles. Black males total12,070 accounting for 31.2% of the total number of juveniles. The remaining males comprisedof Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage total 834 accounting for 2.16% ofthe total number of juveniles. White females total 6,959 accounting for 17.99% of the totalnumber of juveniles. Black females total 5,473 accounting for 14.15% of the total number ofjuveniles. The remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage total 484 accounting for 1.25% of the total number of juveniles.The juvenile arrests are not categorized by age of the juvenile when compared to theoffense type. However, statistics are available on the age breakdown for the 38,690 juvenileswhich involve the following age groups. The “under 10” age group is comprised of 1,892juveniles accounting for 4.87% of the total number of juveniles. The “10-11” age group iscomprised of 1,094 juveniles accounting for 2.82% of the total. The “12-13” age group iscomprised of 3,784 juveniles accounting for 9.75% of the total. The “14-15” age group iscomprised of 10,256 juveniles accounting for 26.42% of the total. The “16-17” age group iscomprised of 17,879 juveniles accounting for 46.06% of the total. The “18 and over” age groupis comprised of 3,911 juveniles accounting for 10.08% of the total. Thus, the most frequentlyoccurring age group for juveniles in Calendar Year 2010 is the “16-17” age group (17,879juveniles, 46.06% of the total), followed in descending order by the “14-15” age group (10,256juveniles, 26.42% of the total), the “18 and over” age group (3,911 juveniles, 10.08% of thetotal), the “12-13” age group (3,784 juveniles, 9.75% of the total), the “under 10” age group(1,892 juveniles, 4.87% of the total), and finally the “10-11” age group (1,094 juveniles, 2.82%of the total number of juveniles).Less than 40% of these juveniles (15,233 juveniles, 39.23%) had no prior record ofoffenses, comprised of white males totaling 5,415 and accounting for 35.54% of the total numberof juveniles having no prior record of offenses, black males totaling 3,412 and accounting for22.39% of the total number, and the remaining males comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native21

American, or mixed race heritage totaling 414 and accounting for 2.7% of the total number ofjuveniles having no prior record of offenses. White females total 3,549 and account for 23.29%of the total number of juveniles having no prior record of offenses, black females total 2,166 andaccount for 14.21% of the total, and the remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage total 277 and account for 1.8% of the total number of juvenileshaving no prior record of offenses. The remaining 23,594 juveniles did report having had a priorrecord of offenses, comprised of white males totaling 7,505 and accounting for 31.8% of the totalnumber of juveniles having a prior record of offenses, black males totaling 8,703 and accountingfor 36.88% of the total number, and the remaining males comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage totaling 424 and accounting for 1.7% of the total number ofjuveniles having a prior record of offenses. White females total 3,435 and account for 14.55% ofthe total number of juveniles having a prior record of offenses, black females total 3,319 andaccount for 14.06% of the total, and the remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage total 208 and account for 0.88% of the total number ofjuveniles having a prior record of offenses.Juvenile arrests by gender, age, and race -- Calendar Year 2009The 40,940 juvenile cases processed by the DYS in Calendar Year 2009 involved a totalof 27,209 males accounting for 66.46% of the total number of juveniles, and 13,731 femalesaccounting for 33.54% of this total number. Whites total 20,482 accounting for 50.03% of thetotal number of juveniles, and blacks total 19,118 accounting for 46.70% of this total number.The remaining races, comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage,total 1,340 accounting for 3.27% of the total number of juveniles.A more specific gender and ethnicity breakdown for these groups is as follows. Whitemales total 13,264 accounting for 32.40% of the total number of juveniles. Black males total13,094 accounting for 31.98% of the total number of juveniles. The remaining males comprisedof Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage total 851 accounting for 2.08% ofthe total number of juveniles. White females total 7,218 accounting for 17.63% of the totalnumber of juveniles. Black females total 6,024 accounting for 14.71% of the total number ofjuveniles. The remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage total 489 accounting for 1.19% of the total number of juveniles.The juvenile arrests are not categorized by age of the juvenile when compared to theoffense type. However, statistics are available on the age breakdown for the 40,940 juvenileswhich involve the following age groups. The “under 10” age group is comprised of 2,191juveniles accounting for 5.35% of the total number of juveniles. The “10-11” age group iscomprised of 1,183 juveniles accounting for 2.89% of the total. The “12-13” age group iscomprised of 4,101 juveniles accounting for 10.02% of the total. The “14-15” age group iscomprised of 11,486 juveniles accounting for 28.06% of the total. The “16-17” age group iscomprised of 18,488 juveniles accounting for 45.06% of the total. The “18 and over” age groupis comprised of 3,531 juveniles accounting for 8.62% of the total. Thus, the most frequentlyoccurring age group for juveniles in Calendar Year 2009 is the “16-17” age group (18,448juveniles, 45.06% of the total), followed in descending order by the “14-15” age group (11,486juveniles, 28.06% of the total), the “12-13” age group (4,101 juveniles, 10.02% of the total), the22

“18 and over” age group (3,531 juveniles, 8.62% of the total), the “under 10” age group (2,191juveniles, 5.35% of the total), and finally the “10-11” age group (1,183 juveniles, 2.89% of thetotal number of juveniles).Less than 40% of these juveniles (16,040 juveniles, 39.18%) had no prior record ofoffenses, comprised of white males totaling 5,708 and accounting for 35.58% of the total numberof juveniles having no prior record of offenses, black males totaling 3,515 and accounting for21.91% of the total number, and the remaining males comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage totaling 426 and accounting for 2.65% of the total number ofjuveniles having no prior record of offenses. White females total 3,777 and account for 23.54%of the total number of juveniles having no prior record of offenses, black females total 2,343 andaccount for 14.6% of the total, and the remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage total 271 and account for 1.68% of the total number ofjuveniles having no prior record of offenses. The remaining 24,900 juveniles did report havinghad a prior record of offenses, comprised of white males totaling 7,556 and accounting for30.34% of the total number of juveniles having a prior record of offenses, black males totaling9,579 and accounting for 38.46% of the total number, and the remaining males comprised ofHispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage totaling 425 and accounting for 1.7%of the total number of juveniles having a prior record of offenses. White females total 3,441 andaccount for 13.81% of the total number of juveniles having a prior record of offenses, blackfemales total 3,681 and account for 14.78% of the total, and the remaining females comprised ofHispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage total 218 and account for 0.87% of thetotal number of juveniles having a prior record of offenses.(2) Number and characteristics (by offense type, gender, race, andage) of juveniles referred to juvenile court, a probation agency, or special intake unit forallegedly committing a delinquent or status offenseCalendar Year 2011 -- Of the 35,115 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2011, 11,707 were disposed of without a court appearance accountingfor 35.22% of this total, and 21,531 were disposed of by the court accounting for 64.78% of thistotal. Of the 21,531 disposed of by the court, 20,540 were disposed of with a court appearanceaccounting for 61.8% of the total cases, 592 were disposed of with a transfer of custodyaccounting for 1.78% of the total cases, and 399 were disposed of in other ways accounting for1.2% of the total cases.Of the 21,531 total cases disposed of by the court, 7,247 were granted probationaccounting for 33.6% of the total number of cases disposed of by the court, 5,738 were dismissedaccounting for 26.6% of the total, 1,788 were committed to detention with the DYS accountingfor 8.3% of the total, 3,353 were disposed of by entering into a consent decree accounting for15.5% of the total, 145 were waived to adult court accounting for 0.67% of the total, and 229were fined accounting for 1.06% of this total.Of the 11,707 total cases disposed of without a court appearance, 8,165 were lectured andreleased accounting for 69.7% of the total number of cases disposed of without a court23

appearance, 2,981 were treated to an informal adjustment accounting for 25.4% of the total, and561 were treated to other types of adjustment accounting for 4.79% of the total.Calendar Year 2010 -- Of the 38,690 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2010, 13,457 were disposed of without a court appearance accountingfor 34.65% of this total, and 25,233 were disposed of by the court accounting for 65.21% of thistotal. Of the 25,233 disposed of by the court, 24,231 were disposed of with a court appearanceaccounting for 62.63% of the 38,690 total cases, 567 were disposed of with a transfer of custodyaccounting for 1.47% of the total cases, and 435 were disposed of in other ways accounting for1.12% of the total cases.Of the 25,233 total cases disposed of by the court, 7,985 were granted probationaccounting for 31.64% of the total number of cases disposed of by the court, 7,328 weredismissed accounting for 29% of the total, 1,952 were committed to detention with the DYSaccounting for 7.7% of the total, 3,775 were disposed of by entering into a consent decreeaccounting for 14.9% of the total, 211 were waived to adult court accounting for 0.83% of thetotal, and 295 were fined accounting for 1.16% of this total.Of the 13,457 total cases disposed of without a court appearance, 9,692 were lectured andreleased accounting for 72% of the total number of cases disposed of without a court appearance,2,953 were treated to an informal adjustment accounting for 21.9% of the total, and 812 weretreated to other types of adjustment accounting for 6% of the total.Calendar Year 2009 -- Of the 40,940 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2009, 13,496 were disposed of without a court appearance accountingfor 32.97% of this total, and 27,444 were disposed of with a court appearance accounting for67.03% of this total. Of the 27,444 disposed of with a court appearance, 26,129 were disposedof by the court accounting for 63.82% of the 40,940 total cases, 704 were disposed of with atransfer of custody accounting for 1.72% of the total cases, and 611 were disposed of in otherways accounting for 1.49% of the total cases.Of the 27,444 total cases disposed of with a court appearance, 8,809 were grantedprobation accounting for 32% of the total number of cases disposed of with a court appearance,7,712 were dismissed accounting for 28.1% of the total, 2,249 were committed to detention withthe DYS accounting for 8.19% of the total, 4,034 were disposed of by entering into a consentdecree accounting for 14.69% of the total, 210 were waived to adult court accounting for 0.76%of the total, and 285 were fined accounting for 1.03% of this total.Of the 13,496 total cases disposed of without a court appearance, 9,602 were lectured andreleased accounting for 71.14% of the total number of cases disposed of without a courtappearance, 2,869 were treated to an informal adjustment accounting for 21.25% of the total, and611 were treated to other types of adjustment accounting for 4.5% of the total.24

Juvenile referrals by offense type -- Calendar Year 2011Of the 35,115 total juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year2011, 3,374 cases were referred for Part I violent crimes accounting for 9.61% of this total, 5,711cases were referred for Part I property crimes accounting for 16.26% of this total, 12,815 caseswere referred for Part II offenses accounting for 36.49% of this total, 10,058 cases were referredfor CHINS offenses accounting for 28.64% of this total, 2,694 cases were referred for technicalviolations accounting for 7.67% of this total, and 463 cases were referred for other violationsaccounting for 1.32% of this total.Juvenile referrals by offense type -- Calendar Year 2010Of the 38,690 total juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year2010, 3,894 cases were referred for Part I violent crimes accounting for 10.03% of this total,6,142 cases were referred for Part I property crimes accounting for 15.82% of this total, 13,260cases were referred for Part II offenses accounting for 34.16% of this total, 11,547 cases werereferred for CHINS offenses accounting for 29.75% of this total, 3,248 cases were referred fortechnical violations accounting for 8.37% of this total, and 725 cases were referred for otherviolations accounting for 1.87% of this total.Juvenile referrals by offense type -- Calendar Year 2009Of the 40,940 total juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year2009, 4,097 cases were referred for Part I violent crimes accounting for 10.01% of this total,6,636 cases were referred for Part I property crimes accounting for 16.21% of this total, 14,517cases were referred for Part II offenses accounting for 35.46% of this total, 11,566 cases werereferred for CHINS offenses accounting for 28.25% of this total, 3,359 cases were referred fortechnical violations accounting for 8.20% of this total, and 765 cases were referred for otherviolations accounting for 1.87% of this total.Juvenile referrals by gender, age, and race -- Calendar Year 2011Of the 3,374 total cases referred for Part I violent crimes, males comprised 2,378 of thesecases accounting for 70.4% of this total of 3,374 cases, and females comprised 996 of these casesaccounting for 29.5% of this total. Of the 5,711 total cases referred for Part I property crimes,males comprised 4,397 of these cases accounting for 77% of this total of 5,711 cases, andfemales comprised 1,314 of these cases accounting for 23% of this total.Of the 12,815 total cases referred for Part II offenses, males comprised 9,453 of thesecases accounting for 73.7% of this total of 12,815 cases, and females comprised 3,362 of thesecases accounting for 26.2% of this total.Of the 10,058 total cases referred for CHINS offenses, males comprised 5,416 of thesecases accounting for 53.8% of this total of 10,058 cases, and females comprised 4,642 of thesecases accounting for 46.1% of this total.25

Of the 2,694 total cases referred for technical violations, males comprised 1,986 of thesecases accounting for 73.7% of this total of 2,694 cases, and females comprised 708 of these casesaccounting for 26.2% of this total.Of the 463 total cases referred for other violations, males comprised 147 of these casesaccounting for 31.7% of this total of 463 cases, and females comprised 316 of these casesaccounting for 68.2% of this total.Of the 3,374 total cases referred for violent crimes, whites comprised 1,440 of these casesaccounting for 42.6% of this total, blacks comprised 1,873 of these cases accounting for 55.5%of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage comprised 61 of these cases accounting for 1.8% of this total.Of the 5,711 total cases referred for property crimes, whites comprised 2,188 of thesecases accounting for 38.3% of this total, blacks comprised 3,394 of these cases accounting for59.4% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 129 of these cases accounting for 2.2% of this total.Of the 12,815 total cases referred for Part II offenses, whites comprised 5,932 of thesecases accounting for 46.2% of this total, blacks comprised 6,547 of these cases accounting for51% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage comprised 336 of these cases accounting for 2.6% of this total.Of the 10,058 total cases referred for CHINS offenses, whites comprised 6,600 of thesecases accounting for 65.6% of this total, blacks comprised 2,805 of these cases accounting for27.8% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 653 of these cases accounting for 6.4% of this total.Of the 2,694 total cases referred for technical violations, whites comprised 1,201 of thesecases accounting for 44.5% of this total, blacks comprised 1,423 of these cases accounting for52.8% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 70 of these cases accounting for 2.5% of this total.And of the 463 total cases referred for other violations, whites comprised 267 of thesecases accounting for 57.6% of this total, blacks comprised 188 of these cases accounting for40.6% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 8 of these cases accounting for 1.7% of this total.NOTE: Referrals are not categorized by age of the juvenile when compared to the offense type.Juvenile referrals by gender, age, and race -- Calendar Year 2010Of the 3,894 total cases referred for Part I violent crimes, males comprised 2,722 of thesecases accounting for 69.9% of this total of 3,894 cases, and females comprised 1,172 of thesecases accounting for 30.1% of this total. Of the 6,142 total cases referred for Part I property26

crimes, males comprised 4,494 of these cases accounting for 73.16% of this total of 6,142 cases,and females comprised 1,648 of these cases accounting for 26.8% of this total.Of the 13,260 total cases referred for Part II offenses, males comprised 9,873 of thesecases accounting for 74.4% of this total of 13,260 cases, and females comprised 3,387 of thesecases accounting for 25.54% of this total.Of the 11,547 total cases referred for CHINS offenses, males comprised 6,089 of thesecases accounting for 52.73% of this total of 11,547 cases, and females comprised 5,458 of thesecases accounting for 47.26% of this total.Of the 3,248 total cases referred for technical violations, males comprised 2,363 of thesecases accounting for 72.75% of this total of 3,248 cases, and females comprised 885 of thesecases accounting for 27.24% of this total.Of the 725 total cases referred for other violations, males comprised 324 of these casesaccounting for 44.68% of this total of 725 cases, and females comprised 401 of these casesaccounting for 55.31% of this total.Of the 3,894 total cases referred for violent crimes, whites comprised 1,587 of these casesaccounting for 40.75% of this total, blacks comprised 2,233 of these cases accounting for57.34% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 74 of these cases accounting for 1.9% of this total.Of the 6,142 total cases referred for property crimes, whites comprised 2,596 of thesecases accounting for 42.26% of this total, blacks comprised 3,368 of these cases accounting for54.83% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 178 of these cases accounting for 2.89% of this total.Of the 13,260 total cases referred for Part II offenses, whites comprised 6,387 of thesecases accounting for 48.16% of this total, blacks comprised 6,498 of these cases accounting for49% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage comprised 445 of these cases accounting for 3.35% of this total.Of the 11,547 total cases referred for CHINS offenses, whites comprised 7,416 of thesecases accounting for 64.22% of this total, blacks comprised 3,527 of these cases accounting for30.54% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 312 of these cases accounting for 2.7% of this total.Of the 3,248 total cases referred for technical violations, whites comprised 1,507 of thesecases accounting for 46.39% of this total, blacks comprised 1,657 of these cases accounting for51% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage comprised 84 of these cases accounting for 2.58% of this total.And of the 725 total cases referred for other violations, whites comprised 408 of thesecases accounting for 56.27% of this total, blacks comprised 310 of these cases accounting for27

42.75% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 7 of these cases accounting for 0.9% of this total.NOTE: Referrals are not categorized by age of the juvenile when compared to the offense type.Juvenile referrals by gender, age, and race -- Calendar Year 2009Of the 4,097 total cases referred for Part I violent crimes, males comprised 2,871 of thesecases accounting for 70.07% of this total of 4,097 cases, and females comprised 1,226 of thesecases accounting for 29.92% of this total. Of the 6,636 total cases referred for Part I propertycrimes, males comprised 4,613 of these cases accounting for 69.51% of this total of 6,636 cases,and females comprised 2,023 of these cases accounting for 30.48% of this total.Of the 14,517 total cases referred for Part II offenses, males comprised 10,796 of thesecases accounting for 74.36% of this total of 14,517 cases, and females comprised 3,721 of thesecases accounting for 25.63% of this total.Of the 11,566 total cases referred for CHINS offenses, males comprised 6,144 of thesecases accounting for 53.12% of this total of 11,566 cases, and females comprised 5,422 of thesecases accounting for 46.87% of this total.Of the 3,359 total cases referred for technical violations, males comprised 2,441 of thesecases accounting for 72.67% of this total of 3,359 cases, and females comprised 918 of thesecases accounting for 27.32% of this total.Of the 765 total cases referred for other violations, males comprised 344 of these casesaccounting for 44.96% of this total of 765 cases, and females comprised 421 of these casesaccounting for 55.03% of this total.Of the 4,097 total cases referred for violent crimes, whites comprised 1,559 of these casesaccounting for 38.05% of this total, blacks comprised 2,479 of these cases accounting for 60.5%of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage comprised 59 of these cases accounting for 1.44% of this total.Of the 6,636 total cases referred for property crimes, whites comprised 2,706 of thesecases accounting for 40.77% of this total, blacks comprised 3,788 of these cases accounting for57.08% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 142 of these cases accounting for 2.13% of this total.Of the 14,517 total cases referred for Part II offenses, whites comprised 6,793 of thesecases accounting for 46.79% of this total, blacks comprised 7,287 of these cases accounting for50.19% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 437 of these cases accounting for 3.01% of this total.Of the 11,566 total cases referred for CHINS offenses, whites comprised 7,566 of thesecases accounting for 65.41% of this total, blacks comprised 3,389 of these cases accounting for28

source at 10,739 referrals, accounting for 26.22% of the referral sources. The victims were thethird most frequent referral source at 3,821 referrals, accounting for 9.33% of the referralsources. Parents and/or relatives were the fourth most frequent referral source at 3,608 referrals,accounting for 8.81% of the referral sources. The probation officers were the fifth most frequentreferral source at 2,712 referrals, accounting for 6.62% of the referral sources. And theremaining 1,972 referrals were made by social agencies, traffic courts, and other sources,accounting for 4.81% of the referral sources.(3) Number of cases handled informally (non-petitioned) and formally(petitioned) by gender, race, and type of disposition (e.g., diversion, probation,commitment, residential treatment)Calendar Year 2011 -- Of the 35,115 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2011, 20,540 were disposed of with a court appearance accountingfor 61.8% of this total, 11,707 were disposed of without a court appearance accounting for35.22% of this total, 592 were disposed of with a transfer of custody accounting for 1.78% ofthis total, and 399 were disposed of in other ways accounting for 1.2% of this total.Of the 20,540 cases disposed of with a court appearance, 7,247 were granted probationaccounting for 35.2% of the cases disposed of with a court appearance, 5,738 were dismissedaccounting for 27.9% of the cases, 1,788 were committed to detention with the DYS accountingfor 8.7% of the cases, 3,253 were disposed of by entering into a consent decree accounting for15.8% of the cases, 145 were waived to adult court accounting for 0.7% of the cases, and 229were fined accounting for 1.1% of the cases.Of the 11,707 cases disposed of without a court appearance, 8,165 were lectured andreleased accounting for 69.7% of the cases disposed of without a court appearance, 2,981 weretreated to an informal adjustment accounting for 25.4% of the cases, and 561 were treated toother types of adjustment accounting for 4.7% of the cases.Calendar Year 2010 -- Of the 38,690 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2010, 24,231 were disposed of with a court appearance accountingfor 62.63% of this total, 13,457 were disposed of without a court appearance accounting for34.65% of this total, 567 were disposed of with a transfer of custody accounting for 1.47% ofthis total, and 435 were disposed of in other ways accounting for 1.12% of this total.Of the 24,231 cases disposed of with a court appearance, 7,985 were granted probationaccounting for 32.95% of the cases disposed of with a court appearance, 7,328 were dismissedaccounting for 30.24% of the cases, 1,952 were committed to detention with the DYS accountingfor 8.05% of the cases, 3,775 were disposed of by entering into a consent decree accounting for15.57% of the cases, 211 were waived to adult court accounting for 0.87% of the cases, and 295were fined accounting for 1.2% of the cases.Of the 13,457 cases disposed of without a court appearance, 9,692 were lectured andreleased accounting for 72% of the cases disposed of without a court appearance, 2,953 were30

treated to an informal adjustment accounting for 21.94% of the cases, and 812 were treated toother types of adjustment accounting for 6% of the cases.Calendar Year 2009 -- Of the 40,950 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2009, 26,129 were disposed of with a court appearance accountingfor 63.82% of this total, 13,496 were disposed of without a court appearance accounting for32.97% of this total, 704 were disposed of with a transfer of custody accounting for 1.72% ofthis total, and 611 were disposed of in other ways accounting for 1.49% of this total.Of the 26,129 cases disposed of with a court appearance, 8,809 were granted probationaccounting for 33.71% of the cases disposed of with a court appearance, 7,712 were dismissedaccounting for 29.51% of the cases, 2,249 were committed to detention with the DYS accountingfor 8.6% of the cases, 4,034 were disposed of by entering into a consent decree accounting for15.43% of the cases, 210 were waived to adult court accounting for 0.8% of the cases, and 285were fined accounting for 1.09% of the cases.Of the 13,496 cases disposed of without a court appearance, 9,602 were lectured andreleased accounting for 71.14% of the cases disposed of without a court appearance, 2,869 weretreated to an informal adjustment accounting for 21.25% of the cases, and 611 were treated toother types of adjustment accounting for 4.5% of the cases.Calendar Year 2011Juvenile case dispositions by gender, race, and type of disposition --Of the 20,540 cases disposed of with a court appearance, males comprised 14,934 ofthese cases accounting for 72.7% of this total, and females comprised 5,506 of these casesaccounting for 27.3% of this total of 20,540 cases.Of the 11,707 cases disposed of without a court appearance, males comprised 6,729 ofthese cases accounting for 57.4% of this total, and females comprised 4,978 of these casesaccounting for 42.5% of this total of 11,707 cases.Of the 592 cases disposed of by transfer of custody, males comprised 315 of these casesaccounting for 53.2% of this total, and females comprised 277 of these cases accounting for46.7% of this total of 592 cases.Of the 399 cases disposed of in other ways, males comprised 159 of these casesaccounting for 39.8% of this total, and females comprised 240 of these cases accounting for60.1% of this total of 399 cases.Of the 20,540 cases disposed of with a court appearance, whites comprised 9,629 of thesecases accounting for 46.87% of this total, blacks comprised 10,323 of these cases accounting for50.25% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 588 of these cases accounting for 2.86% of this total of 20,540 cases.31

Of the 11,707 cases disposed of without a court appearance, whites comprised 6,658 ofthese cases accounting for 56.87% of this total, blacks comprised 4,452 of these cases accountingfor 38% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage comprised 597 of these cases accounting for 5% of this total of 11,707 cases.Of the 592 cases disposed of by transfer of custody, whites comprised 298 of these casesaccounting for 50.3% of this total, blacks comprised 272 of these cases accounting for 45.9% ofthis total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritagecomprised 22 of these cases accounting for 3.7% of this total of 592 cases.Of the 399 cases disposed of in other ways, whites comprised 232 of these casesaccounting for 58.1% of this total, blacks comprised 147 of these cases accounting for 36.8% ofthis total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritagecomprised 20 of these cases accounting for 5% of this total of 399 cases.Calendar Year 2010Juvenile case dispositions by gender, race, and type of disposition --Of the 24,231 cases disposed of with a court appearance, males comprised 17,613 ofthese cases accounting for 72.68% of this total, and females comprised 6,618 of these casesaccounting for 27.31% of this total of 24,231 cases.Of the 13,457 cases disposed of without a court appearance, males comprised 7,667 ofthese cases accounting for 56.97% of this total, and females comprised 5,790 of these casesaccounting for 43% of this total of 13,457 cases.Of the 567 cases disposed of by transfer of custody, males comprised 270 of these casesaccounting for 47.61% of this total, and females comprised 297 of these cases accounting for52.38% of this total of 567 cases.Of the 435 cases disposed of in other ways, males comprised 224 of these casesaccounting for 51.49% of this total, and females comprised 211 of these cases accounting for48.5% of this total of 435 cases.Of the 24,231 cases disposed of with a court appearance, whites comprised 11,744 ofthese cases accounting for 48.46% of this total, blacks comprised 11,776 of these casesaccounting for 48.59% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage comprised 711 of these cases accounting for 2.9% of this totalof 24,231 cases.Of the 13,457 cases disposed of without a court appearance, whites comprised 7,554 ofthese cases accounting for 56.13% of this total, blacks comprised 5,331 of these cases accountingfor 39.61% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, ormixed race heritage comprised 572 of these cases accounting for 4.25% of this total of 13,457cases.32

Of the 567 cases disposed of by transfer of custody, whites comprised 271 of these casesaccounting for 47.79% of this total, blacks comprised 272 of these cases accounting for 47.97%of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage comprised 24 of these cases accounting for 4.23% of this total of 567 cases.Of the 435 cases disposed of in other ways, whites comprised 260 of these casesaccounting for 59.77% of this total, blacks comprised 164 of these cases accounting for 37.70%of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage comprised 11 of these cases accounting for 2.5% of this total of 435 cases.Calendar Year 2009Juvenile case dispositions by gender, race, and type of disposition --Of the 26,129 cases disposed of with a court appearance, males comprised 18,879 ofthese cases accounting for 72.25% of this total, and females comprised 7,250 of these casesaccounting for 27.74% of this total of 26,129 cases.Of the 13,496 cases disposed of without a court appearance, males comprised 7,671 ofthese cases accounting for 56.83% of this total, and females comprised 5,825 of these casesaccounting for 43.16% of this total of 13,496 cases.Of the 704 cases disposed of by transfer of custody, males comprised 329 of these casesaccounting for 46.73% of this total, and females comprised 375 of these cases accounting for53.26% of this total of 704 cases.Of the 611 cases disposed of in other ways, males comprised 330 of these casesaccounting for 54% of this total, and females comprised 281 of these cases accounting for45.99% of this total of 611 cases.Of the 26,129 cases disposed of with a court appearance, whites comprised 12,311 ofthese cases accounting for 47.11% of this total, blacks comprised 13,147 of these casesaccounting for 50.31% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage comprised 671 of these cases accounting for 2.56% of thistotal of 26,129 cases.Of the 13,496 cases disposed of without a court appearance, whites comprised 7,522 ofthese cases accounting for 55.73% of this total, blacks comprised 5,362 of these cases accountingfor 39.73% of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, ormixed race heritage comprised 612 of these cases accounting for 4.53% of this total of 13,496cases.Of the 704 cases disposed of by transfer of custody, whites comprised 338 of these casesaccounting for 48.01% of this total, blacks comprised 327 of these cases accounting for 46.44%of this total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage comprised 39 of these cases accounting for 5.53% of this total of 704 cases.33

Of the 611 cases disposed of in other ways, whites comprised 311 of these casesaccounting for 50.9% of this total, blacks comprised 282 of these cases accounting for 46.15% ofthis total, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritagecomprised 18 of these cases accounting for 2.94% of this total of 611 cases.(4) Number of delinquent and status offenders admitted, by genderand race, to juvenile detention facilities and adult jails and lockups (if applicable)Calendar Year 2011 -- Of the 35,115 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2011, 20,540 of these cases were disposed of with a court appearance,and 9,495 of these cases were adjudicated as delinquent. The gender and ethnicity breakdownfor this group of delinquent juvenile adjudications is as follows.Whites total 3,966 cases accounting for 41.7% of the total number of 9,495 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 11.96% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile casesprocessed. Blacks total 5,321 cases accounting for 56% of the total number of 9,495 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 16.04% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile casesprocessed. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage total 208 cases, accounting for 0.63% of the total number of 9,495 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 2.19% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile casesprocessed.Males total 7,637 cases accounting for 80.4% of the total number of 9,495 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 23.02% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile casesprocessed. Females total 1,858 cases accounting for 19.5% of the total number of 9,495 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 5.6% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile casesprocessed.White males total 3,081 cases, accounting for 40.3% of the total number of 7,637 malesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 32.4% of the total number of 9,495 male and female casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 9.29% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile casesprocessed. Black males total 4,382 cases, accounting for 57.3% of the total number of 7,637males adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 46.1% of the total number of 9,495 male and femalecases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 13.21% of the total number of 35,115 juvenilecases processed. The remaining males comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage total 174 cases, accounting for 2.2% of the total number of 7,637 males adjudicatedas delinquent juveniles, 1.8% of the total number of 9,495 male and female cases adjudicated asdelinquent juveniles, and 0.52% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile cases processed.White females total 885 cases, accounting for 47.6% of the total number of 1,858 femalecases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 9.3% of the total number of 9,495 male and femalecases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 2.67% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile casesprocessed. Black females total 939 cases, accounting for 50.5% of the total number of 1,858female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 9.8% of the total number of 9,495 male andfemale cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 2.83% of the total number of 35,115juvenile cases processed. The remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native34

American, or mixed race heritage total 34 cases, accounting for 1.8% of the total number of1,858 female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 0.35% of the total number of 9,495 maleand female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 0.1% of the total number of 35,115juvenile cases processed.Of the total number of 9,495 cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 1,788 of thesewere committed to detention with the DYS, accounting for 18.8% of the total number of 9,495cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 5.38% of the total number of 35,115 juvenile casesprocessed.Whites committed to detention with DYS total 657 cases, accounting for 36.7% of thetotal number of 1,788 cases committed to detention with DYS. Blacks committed to detentionwith DYS total 1,100 accounting for 61.5% of the total number of 1,788 cases committed todetention with DYS. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, ormixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total 31 cases, accounting for 1.7% of thetotal number of 1,788 cases committed to detention with DYS.Males committed to detention with DYS total 1,551 cases, accounting for 86.7% of thetotal number of 1,788 cases committed to detention with DYS. Females committed to detentionwith DYS total 237 cases, accounting for 13.2% of the total number of 1,788 cases committed todetention with DYS.White males committed to detention with DYS total 541 cases, accounting for 30.2% ofthe total number of 1,788 cases committed to detention with DYS. Black males committed todetention with DYS total 985 cases, accounting for 55% of the total number of 1,788 casescommitted to detention with DYS. The remaining male juveniles comprised of Hispanic, Asian,native American, or mixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total 25 cases,accounting for 1.3% of the total number of 1,788 cases committed to detention with DYS.White females committed to detention with DYS total 116 cases, accounting for 6.4% ofthe total number of 1,788 cases committed to detention with DYS. Black female juvenilescommitted to detention with DYS total 115 cases, accounting for 6.4% of the total number of1,788 cases committed to detention with DYS. The remaining female juveniles comprised ofHispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total6 cases, accounting for 0.3% of the total number of 1,788 cases committed to detention withDYS.Of the total 35,115 juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year2011, 145 of these cases were waived to adult court, accounting for 0.44% of the total number of35,115 juveniles cases processed.Whites total 47 cases accounting for 32.4% of the total number of 145 cases waived toadult court. Blacks total 97 cases accounting for 66.8% of the total number of 145 cases waivedto adult court. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage total 1 case accounting for 0.68% of the total number of 145 cases waived to adultcourt.35

Males waived to adult court total 136 cases, accounting for 93.7% of the total number of145 cases waived to adult court. Females waived to adult court total 9 cases, accounting for6.3% of the total number of 145 cases waived to adult court.White males waived to adult court total 39 cases, accounting for 26.8% of the totalnumber of 145 cases waived to adult court. Black males waived to adult court total 96 cases,accounting for 66.2% of the total number of 145 cases waived to adult court. The remainingmales comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage waived to adultcourt total 1 case, accounting for 0.68% of the total number of 145 cases waived to adult court.White females waived to adult court total 8 cases, accounting for 5.5% of the totalnumber of 145 cases waived to adult court. Black females waived to adult court total 1 case,accounting for 0.68% of the total number of 145 cases waived to adult court. The remainingfemales comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage waived to adultcourt total 0 cases, accounting for 0% of the total number of 145 cases waived to adult court.Calendar Year 2010 -- Of the 38,690 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2010, 24,231 of these cases were disposed of with a court appearance,and 11,379 of these cases were adjudicated as delinquent. The gender and ethnicity breakdownfor this group of delinquent juvenile adjudications is as follows.Whites total 4,941 cases accounting for 43.42% of the total number of 11,379 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 12.69% of the total number of 38,690 juvenile casesprocessed. Blacks total 6,155 cases accounting for 54% of the total number of 11,379 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 15.8% of the total number of 38,690 juvenile casesprocessed. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage total 283 cases, accounting for 2.48% of the total number of 11,379 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 0.73% of the total number of 38,690 juvenile casesprocessed.Males total 9,037 cases accounting for 79.41% of the total number of 11,379 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 23.2% of the total number of 38,690 juvenile casesprocessed. Females total 2,342 cases accounting for 20.58% of the total number of 11,379 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 6.01% of the total number of 38,690 juvenile casesprocessed.White males total 3,893 cases, accounting for 43.07% of the total number of 9,037 malesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 34.2% of the total number of 11,379 male and female casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 10% of the total number of 38,690 juvenile casesprocessed. Black males total 4,917 cases, accounting for 54.4% of the total number of 9,037males adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 43.2% of the total number of 11,379 male and femalecases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 12.63% of the total number of 38,690 juvenilecases processed. The remaining males comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage total 227 cases, accounting for 2.5% of the total number of 9,037 males adjudicated36

as delinquent juveniles, 1.9% of the total number of 11,379 male and female cases adjudicated asdelinquent juveniles, and 0.58% of the total number of 38,690 juvenile cases processed.White females total 1,048 cases, accounting for 44.74% of the total number of 2,342female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 9.2% of the total number of 11,379 male andfemale cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 2.69% of the total number of 38,690juvenile cases processed. Black females total 1,238 cases, accounting for 52.86% of the totalnumber of 2,342 female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 10.87% of the total number of11,379 male and female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 3.18% of the total numberof 38,690 juvenile cases processed. The remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage total 56 cases, accounting for 2.39% of the total number of2,342 female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 0.49% of the total number of 11,379male and female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 0.14% of the total number of38,690 juvenile cases processed.Of the total number of 11,379 cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 1,952 of thesewere committed to detention with the DYS, accounting for 17.15% of the total number of 11,379cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 5.05% of the total number of 38,690 juvenile casesprocessed.Whites committed to detention with DYS total 771 cases, accounting for 39.49% of thetotal number of 1,952 cases committed to detention with DYS. Blacks committed to detentionwith DYS total 1,157 accounting for 59.27% of the total number of 1,952 cases committed todetention with DYS. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, ormixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total 24 cases, accounting for 1.2% of thetotal number of 1,952 cases committed to detention with DYS.Males committed to detention with DYS total 1,725 cases, accounting for 88.37% of thetotal number of 1,952 cases committed to detention with DYS. Females committed to detentionwith DYS total 227 cases, accounting for 11.62% of the total number of 1,952 cases committedto detention with DYS.White males committed to detention with DYS total 652 cases, accounting for 33.4% ofthe total number of 1,952 cases committed to detention with DYS. Black males committed todetention with DYS total 1,053 cases, accounting for 53.94% of the total number of 1,952 casescommitted to detention with DYS. The remaining male juveniles comprised of Hispanic, Asian,native American, or mixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total 20 cases,accounting for 1.02% of the total number of 1,952 cases committed to detention with DYS.White females committed to detention with DYS total 119 cases, accounting for 6.09% ofthe total number of 1,952 cases committed to detention with DYS. Black female juvenilescommitted to detention with DYS total 104 cases, accounting for 5.32% of the total number of1,952 cases committed to detention with DYS. The remaining female juveniles comprised ofHispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total4 cases, accounting for 0.2% of the total number of 1,952 cases committed to detention withDYS.37

Of the total 38,690 juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year2010, 211 of these cases were waived to adult court, accounting for 0.55% of the total number of38,690 juveniles cases processed.Whites total 87 cases accounting for 41.23% of the total number of 211 cases waived toadult court. Blacks total 119 cases accounting for 56.39% of the total number of 211 caseswaived to adult court. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American,or mixed race heritage total 5 cases accounting for 2.36% of the total number of 211 caseswaived to adult court.Males waived to adult court total 197 cases, accounting for 93.36% of the total number of211 cases waived to adult court. Females waived to adult court total 14 cases, accounting for6.63% of the total number of 211 cases waived to adult court.White males waived to adult court total 77 cases, accounting for 36.49% of the totalnumber of 211 cases waived to adult court. Black males waived to adult court total 116 cases,accounting for 54.97% of the total number of 211 cases waived to adult court. The remainingmales comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage waived to adultcourt total 4 case, accounting for 1.89% of the total number of 211 cases waived to adult court.White females waived to adult court total 10 cases, accounting for 4.73% of the totalnumber of 211 cases waived to adult court. Black females waived to adult court total 3 cases,accounting for 1.42% of the total number of 211 cases waived to adult court. The remainingfemales comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage waived to adultcourt total 1 case, accounting for 0.47% of the total number of 211 cases waived to adult court.Calendar Year 2009 -- Of the 40,940 total juvenile cases processed by the State ofAlabama in Calendar Year 2009, 26,129 of these cases were disposed of with a court appearance,and 12,528 of these cases were adjudicated as delinquent. The gender and ethnicity breakdownfor this group of delinquent juvenile adjudications is as follows.Whites total 5,269 cases accounting for 42.05% of the total number of 12,528 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 12.87% of the total number of 40,940 juvenile casesprocessed. Blacks total 6,995 cases accounting for 55.83% of the total number of 12,528 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 17.09% of the total number of 40,940 juvenile casesprocessed. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixedrace heritage total 264 cases, accounting for 2.1% of the total number of 12,528 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 0.64% of the total number of 40,940 juvenile casesprocessed.Males total 9,732 cases accounting for 77.68% of the total number of 12,528 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 23.77% of the total number of 40,940 juvenile casesprocessed. Females total 2,796 cases accounting for 22.31% of the total number of 12,528 casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 6.83% of the total number of 40,940 juvenile casesprocessed.38

White males total 4,028 cases, accounting for 41.38% of the total number of 9,732 malesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 32.15% of the total number of 12,528 male and female casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 9.84% of the total number of 40,940 juvenile casesprocessed. Black males total 5,490 cases, accounting for 56.41% of the total number of 9,732males adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 43.82% of the total number of 12,528 male andfemale cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 13.41% of the total number of 40,940juvenile cases processed. The remaining males comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American,or mixed race heritage total 214 cases, accounting for 2.19% of the total number of 9,732 malesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 1.7% of the total number of 12,528 male and female casesadjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 0.52% of the total number of 40,940 juvenile casesprocessed.White females total 1,241 cases, accounting for 44.38% of the total number of 2,796female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 9.9% of the total number of 12,528 male andfemale cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 3.03% of the total number of 40,940juvenile cases processed. Black females total 1,505 cases, accounting for 53.82% of the totalnumber of 2,796 female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 12.01% of the total number of12,528 male and female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 3.68% of the total numberof 40,940 juvenile cases processed. The remaining females comprised of Hispanic, Asian, nativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage total 50 cases, accounting for 1.78% of the total number of2,796 female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 0.39% of the total number of 12,528male and female cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 0.12% of the total number of40,940 juvenile cases processed.Of the total number of 12,528 cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, 2,249 of thesewere committed to detention with the DYS, accounting for 17.95% of the total number of 12,528cases adjudicated as delinquent juveniles, and 5.49% of the total number of 40,940 juvenile casesprocessed.Whites committed to detention with DYS total 876 cases, accounting for 38.95% of thetotal number of 2,249 cases committed to detention with DYS. Blacks committed to detentionwith DYS total 1,335 accounting for 59.35% of the total number of 2,249 cases committed todetention with DYS. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, ormixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total 38 cases, accounting for 1.68% ofthe total number of 2,249 cases committed to detention with DYS.Males committed to detention with DYS total 1,940 cases, accounting for 86.26% of thetotal number of 2,249 cases committed to detention with DYS. Females committed to detentionwith DYS total 309 cases, accounting for 13.73% of the total number of 2,249 cases committedto detention with DYS.White males committed to detention with DYS total 706 cases, accounting for 31.39% ofthe total number of 2,249 cases committed to detention with DYS. Black males committed todetention with DYS total 1,199 cases, accounting for 53.31% of the total number of 2,249 casescommitted to detention with DYS. The remaining male juveniles comprised of Hispanic, Asian,39

native American, or mixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total 35 cases,accounting for 1.55% of the total number of 2,249 cases committed to detention with DYS.White females committed to detention with DYS total 170 cases, accounting for 7.55% ofthe total number of 2,249 cases committed to detention with DYS. Black female juvenilescommitted to detention with DYS total 136 cases, accounting for 6.04% of the total number of2,249 cases committed to detention with DYS. The remaining female juveniles comprised ofHispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage committed to detention with DYS total3 cases, accounting for 0.13% of the total number of 2,249 cases committed to detention withDYS.Of the total 40,940 juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year2009, 210 of these cases were waived to adult court, accounting for 0.51% of the total number of40,940 juveniles cases processed.Whites total 82 cases accounting for 39.04% of the total number of 210 cases waived toadult court. Blacks total 128 cases accounting for 60.95% of the total number of 210 caseswaived to adult court. The remaining category comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American,or mixed race heritage total 0 cases accounting for 0% of the total number of 210 cases waived toadult court.Males waived to adult court total 197 cases, accounting for 93.8% of the total number of210 cases waived to adult court. Females waived to adult court total 13 cases, accounting for6.19% of the total number of 210 cases waived to adult court.White males waived to adult court total 77 cases, accounting for 36.66% of the totalnumber of 210 cases waived to adult court. Black males waived to adult court total 120 cases,accounting for 57.14% of the total number of 210 cases waived to adult court. The remainingmales comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage waived to adultcourt total 0 case, accounting for 0% of the total number of 210 cases waived to adult court.White females waived to adult court total 5 cases, accounting for 2.38% of the totalnumber of 210 cases waived to adult court. Black females waived to adult court total 8 cases,accounting for 3.8% of the total number of 210 cases waived to adult court. The remainingfemales comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed race heritage waived to adultcourt total 0 cases, accounting for 0% of the total number of 210 cases waived to adult court.(5) Other social, economic, legal, and organizational conditionsconsidered relevant to delinquency prevention programmingA discussion of other social, economic, legal, and organizational conditions consideredrelevant to delinquency prevention programming cannot be conducted without first consideringthe educational needs, gender specific services, delinquency prevention and treatment servicesavailable to juveniles in rural areas, and mental health services available to juveniles in thejuvenile justice system.40

To address the education needs of juveniles in the juvenile justice system, the DYSprovides education services as the State’s Youth Services School District, the 134 th schoolsystem in Alabama, which is governed by the policies and procedures of both DYS and theAlabama Department of Education (which governs the State’s levels of elementary andsecondary education from kindergarten through 12th grade). The DYS School District currentlyoperates three major schools that provide regular academic and vocational education services tothe juveniles committed to a DYS facility and attending those schools. One reason for this is thatmany of the committed youth experience educational issues related to their behavioral issues,and the problems manifest themselves when the youth must confront and address these problemsduring their detention in the juvenile justice system. It is common for these youth to have fallenseveral academic grade levels behind their peers in mathematical, language, and readingcomprehension abilities, and school truancy/suspension/expulsion are common characteristicsshared by the juvenile delinquent population in both urban and rural areas of the State.To address the need for gender specific services in the juvenile justice system, the Stateencourages each applicant for juvenile justice grant program funds to establish its own programsand services, or to avail itself of other programs and services offered through various resources,which provide gender-specific aid as and when needed. Some grant applicants provide programsthat target teen pregnancy through pregnant and parenting teen education classes for teenagegirls who are currently pregnant with their first unborn child and/or teenage girls who areparenting their first born child, and the program teaches them not only “raising healthy baby”practices but also good health and hygiene practices, time and work management techniques, andpregnancy prevention as a means to stop the destructive behavioral and teen pregnancy cyclesexperienced by these girls prior to their reaching adulthood. Some grant applicants providetreatment programs for male teenage sex offenders. And some grant applicants provideprograms that target specific male and female youth in developing healthy lifestyle habits withregard to proper health and hygiene, nutrition and eating habits, clean living standards, properuse of medications so as not to progress into drug misuse and abuse, and positive mental healthpractices with regard to developing anger management techniques so as not to progress into moreself-destructive behaviors at a later age. As is the case with many programs, those located nearpopulated areas are able to couple their efforts and pool their resources with services alreadybeing provided for the general population in those areas, and the result is the ability to provide abetter product for the targeted clientele. However, programs located in rural or isolated areaslack the ability to combine their efforts with other services, and the result is that limited servicescan be provided -- and only to a small number of clients, and the threat of limited treatment orinconsistency in treatment will permeate all such efforts made at service delivery for thespecified gender group.To address the need for delinquency prevention and treatment services available in ruralareas, the State encourages those rural applicants for juvenile justice grant program funds tocouple their prevention and treatment efforts with those already established and operating innearby cities and contiguous counties. Such collaboration allows for treatment services to beprovided by knowledgeable and qualified individuals/service providers who are within arelatively short distance of those youth in need of their services. This way, clientele costs fortransportation and time in transit will surely increase, but costs for constructing/staffing/andoperating new facilities in rural areas will be eliminated due to the availability of specialized41

services that are already being provided in the contiguous urban areas. The State alsoencourages rural applicants to establish working relationships with the State’s colleges anduniversities for internship and research programs to be developed which will encourage collegelevelcriminal justice and psychology students (at both the undergraduate and graduate studentlevels) and faculty personnel to become involved in studying, evaluating, and responding to ruralarea juvenile justice causation factors and treatment options.These same practices are also utilized by the State to address the need for mental healthservices to be made available to juveniles in the juvenile justice system. Mental health diagnosesin juveniles can indicate the presence of various maladies for which mainstream/conventional aswell as alternative treatment options could -- and possibly should -- be made available. But themental health needs of juveniles in society overall, as well as those of juveniles committed in thejustice system in particular, are often overlooked and unattended. For many, the only recoursefor treatment is to avail themselves of what services can be provided by the Alabama Departmentof Mental Health or their local/county mental health office. For youth committed to detention inthe juvenile justice system, treatment might be that much more out of reach due to the sentenceimposed upon them by the court, lack of available funds to provide thorough and consistenttreatment within the juvenile justice system itself, and the detachment from their network offamily, friends, and community support. With limited funds and treatment options, the Stateencourages its juvenile justice grant applicants to couple their juvenile mental health diagnosesand treatment efforts with those already established and operating in nearby cities, contiguouscounties, and colleges and universities.With the consideration of educational services, gender specific services, rural areadelinquency prevention and treatment services, and mental health services stated above,analyzing other social, economic, legal, and organizational conditions which could be consideredas relevant to juvenile justice and delinquency prevention programming within the State ofAlabama is a process which remains under continual development and review by the State’sSAG, with particular assistance provided by the ADECA LETS Division, AOC, and DYS. Suchdevelopment, review, and redevelopment are based upon the description of the State ofAlabama’s formal juvenile justice system. The analysis is founded upon a review of theconditions considered or determined by the State’s SAG to be those relevant to addressingjuvenile justice and delinquency prevention existing problems. The analysis considers theAlabama juvenile justice system’s education needs, gender-specific service needs, delinquencyprevention and treatment service needs in the State’s urban and rural areas, unemployment rates,school dropout / suspension / expulsion / exclusion rates, adolescent pregnancy rates, child abuserates, mental health needs and services available to juveniles confined within the juvenile justicesystem, and other social, economic, legal, and organizational conditions which the State’s SAGconsiders relevant to its planning and programming of delinquency prevention within the State.Based upon findings which are continually revealed by the ongoing analysis, themembers of the State’s SAG Grant Application Review Committee identified the followingpriorities to follow when awarding grant funds made available pursuant to the JJDP Act to theState and its units of local government. The SAG Grant Application Review Committeediscussed, established, and recommended programming and funding priorities for grantapplications that are submitted for the SAG’s consideration pursuant to the JJDP Act’s Title II42

Part B Formula Grant Program. The programming and funding priorities focus on the reductionof the need for juvenile detention placement facilities by creating alternative resources in theidentified areas. The full SAG, at its February 22, 2002 meeting, voted to adopt the SAG GrantApplication Review Committee’s recommendations. The priorities established by the SAGGrant Application Review Committee and adopted by the full SAG for the programming andfunding of future grant projects are as follows:1. Sentencing Alternatives for Juvenile Courts Addressing Juvenile Delinquency:(a) Programs which serve to eliminate the inappropriate sentencing ofjuveniles to incarceration within the DYS’s juvenile detention system.(b) Programs which serve to provide alternative resources to juvenileincarceration.(c) Programs which serve to provide intervention services at the early onset ofrecognized risk factors in juvenile delinquent behavior.(d) Programs which serve to provide support for innovative techniques thatdemonstrate effective processes to minimize the manifestation of juvenile delinquency and / orat-risk behavior in juveniles.2. Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency:(a) Programs which develop and implement primary juvenile delinquencyprevention techniques or services.(b) Programs which develop and implement secondary juvenile delinquencyprevention techniques or services.3. Addressing Causation Factors of Juvenile Delinquency and Recidivism:(a) Programs which identify and address juvenile mental health issues, needs,and the availability of or the provision of services, or the lack thereof, as a causation factor injuvenile delinquency and recidivism.(b) Programs which identify and address juvenile delinquent aftercare issues,needs, and the availability of or the provision of services, or the lack thereof, as a causationfactor in juvenile delinquency and recidivism.(c) Programs which identify and address juvenile pregnancy and juvenileparenting issues, needs, and the availability of or the provision of services as a causation factor injuvenile delinquency and recidivism.With regard to analyzing the issue of over-representation of minority youth and theformer “disproportionate minority confinement” (DMC), on March 14, 2001 the ADECA LETSDivision contracted with Auburn University at Montgomery (AUM) for AUM (by and throughits School of Sciences’ Department of Justice and Public Safety and Department of PoliticalScience and Public Administration) to conduct a study and analysis regarding the overrepresentationof minority youth and disproportionate minority confinement (DMC) within theState’s juvenile justice system. A final report on the results and conclusions from this study wassubmitted by AUM to the ADECA LETS Division in July 2002. Use of the information andstatistical data collected during that study continues to be utilized by the State’s SAG and theADECA LETS Division for inclusion in the performance of other analytical studies, theproduction of subsequent reports concerning the status and direction of the State’s juvenile43

justice system, and the awarding of Title II Part B Formula Grant funds to subgrantees/units oflocal government. A copy of that final report was submitted to Mrs. Shirley Martin and toDr. Heidi Hsia at the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) Office of Justice Programs(OJP) Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) in July 2002. TheADECA LETS Division is also currently working on updating its DMC Assessment Study, andplans to have that completed and submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP SRAD by March 2013.B. List of State’s Priority Juvenile Justice Needs/Problem StatementsThe following is a written presentation that describes the magnitude, seriousness, rate ofchange, persons affected, and other aspects of the problems that are the product of, and that usethe qualitative and quantitative information collected from, the juvenile crime analysis above.The problem statements identify the nature, extent, and effect of system response; makeprojections based upon historical precedent; and rigorously attempt to address the origins of theproblem. The problem statements are linked to the current data and needs analysis, therequirements of the JJDP Act, the functions of the juvenile justice system, geographic locations,and -- whenever possible -- related socioeconomic factors. The problem statements are clear andsuccinct summaries that reflect the results of the analysis undertaken, but do not necessarilyrepresent all of the analysis undertaken or all of the data collected for each stated problem. Theproblem statements are stated in priority rank order.1. Program Problem Statement: Planning and Administration.Juvenile justice program planning and compliance monitoring are not static activities;they are performed on a continuing basis so that the requirements of the JJDP Act can beproperly implemented within the State. It is essential that State and local level grant recipientsproperly maintain accurate records in an accessible format within a usable informationcommunications system so that State level grant administrators can access that informationduring the conduct of program monitoring activities. However, the State is faced with thesituation that although there are many separate agencies administering to the needs of thejuvenile offender population (county courts, county juvenile probation offices, State and localdetention centers, State and local education agencies, local medical and mental health serviceproviders, etc.), these agencies do not function according to established uniform operations andcommunications policies -- including policies for records retention and coordinated access tothose records. One result is that a usable statewide database of accurate and uniform juvenilejustice information did not exist and did not allow for grant administrators and law enforcementprofessionals to obtain information that could be incorporated into juvenile justice programplanning and assessment, behavioral assessment, and behavioral prediction.Examples of this situation can be described as follows. The Alabama Department ofYouth Services (DYS) maintains “unduplicated” records that are on individual juvenile offenderswithout regard to the number of offenses committed by each juvenile; therefore, one juvenilewith ten offenses to his or her name is recorded as one juvenile within the DYS system, due tothe fact that the DYS facility is housing, educating, and providing treatment to that juvenile as anindividual person within its care, custody, and control. Thus, that juvenile offender is housed atDYS pursuant to his/her adjudication order from the court, and is counted as one person. The44

juvenile’s records are, therefore, considered to be “unduplicated” because the youth in DYScustody is counted as one youth who has juvenile justice system contact regardless of the numberof contacts. The Alabama Administrative Office of Courts (AOC) maintains “duplicated”records that are on the number of offenses or charges that have been brought to and disposed ofby the courts; therefore, one juvenile with ten offenses is recorded as ten offenses. Thejuvenile’s records are, therefore, considered to be “duplicated” because the youth in the AOC’srecords system are counted by their total contacts with the justice system.Local police departments maintain records on the number of arrests they have made;therefore, police maintain records on the number of times that a juvenile has been arrested. Andseveral agencies which deal directly with the juvenile population (such as county juvenile courtjudges, county juvenile probation officers, school administrators, school resource officers, schooltruancy officers, and social service agency case workers and/or treatment providers) possessinformation which perhaps should be included in the respective juvenile offender’s recordsmaintained by each and all of these entities. Although all of these records are accurate and,when combined, effectively convey a more complete picture of the State’s juvenile justicesystem, each record database must be separately examined to determine what information itcontains and how that information can be used for meaningful purposes, particularly whenprocessing the juveniles through the juvenile justice system.The State participates in the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) procedures and activities, butadditional information about juvenile cases is continually being sought and discovered. Theproblem of addressing the need to develop methods by which to improve access to and use ofthose various juvenile offender records systems is vital to the juvenile justice planning process.The results would be beneficial to the overall effectiveness of treatment programs andcorrectional programs as well as in the development of ways by which to reduce recidivism rates,program duplication, and costs, and more efficiently manage court and personnel time and costs.2. Program Problem Statement: Deinstitutionalization of StatusOffenders, and Jail Removal.During Calendar Year 2011, 35,115 juvenile cases were processed through the State’sjuvenile courts. Of that number, 21,531 juvenile cases resulted in a petition being filed, 1,788juvenile cases resulted in requiring the imposition of secure detention, and 154 juvenile casesresulted in referrals to non-secure attention facilities. During Calendar Year 2010, 38,690juvenile cases were processed through the State’s juvenile courts. Of that number, 25,233juvenile cases resulted in a petition being filed, 1,952 juvenile cases resulted in requiring theimposition of secure detention, and 153 juvenile cases resulted in referrals to non-secureattention facilities. And during Calendar Year 2009, 40,940 juvenile cases were processedthrough the State’s juvenile courts. Of that number, 27,444 juvenile cases resulted in a petitionbeing filed, 2,249 juvenile cases resulted in requiring the imposition of secure detention, and 207juvenile cases resulted in referrals to non-secure attention facilities.Within the State’s juvenile corrections system, the correctional institution space providedfor juveniles by the DYS through the State’s regional detention centers is utilized primarily bythose juveniles who are older, who have committed more serious offenses, or who are habitual45

offenders. The services provided by community-based care institutions for those juveniles whocommit less serious offenses could be maintained and even expanded to other geographic areaswithin the State. Alabama’s statutory law, previously codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-61 and §12-15-71, and now codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-201 and 208, and §12-15-314, 502, 215, and 503, mandates that juveniles who are adjudicated to be delinquent must becommitted to or confined in a detention facility or in an institution established for the care andrehabilitation of delinquent children, and that children who are adjudicated to be dependent or inneed of supervision (CHINS) must be placed in facilities separate from those delinquent childrenin detention facilities. The State complies with these mandates, but also struggles with the needto continually support such compliance with appropriate funding from reliable revenue sources,sufficient staffing to meet changing management and technology needs, and adequate proceduresto implement program requirements.3. Program Problem Statement: Deinstitutionalization of StatusOffenders.The number of juvenile offenders processed by the State’s juvenile justice system hadsteadily increased throughout the 1990s decade and into the 2000s, but as of 2010 it has begun todecrease. Although this number is decreasing, the quality and effectiveness of the servicesprovided by the State’s juvenile justice system have the potential to decrease due to the pooreconomy as well as due to more time and resources needing to be provided to treat those in needof juvenile justice services, but which time and resources are not necessarily available as/when/where they are needed.Alabama’s statutory law, previously codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-61 and§12-15-71, and now codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-201 and 208, and §12-15-314,502, 215, and 503, mandates that juveniles who are adjudicated to be delinquent must becommitted to or confined in a detention facility or in an institution established for the care andrehabilitation of delinquent children, and that children who are adjudicated to be dependent or inneed of supervision (CHINS) must be placed in facilities separate from those delinquent childrenin detention facilities. The State’s courts and law enforcement agencies need to have theresources and alternatives available to them so as to allow them to process and manage theseclassifications of juvenile offenders prior to fully and formally processing the offenders into thecriminal justice system. This would coincide with the intent of the JJDP Act and the State’sstatutory law.If juveniles who commit non-serious offenses or status offenses could be successfullydiverted out of the juvenile justice system, then the State would not be forced to bear thefinancial burden of providing care for these juveniles as well as for those adjudicated juveniledelinquents who are older, more-experienced, and who have committed more serious offenses.The status offender population could be substantially reduced through the implementation ofdiversionary programs available for use in local jurisdictions. If this could be effectivelypracticed, then the juvenile courts and juvenile detention system would be better able to targettheir efforts and concentrate resources on treating the more serious juvenile offender population.46

4. Program Problem Statement: Minority Overrepresentation,Illegal Drugs and Alcohol, SeriousCrime, Gangs, and DelinquencyPrevention.Minority overrepresentation does exist in the State of Alabama’s juvenile justice system.Statistics drawn from the 2000 and 2010 Census and statistics produced by the DYS and theAOC indicate that black youth in Alabama are disproportionately over-represented in the State’sjuvenile justice system. Alabama’s total juvenile population drawn from the 1990 Censuscontained 577,226 youth, consisting of 403,193 white youth accounting for 69.85% of thispopulation, 164,448 black youth accounting for 28.49% of this population, and 14,170 youth ofother racial origin comprised of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, or mixed race heritageaccounting for 2.45% of this population. Also in 1990, the State’s population of juveniles under18 years of age totaled 162,750, equating to 28.2% of this population. Alabama’s total juvenilepopulation drawn from the 2000 Census contained 1,256,169 youth, 71.13% of this populationconsisting of white youth, 26% of this population consisting of black youth, and 2.86% of thispopulation consisting of youth of other racial origins comprised of Hispanic, Asian, NativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage. Also in 2000, the State’s population of juveniles under 18years of age totaled 1,123,000, equating to 89.4% of the total juvenile population. AndAlabama’s total juvenile population drawn from the 2010 Census contained 1,348,630 youth,68.5% of this population consisting of white youth, 26.2% of this population consisting of blackyouth, and 5.3% of this population consisting of youth of other racial origins comprised ofHispanic, Asian, Native American, or mixed race heritage. Also in 2010, the State’s populationof juveniles under 18 years of age totaled 1,132,459, equating to 83.97% of the total juvenilepopulation.There was a total of 35,115 juvenile cases processed through the State of Alabama’sjuvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2011: whites comprised 17,628 of the cases, blackscomprised 16,230 of the cases, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, Native American,or mixed race heritage comprised 1,257 of the cases. From these figures, it can be determinedthat 50.2% of the 35,115 case total consisted of white cases, 46.22% consisted of black cases,and 3.58% consisted of cases of other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, ormixed race heritage. There was a total of 38,690 juvenile cases processed through the State ofAlabama’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2010: whites comprised 19,829 of the cases,blacks comprised 17,543 of the cases, and other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, NativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage comprised 1,318 of the cases. From these figures, it can bedetermined that 51.25% of the 38,690 case total consisted of white cases, 45.34% consisted ofblack cases, and 3.41% consisted of cases of other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, NativeAmerican, or mixed race heritage. And there was a total of 40,940 juvenile cases processedthrough the State of Alabama’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2009: whites comprised20,482 of the cases, blacks comprised 19,118 of the cases, and other races comprised ofHispanic, Asian, Native American, or mixed race heritage comprised 1,340 of the cases. Fromthese figures, it can be determined that 50.03% of the 40,940 case total consisted of white cases,46.70% consisted of black cases, and 3.27% consisted of cases of other races comprised ofHispanic, Asian, Native American, or mixed race heritage.47

Thus, whites accounted for 69.85% of the State’s population according to the 1990Census, 71.13% of the State’s population according to the 2000 Census, and 68.5% of the State’spopulation according to the 2010 Census, but accounted for 50.2% of the juvenile casesprocessed through the State’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2011, 51.25% of thejuvenile cases processed through the State’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2010, and50.03% of the juvenile cases processed through the State’s juvenile justice system in CalendarYear 2009. Blacks accounted for 28.49% of the State’s population according to the 1990Census, 26% of the State’s population according to the 2000 Census, and 26.2% of the State’spopulation according to the 2010 Census, but accounted for 46.22% of the juvenile casesprocessed through the State’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2011, 45.34% of thejuvenile cases processed through the State’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2010, and46.70% of the juvenile cases processed through the State’s juvenile justice system in CalendarYear 2009. And juveniles of other races comprised of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, ormixed race heritage accounted for 2.45% of the State’s population according to the 1990 Census,2.86% of the State’s population according to the 2000 Census, and 5.3% of the State’spopulation according to the 2010 Census, but accounted for 3.58% of the juvenile casesprocessed through the State’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2011, 3.41% of thejuvenile cases processed through the State’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2010, and3.27% of the juvenile cases processed through the State’s juvenile justice system in CalendarYear 2009.Minority (black) youth represented slightly less than one-third of Alabama’s juvenilepopulation in Calendar Years 2000-2011, yet represented slightly less than one-half of itsjuvenile delinquent case population in those same years. One solution to this minorityoverrepresentation situation would be to develop and implement effective prevention programswhich would provide a means of addressing the various causes contributing to this overall crimeproblem, as well as to develop and implement effective accountability and treatment programs tobe used as graduated sanctions which would be made available to the juvenile courts to serve asalternative resources to the existing juvenile short-term detention and long-term confinementsystem. Efforts could be undertaken to refocus existing programs so as to direct more attentiontoward addressing the problem of delinquent behavior and punishment of minority youth withoutcompromising the principal missions of the existing programs. If prevention programs wereexpanded and could also accomplish their primary mission(s) more effectively, then minorityyouth could be less likely to come into contact with and become involved in the State’s juvenilejustice system.The State’s SAG emphasizes as priorities the prevention of juvenile crime, addressing theover-representation of minorities within the juvenile justice system, and addressing the particularcausation factors existing throughout the State in general -- and within certain geographic areasin particular -- that are associated with high juvenile crime rates. The guiding premise indeveloping treatment programs to prevent juvenile delinquency, and especially graduatedsanctions programs which can address minority overrepresentation within the juvenile justicesystem, is the need to target and reach juveniles before they exhibit at-risk behavior which canbring them into contact with the juvenile justice system and allow their entry and furtherprogression into the adult criminal justice system.48

5. Program Problem Statement: Developing Innovative Local LawEnforcement Community Policingthrough Delinquency Preventionand Juvenile Justice SystemImprovement.Community policing efforts -- which would be considered as innovative and which wouldbe implemented by local law enforcement agencies -- need to be timely and continuallydeveloped, implemented, and evaluated so as to positively impact the juvenile at-risk anddelinquent populations living in local communities. As each generation of the juvenilepopulation develops and matures, and as technology continues to develop and improveworkplace efficiency, then more modern, efficient, and effective methods of managing juvenilecrime and the juvenile delinquent population need to be -- and are being -- devised so that lawenforcement agencies can properly and timely address the at-risk and delinquent youth problemsin their own communities. Providing the necessary and proper resources to equip local lawenforcement personnel with the latest technology and means by which to address their juvenileat-risk and delinquent populations is a continual problem faced by local communities to whichinnovative local law enforcement community policing efforts could positively impact.3. Plan for Compliance with the First Three Core Requirements of the JJDP Act andthe State’s Compliance Monitoring PlanThe State of Alabama's plan for compliance with the first three core requirements of theJJDP Act (deinstitutionalization of status offenders/DSO, sight and sound separation of juvenilesfrom adult offenders, and removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups), and the State's planfor monitoring the juvenile facilities for compliance with these first three core requirements (alsoknown as "compliance monitoring"), are data-based and program specific. They provide forclear plans of action, and are based on the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's Guidance Manual forMonitoring Facilities Under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 2002, lastrevised and published in January 2007.A. Plan for Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders (Removal of StatusOffenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities) (DSO)With regard to the “deinstitutionalization of status offenders” (DSO) requirement madepursuant to the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(12) [or, under the Consequences of JuvenileOffenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(11)], the State must develop a plan that providesstatus offenders and nonoffenders are not placed in secure detention or secure correctionalfacilities except as allowed under the exceptions set forth in Section 223(a)(11)(A). Alabamahas developed such a plan, and the USDOJ OJP OJJDP has ruled that the State has achievedsubstantial compliance as outlined in 42 USC §5633(c) (see the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s letters ofdetermination dated July 30, 2002, August 4, 2003, June 28, 2004, October 26, 2004, September6, 2005, March 8, 2006, November 21, 2006, May 9, 2007, September 5, 2007, July 15, 2008,September 16, 2008, July 13, 2009, October 2, 2009, July 7, 2010, August 23, 2010, September30, 2011, and December 1, 2011). The plan allows the State to collect and provide sufficient49

documentation of the State’s unequivocal commitment to achieving full compliance with theDSO mandate. To this DSO requirement, the State of Alabama states as follows.1. Trend analysis of the State’s DSO rates in preceding years, and thenature of DSO violations.The statistics indicating and validating Alabama’s compliance with the DSO requirementare reported in the form of Alabama’s Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that is submittedto the USDOJ OJP OJJDP by March 30 th of each year. In reviewing these reports, a trendanalysis can be done concerning Alabama’s DSO rates in preceding years (2011, 2010, and2009).As reported in Alabama’s 2011 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2012, the DSO statistics reveal that (i) for the total number of accused and adjudicated statusoffenders and nonoffenders, including status offender valid court order (VCO) violators, out-of-State runaways, and Federal wards, the number of youth who were securely detained for anylength of time in public and private adult jails was 17 in adult jails and 27 in adult lockups; (ii)the total number of accused status offenders and Federal wards who were securely detained forlonger than 24 hours (not including weekends or holidays) in public and private juveniledetention centers was 8 and in juvenile training schools was zero; (iii) the total number ofadjudicated status offenders and Federal wards, including nonoffenders (both adjudicated andaccused) who were securely detained for any length of time in public and private juveniledetention centers was 9 and in juvenile training schools was 1. This brings the total number ofviolations to 62.00, and the rate of status offender and nonoffender detention and correctionalinstitutionalization per 100,000 population under 18 to 5.47. The DSO statistics also reveal that(iv) the total number of status offenders securely detained in public and private facilities pursuantto a judicial determination that the juvenile has violated a valid court order are 68 youth detainedin juvenile detention centers, and zero youth detained in juvenile training schools. The DSOstatistics also reveal that (v) the total number of juveniles held pursuant to the Youth HandgunSafety Act who were securely detained for any length of time in public and private facilities are27 youth detained in juvenile detention centers, 19 youth detained in juvenile training schools,zero youth detained in adult jails, and zero youth detained in adult lockups. The DSO statisticsalso reveal that (vi) the total number of out-of-State runaways (not held pursuant to the InterstateCompact for Juveniles) and Federal wards securely held beyond 24 hours in a juvenile detentioncenter or training school are 1 youth detained in juvenile detention centers, and 0 youth detainedin juvenile training schools. This 5.47 rate indicates that Alabama is considered to be in fullcompliance with de minimis exceptions.Regarding the use of the valid court order (VCO) exception as reported in Alabama’s2011 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report, the ADECA LETS Division stated:“ATTACHMENT 3Verification of VCO exception pursuant to 28 CFR §31.303(f)(3)(i-vii)The compliance monitors collect monthly data from the DYS-licensed securejuvenile detention facilities, in part to determine which status offenders may have been50

held for violation of a VCO. The completed VCO forms are forwarded monthly withthe detention report from each juvenile detention center.While on-site, the compliance monitors review court files to ensure theappropriate use of the forms and the VCO procedure. A minimum of 10% of all VCOfiles are reviewed on-site by the compliance monitors to determine compliance withstate law and federal requirements. Information regarding any violations will be sharedwith the responsible court.During this reporting year, 68 status offenders (CHINS) were reported held forVCO violations. A total of 36 of these case files (53%) were reviewed on-site todetermine if the VCO procedure was adequately utilized. A total of ten adjudicatedstatus offenders held without the requisite VCO paperwork were reported as violationsof the DSO requirement.The State of Alabama’s Legislature enacted the Alabama Juvenile Justice Act of2008 in May 2008, of which the VCO provision became effective on October 1, 2009.This 2008 Act brings Alabama’s statutes into compliance with the JJDP Act. TheAlabama Administrative Office of Courts developed two separate court forms consistentwith the VCO exception provision. The VCO forms used by the State of Alabama maybe found in Appendix A.”In response to Alabama’s 2011 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2012, the ADECA LETS Division has not yet received from the USDOJ OJP OJJDP a letterof determination wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP rules that the State has achieved fullcompliance with the DSO requirements outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(11).As reported in Alabama’s 2010 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2011, the DSO statistics reveal that (i) for the total number of accused and adjudicated statusoffenders and nonoffenders, including status offender valid court order (VCO) violators, out-of-State runaways, and Federal wards, the number of youth who were securely detained for anylength of time in public and private adult jails was one and in adult lockups was zero; (ii) thetotal number of accused status offenders and Federal wards who were securely detained forlonger than 24 hours (not including weekends or holidays) in public and private juveniledetention centers was 7 and in juvenile training schools was zero; (iii) the total number ofadjudicated status offenders and Federal wards, including nonoffenders (both adjudicated andaccused) who were securely detained for any length of time in public and private juveniledetention centers was 4 and in juvenile training schools was zero. This brings the total numberof violations to 12.11, and the rate of status offender and nonoffender detention and correctionalinstitutionalization per 100,000 population under 18 to 1.08. The DSO statistics also reveal that(iv) the total number of status offenders securely detained in public and private facilities pursuantto a judicial determination that the juvenile has violated a valid court order are 67 youth detainedin juvenile detention centers, and zero youth detained in juvenile training schools. The DSOstatistics also reveal that (v) the total number of juveniles held pursuant to the Youth HandgunSafety Act who were securely detained for any length of time in public and private facilities are44 youth detained in juvenile detention centers, 12 youth detained in juvenile training schools, 251

youth detained in adult jails, and 0 youth detained in adult lockups. The DSO statistics alsoreveal that (vi) the total number of out-of-State runaways (not held pursuant to the InterstateCompact for Juveniles) and Federal wards securely held beyond 24 hours in a juvenile detentioncenter or training school are 0 youth detained in juvenile detention centers, and 0 youth detainedin juvenile training schools. This 1.08 rate indicates that Alabama is considered to be in fullcompliance with de minimis exceptions.Regarding the use of the valid court order (VCO) exception as reported in Alabama’s2010 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report, the ADECA LETS Division stated:“ATTACHMENT 5Verification of VCO exception pursuant to 28 CFR §31.303(f)(3)(i-vii)The compliance monitors collect monthly data from the DYS licensed securejuvenile detention facilities, in part to determine which status offenders may have beenheld for violation of a VCO. The completed VCO forms are forwarded monthly withthe detention report from each juvenile detention center. While on-site, the compliancemonitors review court files to ensure the appropriate use of the forms and the VCOprocedure. A minimum of 10% of all VCO files are reviewed on-site by the compliancemonitors to determine compliance with state law and federal requirements. Informationregarding any violations will be shared with the responsible court. During this reportingyear, 67 status offenders (CHINS) were reported held for VCO violations. Twenty eight(42%) of these case files were reviewed on-site to determine if the VCO procedure wasadequately utilized. Three adjudicated status offenders held without the requisite VCOpaperwork were reported as violations of the DSO requirement. The State of Alabama’sLegislature enacted the Alabama Juvenile Justice Act of 2008 in May 2008, of which theVCO provision became effective on October 1, 2009. This 2008 Act brings Alabama’sstatutes into compliance with the JJDP Act. The Alabama Administrative Office ofCourts developed two separate court forms consistent with the VCO exceptionprovision. The VCO forms used by the State may be found in Appendix A.”In response to Alabama’s 2010 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March31, 2011, the ADECA LETS Division received the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's letter of determinationdated December 1, 2011 wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ruled that the State had achieved fullcompliance with the DSO requirements outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(11).And as reported in Alabama’s 2009 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March23, 2010, the DSO statistics reveal that (i) for the total number of accused and adjudicated statusoffenders and nonoffenders, including status offender valid court order (VCO) violators, out-of-State runaways, and Federal wards, the number of youth who were securely detained for anylength of time in public and private adult jails was zero and in adult lockups was zero; (ii) thetotal number of accused status offenders and Federal wards who were securely detained forlonger than 24 hours (not including weekends or holidays) in public and private juveniledetention centers was 21 and in juvenile training schools was zero; (iii) the total number ofadjudicated status offenders and Federal wards, including nonoffenders (both adjudicated and52

accused) who were securely detained for any length of time in public and private juveniledetention centers was 29 and in juvenile training schools was 4. This brings the total number ofviolations to 54, and the rate of status offender and nonoffender detention and correctionalinstitutionalization per 100,000 population under 18 to 4.81. The DSO statistics also reveal that(iv) the total number of status offenders securely detained in public and private facilities pursuantto a judicial determination that the juvenile has violated a valid court order are 53 youth detainedin juvenile detention centers, and 2 youth detained in juvenile training schools. The DSOstatistics also reveal that (v) the total number of juveniles held pursuant to the Youth HandgunSafety Act who were securely detained for any length of time in public and private facilities are12 youth detained in juvenile detention centers, 27 youth detained in juvenile training schools, 19youth detained in adult jails, and 35 youth detained in adult lockups. The DSO statistics alsoreveal that (vi) the total number of out-of-State runaways (not held pursuant to the InterstateCompact for Juveniles) and Federal wards securely held beyond 24 hours in a juvenile detentioncenter or training school are 0 youth detained in juvenile detention centers, and 0 youth detainedin juvenile training schools. This 4.81 rate indicates that Alabama is considered to be in fullcompliance with de minimis exceptions.Regarding the use of the valid court order (VCO) exception as reported in Alabama’s2009 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report, the ADECA LETS Division stated:“ATTACHMENT 3Verification of VCO exception pursuant to 28 CFR §31.303(f)(3)(i-vii)As of May 2009, the compliance monitors collect monthly data from the DYSlicensed secure juvenile detention facilities to determine which status offenders mayhave been held for violation of a VCO. While on-site, the compliance monitors annuallyrequest and review court and/or detention files to assure the appropriate use of the formsand the VCO procedure. A minimum of 10% of all VCO files are reviewed on-site bythe compliance monitors to determine compliance with state law and federalrequirements. Information regarding any violations will be shared with the responsiblecourt. During this reporting year, 81 status offenders (CHINS) were reported held forVCO violations. Sixty-seven (78%) of these case files were reviewed on-site todetermine, from the support documentation, if the VCO procedure was adequatelyutilized. Twenty-six adjudicated status offenders (CHINS) held without the requisiteVCO paperwork were reported as violations of the DSO requirement. The remaining 7adjudicated status offenders were reported as violations for being held for minor inpossession/consumption of alcohol. The State of Alabama Legislature passed theAlabama Juvenile Justice Act of 2008, of which the VCO provision became effectiveOctober 1, 2009. This Act brings Alabama statutes into compliance with the JJDP Act.The Alabama Administrative Office of Courts developed two separate court formsconsistent with the VCO exception provision. The VCO forms used by the State may befound in Appendix A.”In response to Alabama’s 2009 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March23, 2010, the ADECA LETS Division received the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's letter of determinationdated August 23, 2010 wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ruled that the State had achieved fullcompliance with the DSO requirements outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(11).53

2. Strategy for maintaining compliance with DSO, including adescription of State or local laws impacting compliance, and information on how thedesignated State agency and SAG will work together to address circumstances in whichDSO violations have occurred (specific activities, timetable covering the three-yearplanning cycle, and resources to support the implementation of the plans).(a)Description of State or local laws impacting compliance.The State has enacted the following legislation which the State implements to complywith the “deinstitutionalization of status offenders” (DSO) requirement of the JJDP Act:1. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-127;2. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-128;3. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-207;4. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-208;5. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-209;6. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-215;7. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §44-1-27(a).This legislation is further detailed below:1. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-127 states,“Release, delivery to detention or shelter care facility, medical facility of children taken intocustody generally.(a) A person taking a child into custody without an order of the juvenile court shall, with allpossible speed, and in accordance with this chapter and the rules of court pursuant thereto:(1) Release the child to the parents, legal guardian, or legal custodian of the child or othersuitable person able to provide supervision and care for the child and issue verbal counsel andwarning as may be appropriate.(2) Release the child to the parents, legal guardian, or legal custodian of the child upon his or herpromise to bring the child before the juvenile court when requested, unless the placement of thechild in detention or shelter care appears required. If a parent, legal guardian, or other legalcustodian fails, when requested, to bring the child before the juvenile court as provided in thissection, the juvenile court may issue an order directing that the child be taken into custody andbrought before the juvenile court.(3) Bring the child, if not released, to the place designated by the juvenile court and give writtennotice of the action taken and the reasons for taking the child into custody to the juvenile courtintake officer, to the parent, legal guardian, or other legal custodian of the child, and, in the caseof dependency, to the Department of Human Resources.(b) Prior to authorizing the admission of the child to detention, shelter, or other care, the juvenilecourt intake officer, on an allegation of delinquency or in need of supervision or of dependency,shall review the need for detention or shelter care, including reviewing the written notice of theperson who took the child into custody without an order of the juvenile court, and shall direct the54

law enforcement officer or other person currently having the child in custody to release the childunless detention or shelter care is required pursuant to Section 12-15-128. The juvenile courtintake officer may allow release with or without electronic or telephone monitoring pending the72-hour hearing requirement.(c) A person taking a child or minor into custody pursuant to subdivision (3) of Section 12-15-125 shall bring the child or minor to a medical or mental health facility if the child or minor isbelieved to be suffering from a serious mental health condition, illness, or injury which requireseither prompt treatment or prompt diagnosis for the welfare of the child or minor or forevidentiary purposes, and, in the most expeditious manner possible, give notice of the actiontaken together with a statement of taking the child or minor into custody in writing to the court,the parents, legal guardian or other legal custodian and to the intake office and to the Departmentof Human Resources in the case of a dependency allegation.”2. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-128 states,“Authority and criteria for continuation of detention or sheltercare of children taken into custodybeyond 72 hours.(a) An allegedly delinquent child, dependent child, or child in need of supervision lawfully takeninto custody shall immediately be released, upon the ascertainment of the necessary facts, to thecare, custody, and control of the parent, legal guardian, or legal custodian of the child or othersuitable person able to provide supervision and care for the child, unless the juvenile court orjuvenile court intake officer, subject to the limitations in Section 12-15-208, finds any of thefollowing:(1) The child has no parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, or other suitable person able toprovide supervision and care for the child.(2) The release of the child would present a clear and substantial threat of a serious nature to theperson or property of others and where the child is alleged to be delinquent.(3) The release of the child would present a serious threat of substantial harm to the child.(4) The child has a history of failing to appear for hearings before the juvenile court.(5) The child is alleged to be delinquent for possessing a pistol, short-barreled rifle, or shortbarreledshotgun, in which case the child may be detained in a juvenile detention facility until thehearing required by Section 12-15-207. Pistol as used in this section shall be as defined insubdivision (1) of Section 13A-11-70. Short-barreled rifle and short-barreled shotgun as used inthis section shall be as defined in Section 13A-11-62.(b) The criteria for continuing the allegedly delinquent child or child in need of supervision indetention or shelter or other care, or for continuing the allegedly dependent child in shelter care,as set forth in subsection (a) shall govern the decisions of all persons involved in determiningwhether the continued detention or shelter care is warranted pending juvenile court disposition55

and those criteria shall be supported by clear and convincing evidence in support of the decisionnot to release the child.(c) In releasing a child, a juvenile court or the juvenile court intake officer may imposerestrictions on the travel, association, or place of abode of the child or place the child under thesupervision of a department, agency, or organization agreeing to supervise him or her, and mayplace the child under supervision such as electronic or telephone monitoring, if available. Achild, once placed in detention, may also be released pursuant to the same conditions shouldthere be a need to release the child from a juvenile detention facility because of an overcrowdedpopulation.”3. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-207 states,“Filing of petition and conduct of hearing as to necessity for continuation of detention or sheltercare of a child; violation of probation and aftercare.(a) When a child is not released from detention or shelter care as provided in Section 12-15-127,a petition shall be filed and a hearing held within 72 hours of placement in detention or sheltercare, Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays included, to determine probable cause and to determinewhether or not continued detention or shelter care is required.(b) Notice of the detention or shelter care hearing, either verbal or written, stating the date, time,place, and purpose of the hearing and the right to counsel shall be given by a juvenile probationofficer to the parent, legal guardian, or legal custodian if they can be found and to the child if thechild is over 12 years of age.(c) At the commencement of the detention or shelter care hearing, the juvenile court shall advisethe parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, and the parties of the right to counsel and shallappoint counsel if the juvenile court determines they are indigent. The parties shall be informedof the right of the child to remain silent. The parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, and theparties shall also be informed of the contents of the petition and, except as provided herein, shallbe given an opportunity to admit or deny the allegations of the petition. Prior to the acceptanceof an admission of the allegations of the petition, the juvenile court shall: (1) Verify if the childwas previously convicted or adjudicated a youthful offender pursuant to Section 12-15-203 or (2)rule on any motion of the prosecutor requesting the juvenile court to transfer the child forcriminal prosecution. The juvenile court shall not accept a plea of guilt or an admission to theallegations of the petition in any case in which the child will be transferred for prosecution as anadult, either by grant of the motion of the prosecutor to transfer or pursuant to Section12-15-203.(d) All relevant and material evidence helpful in determining the need for detention or sheltercare may be admitted by the juvenile court even though not admissible in subsequent hearings.(e) If the child is not released and no parent, legal guardian, or other legal custodian has beennotified and none appeared or waived appearance at the hearing, upon the filing of an affidavitby the parent, legal guardian, or legal custodian stating these facts and requesting a hearing, thejuvenile court shall rehear the matter within 24 hours.56

(f) If a person 18 years of age or older is alleged to have violated a condition of probation oraftercare after the person was adjudicated to be delinquent, the juvenile court may order that theperson be confined in the appropriate jail or lockup for adults as ordered by the juvenile court.”4. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-208 states,“Facilities to be used for detention or shelter care of children generally; when child may bedetained in jail or other facility for detention of adults; notification of juvenile court, when childreceived at facility for detention of adult offenders or persons charged with crimes; developmentof statewide system; Department of Youth Services to subsidize detention in regional facilities,may contract for detention; transfer of child to detention facility, when case transferred fromjuvenile court for criminal prosecution.(a) Persons who shall not be detained or confined in secure custody include all of the following:(1) Status offenders. Effective October 1, 2009, status offenders, as defined in this article, shallnot be detained or confined in secure custody, except that a status offender who is charged withor who commits a violation of a valid court order may be detained in secure custody in a juveniledetention facility for up to 72 hours in any six-month period, provided that all conditions setforth in subdivision (3) of subsection (b) are satisfied. Short-term secure custody of accusedstatus offenders may be necessary, such as detention in a juvenile detention facility for a briefperiod, not exceeding 24 hours, prior to formal juvenile court action, for investigative purposes,for identification purposes, or for the purpose of allowing return of a status offender to theparent, legal guardian, or legal custodian. Detention for a brief period of time pursuant tojuvenile court authority may also be necessary in order to arrange for appropriate shelter careplacement. If a petition regarding an alleged status offender is filed in juvenile court and if it isdetermined that the alleged status offender is at imminent risk of being placed in the legal orphysical custody of the Department of Human Resources, the case shall be referred to the countychildren’s services facilitation team, and the procedures in Article 5 shall be followed. Uponreferral to the county children’s services facilitation team, the juvenile probation officer shallcontinue to provide case management to the status offender unless the county children’s servicesfacilitation team appoints another person to act as case manager. The juvenile probation officershall participate in count children’s services facilitation team meetings and share recordsinformation and reports on the status offender with the county children’s services facilitationteam.(2) Federal wards. Federal wards held beyond 24 hours in secure custody in state and localjuvenile detention facilities pursuant to a written contract or agreement with a federal agency andfor the specific purpose of affecting a jurisdictional transfer or appearance as a material witnessor for return to their lawful residence or country of citizenship shall be reported as violations ofthe deinstitutionalization of status offender requirement.(3) Nonoffenders. Nonoffenders, as defined in this article, shall not be detained or confined insecure custody.(4) Children 10 years of age and younger. Children 10 years of age and younger shall not bedetained or confined in secure custody, unless the children are charged with offenses causing57

death or serious bodily injury to persons or offenses that would be classified as Class A feloniesif committed by adults. Children 11 or 12 years of age may only be detained or confined insecure custody by orders of juvenile courts, unless the children are charged with offenses causingdeath or serious bodily injury to persons or offenses that would be classified as Class A feloniesif committed by adults.(b) Persons who may be detained or confined in secure custody include all of the following:(1) Persons who violate the federal law, which prohibits possession of a handgun by a childunder the age of 18 years, or who violate a similar state or municipal law, may be placed insecure custody in juvenile detention facilities.(2) Persons in custody pursuant to the Interstate Compact on Juveniles, contained in Section44-2-1, et seq., may be placed in secure custody in juvenile detention facilities.(3) Status offenders who violate a valid court order. A status offender who is charged with orhas committed a violation of a valid court order may be detained in secure custody in a juveniledetention facility for up to 72 hours in any six-month period. Status offenders who violate validcourt orders shall not be committed to the Department of Youth Services, nor shall they be heldin jails or lockups for adult offenders. For this valid court order exception to apply, thefollowing actions must occur whenever a status offender is taken into custody for violating avalid court order:a. The juvenile detention facility shall immediately notify the juvenile court intake or probationofficer that the child is being held in secure custody for violating a valid court order. The noticeshall include the date and time the child entered the juvenile detention facility.b. Within the first 24 hours during which a status offender is held in secure custody for violatinga valid court order, not including weekends or holidays, a juvenile court intake or probationofficer, or an authorized representative of the department or agency having custody orsupervision of the child, shall interview the child, in person.c. Within 48 hours of the admission of the status offender to secure custody for violating a validcourt order, not including weekends or holidays:1. The individual who interviewed the child shall submit a written assessment report to thejuvenile court regarding the immediate needs of the child; and2. If the juvenile court has not yet determined whether the child has, in fact, violated the order,the juvenile court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether there is reasonable cause tobelieve that the child violated the order and the appropriate placement of the child pendingdisposition of the alleged violation.(c) Compliance with jail removal. No person under the age of 18 years shall be detained orconfined in any jail or lockup for adults except for the following exceptions:58

(1) A child may be detained in a jail or lockup for adults for up to 6 hours while processing thecase of the child.(2) A child transferred for criminal prosecution pursuant to Section 12-15-203 may be detainedin a jail or lockup for adults.(3) A person charged pursuant to Section 12-15-204 may be detained in a jail or lockup foradults.When a case is transferred to another court for criminal prosecution, the person shall betransferred to the appropriate officer or jail or lockup in accordance with the law governing thedetention of the person charged with the crime. Jails and lockups used for holding adults shallnot hold status offenders in secure custody at any time. An accused status offender may bedetained in a nonsecure area of a jail or lockup for processing while waiting transportation to anonsecure shelter care facility or a juvenile detention facility or while waiting for release to aparent, legal guardian, or legal custodian.Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a circuit court judge exercising criminal jurisdictionfrom recommending that a child described in subdivision (2) or (3) should be placed in a juveniledetention center instead of an adult jail or lockup.(d) Compliance with Separation. Accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offendersshall not have contact with adult inmates, including trusties. Contact is defined to include anyphysical or sustained sight and sound contact. Sight contact is defined as clear visual contactbetween adult inmates and accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offenders withinclose proximity to each other. Sound contact is defined as direct verbal communication betweenadult inmates and accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offenders.No child shall enter pursuant to public authority, for any amount of time, in secure custody in asecure section of a jail, lockup, or correctional facility for adults as a disposition of an offense oras a means of modifying his or her behavior (e.g., Shock Incarceration or Scared Straight).(e) Except as provided above, in providing detention and shelter or other care for childrenreferred to or coming under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, the juvenile court shall utilizeonly those facilities as have been established, licensed, or approved by the Department of YouthServices or Department of Human Resources for those purposes.(f) After October 1, 1991, the Department of Youth Services shall accept all children committedto it within seven days of notice of disposition.(g) Except as provided above, the official in charge of a jail or lockup for the detention of adultoffenders or persons charged with crimes shall inform the juvenile court immediately when achild, who is or appears to be a child as defined by this chapter, is received at the jail or lockup,Upon request, the official shall deliver the child to the juvenile court or transfer him or her to ajuvenile detention facility designated by the juvenile court.59

(h) The Department of Youth Services shall continue to develop and implement a statewidesystem of juvenile detention facilities which shall be licensed by the Department of YouthServices for the detention of children.(i) The Department of Youth Services shall subsidize the detention of children in the juveniledetention facilities in an amount up to one half the average cost of detention, which term isdefined in this article, the amount depending on the provision of funds by the Legislature to theDepartment of Youth Services. Juvenile detention facilities may contract with the Department ofYouth Services or other counties for the detention of children.(j) When a case is transferred to another court for criminal prosecution, the child shall betransferred to the appropriate officer or jail or lockup in accordance with the law governing thedetention of the person charged with criminal offenses.(k) Any law enforcement officer, at the direction of the juvenile court, shall provide security andtransportation services for the juvenile court in transporting children to and from juveniledetention facilities.”5. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-209 states,“Children to be released when full-time detention or shelter care not required; conditionsimposed upon release; amendment of conditions or return of child to custody upon failure toconform to conditions imposed.(a) When the juvenile court finds that full-time detention or shelter care of a child is not required,the juvenile court shall order the release of the child, and in so doing, may impose one or more ofthe following conditions:(1) Place the child in the custody of a parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, or any other personwhom the juvenile court deems proper, place the child with a department, agency, ororganization agreeing to supervise the child.(2) Place restrictions on the travel, association, or place of abode of the child during the period ofhis or her release, or place the child under electronic or telephone monitoring, if available.(3) Impose any other condition deemed reasonably necessary and consistent with the criteria fordetaining children specified in Section 12-15-128, including a condition requiring that the childreturn to custody as required.(b) An order releasing a child on any conditions specified in subsection (a) may at any time beamended to impose additional or different conditions of release or to return the child to custodyfor failure to conform to the conditions originally imposed.”6. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-215 states, in part,“Disposition of delinquent children or children in need of supervision generally.60

(a) If the juvenile court finds on proof beyond a reasonable doubt, based upon comment,material, and relevant evidence, that a child committed the acts by reason of which the child isalleged to be delinquent or in need of supervision, it may proceed immediately to hear evidenceas to whether the child is in need of care or rehabilitation and to file its findings thereon. In theabsence of evidence to the contrary, a finding that the child has committed an act whichconstitutes a felony is sufficient to sustain a finding that the child is in need of care orrehabilitation. If the juvenile court finds that the child is not in need of care or rehabilitation, itshall dismiss the proceedings and discharge the child from any detention or other temporary caretheretofore ordered. If the juvenile court finds that the child is in need of care or rehabilitation, itmay make any of the following orders or dispositions, subject to the limitations and prohibitionson secure custody contained in Section 12-15-208:(1) Permit the child to remain with the parent, legal guardian, or other legal custodian of thechild, subject to the conditions and limitations the juvenile court may prescribe.(2) Place the child on probation pursuant to conditions and limitations the juvenile court mayprescribe.(3) Transfer legal and physical custody to any of the following:a. The Department of Youth Services, with or without an order to a specific institution.b. In the case of a child in need of supervision, the Department of Youth Services, or theDepartment of Human Resources; provided however (i) that prior to any transfer of custody tothe Department of Human Resources, the case shall first be referred to the county children’sservices facilitation team, which must proceed according to Article 5; and (ii) that the child’scommission of one or more status offenses shall not constitute a sufficient basis for transfer oflegal or physical custody to the Department of Human Resources. Upon referral to the countychildren’s services facilitation team, the juvenile probation officer shall continue to provide casemanagement to the status offender unless the county children’s services facilitation teamappoints another person to act as case manager. The juvenile probation officer shall participatein county children’s services facilitation team meetings and share records information andreports on the status offender with the county children’s services facilitation team. When thejuvenile court transfers legal and physical custody to the Department of Human Resources, allrequirements which shall be met for a child to be eligible for federal funding shall apply,including, but not limited to, the requirements set out in Sections 12-15-312, 12-15-315, and 12-15-317.c. A local, public, or private agency, organization, or facility willing and able to assume theeducation, care, and maintenance of the child and which is licensed or otherwise authorized bylaw to receive and provide care for children.d. During the term of supervision, a relative or other individual who is found by the juvenilecourt to be qualified to receive and care for the child.61

(4) Make any other order as the juvenile court in its discretion shall deem to be for the welfareand best interests of the child, including random drug screens, assessment of fines not to exceedtwo hundred fifty dollars ($250), and restitution against the parent, legal guardian, legalcustodian, or child, as the juvenile court deems appropriate. Costs for juvenile court-ordereddrug screening may be ordered paid for by the state out of moneys appropriated as “court costsnot otherwise provided for.” Restitution against the parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, orchild shall be governed by the same principles applicable in the Restitution to Victims of CrimeAct, commencing with Section 15-18-65.(5) Direct the parent, legal guardian, or legal custodian of the child to perform reasonable acts asare deemed necessary to promote the best interests of the child.(6) In any case where a child is adjudicated delinquent for possessing a pistol, short-barreledrifle, or short-barreled shotgun, any pistol, short-barreled rifle, or short-barreled shotgunpossessed by that child is forfeited and shall be ordered to be destroyed by the juvenile court.(b) No child by virtue of a disposition pursuant to this section shall be committed or transferredto a penal institution or other facility used for the execution of sentences of persons convicted ofa crime.(c) No child in need of supervision, unless also a delinquent child, shall be ordered to be placedin an institution or facility established for the care and rehabilitation of delinquent childrenunless the juvenile probation officer submits a written recommendation and the juvenile courtfinds upon a further hearing that the child is not amenable to treatment or rehabilitation pursuantto any prior disposition.In determining if a child is not amenable to treatment or rehabilitation, the juvenile court shallconsider evidence of the following and other relevant factors:(1) Prior treatment efforts, such as, but not limited to:a. Mental health counseling, if any.b. Individualized educational plans, if any.c. Other educational records.d. Individualized service plans, if any.(2) The age of the child.(3) The history of the child being involved with the juvenile court, including, but not limited to,informal adjustments, consent decrees, adjudications, and prior placements.(4) Other factors contributing to the behavioral difficulties of the child.62

The written recommendation of the juvenile probation officer shall include evidence of theforegoing and other relevant factors.”7. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §44-1-27(a) states that the DYS is responsible forestablishing criteria for juvenile detention and short-term (collocated) facilities, as follows,“(a) The Department of Youth Services shall establish and promulgate reasonable minimumstandards for the construction and operation of detention facilities, programs for the preventionand correction of youth delinquency, consultation from local officials, and subsidies to localdelinquency projects. The standards shall include, but not be limited to, reasonable minimumstandards for detention facilities, foster care facilities, group homes, and correctional institutions.(b) No county, city, public or private agency, group, corporation, partnership, or individual shallestablish, maintain, or operate any detention facility or any foster care facility for youths founddelinquent or in need of supervision by a juvenile court without a license from the department. Alicense shall be required on an annual basis or as determined by the department. The departmentshall revoke the license of any city, county, or public or private agency, group, corporation, orindividual conducting, operating or acting as a detention facility or foster care facility caring forchildren and youths alleged or adjudged to be delinquent or in need of supervision that fails tomeet the standards prescribed by the department. The department may visit and inspect anypublic or voluntary detention facility, foster care facility, or group home as it deems necessary.”The DYS criteria established in the Alabama Administrative Code at Rule 950-1-2-.01, etseq., pertaining to the Interstate Compact on Juveniles, and at Rule 950-3-2-.01, et seq.,pertaining to runaway procedure, prohibit the detention of runaways and nonoffenders. Thesestatus offenders, when held in secure facilities, would not be held in violation of State law butwould, instead, be held in violation of these established executive policies/practices. Suchpolicies are established in the Alabama Administrative Code at Rule 950-4-9-.01, et seq.,pertaining to minimum standards for short term detention facilities.Code of Alabama 1975, §28-3A-25(a)(19), currently provides for the offense of a minorin possession of alcohol as a misdemeanor offense rather than as a status offense. Therefore, anystatus offender held on the charge of a minor in possession of alcohol is not held in violation ofState statutory law. Code of Alabama 1975, §28-3A-25(a)(19) states,“Unlawful acts and offenses; penalties.(a) It shall be unlawful:* * *(19) For any person under the legal drinking age, as defined in Section 28-1-5, to attempt topurchase, to purchase, consume, possess, or to transport any alcoholic beverages within the state;provided, however, it shall not be unlawful for a person under the legal drinking age, as definedin Section 28-1-5, to be an employee of a wholesale licensee or an off-premises retail licensee ofthe board to handle, transport, or sell any beer or table wine if the person under the legal drinkingage is acting within the line and scope of his or her employment while so acting. There must bean adult licensee, servant, agent, or employee of the same present at all times a licensedestablishment is open for business.”63

Further, in February 2002, the AOC distributed a policy letter and two court forms thataddress the detention of adjudicated (sentenced) status offenders for a contempt of court charge.Such policy letter and forms are consistent with the JJDP Act’s requirements. From 2002forward, statewide training has been provided by the AOC to the users/implementers of saidpolicy and court forms. This information has been submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP as aportion of the ADECA LETS Division’s annual Alabama Compliance Monitoring Report for2002 and thereafter.In accordance with the above-stated requirements, the State has developed a plan toaddress the secure detention of status offenders in juvenile detention facilities and approvedcollocated facilities. The plan includes the following 8 components:1. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to State statutorylaws and rules of procedure so that they continue to reflect the JJDP Act’s requirements.2. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to thecompliance monitoring universe, which involves the list of facilities to be monitored forcompliance with the JJDP Act’s core requirements. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by asubgrantee to the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division, which is Auburn University atMontgomery and its Alabama Crime Prevention Clearinghouse and Training Institute (AUMACPCTI), and its subcontractors, Mrs. Sandra Nesbit-Manning of Juvenile Justice Associates inFort Collins, Colorado, and Mr. Mike Rollins of RMR Consultation and Compliance, LLC, inAnniston, Alabama, wherein they collect the most recent information on secure and nonsecurefacilities that may hold juveniles in accordance with statutory authority.]3. Annually conducting on-site monitoring visits to facilities included in the compliancemonitoring universe as a means of assuring the proper classification of youth in those facilities,the proper recording of DSO violations in those facilities, and the accurate collection and properretention of necessary core requirement data by those facilities. [NOTE: This activity isconducted by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]4. Annually conducting training for the State’s juvenile court judges and juvenile probationofficers on the core requirements of the JJDP Act as well as on the proper use of the valid courtorder (VCO) and exceptions thereto. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by the AlabamaAdministrative Office of Courts (AOC), and by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]5. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to the DYSstandards so that they come into, or continue to be in, compliance with the JJDP Act standards.[NOTE: This is conducted by the AOC, and by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]6. Annually conducting on-site monitoring visits to facilities included in the compliancemonitoring universe as a means of assuring that status offenders are properly held in a nonsecureenvironment in accordance with the DSO requirement. [NOTE: This activity is conducted byAUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]64

7. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to the DSOpolicies and plans implemented within certain facilities included in the compliance monitoringuniverse, and that proper valid court order (VCO) protocols are developed and implemented atthese facilities. [NOTE: This is conducted by the AOC, and by AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors.]8. Continuing the development and implementation of the AOC’s coordinatedcomprehensive juvenile justice automated computer information-sharing system to allappropriate juvenile justice professionals in the State, which involves the project’s funding,organization and secure access, infrastructure development, equipment installation, system pilottestingof software, and training of the system’s users. Such information-sharing system allowsthe facilities included in the compliance monitoring universe to timely submit relevant DSO datarelated to the secure and nonsecure detention of juveniles. [NOTE: This is conducted by theAOC under the guidance of an oversight committee appointed by the Alabama Supreme Court’sChief Justice, and is tasked with ensuring the timely development and implementation of saidsystem.]Resources that are expended to conduct these activities include (1) financial resources, inthat USDOJ OJP OJJDP juvenile justice grant program funds are subgranted from the ADECALETS Division to the AOC, and to the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors; (2) staff personnelresources, in that this work is performed by staff members from the AOC and the AUMACPCTI; (3) contract personnel resources, in that some of this work is contracted by the AUMACPCTI to be performed by its subcontractors; and (4) office space, utilities, equipment,supplies, and other facilities (such as record keeping storage space, etc.) provided by theADECA LETS Division, the AOC, and the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.(b) Information on how the designated State agency and SAG willwork together to address circumstances in which DSO violations have occurred.Alabama’s Advisory Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (the StateAdvisory Group or “SAG”) serves a compliance monitoring role. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP andthe ADECA LETS Division present all requirements of the JJDP Act to new SAG members attheir organizational meeting following their appointment to the SAG by the Governor. The SAGthen establishes State juvenile justice program area priorities which are used to guide the SAG inmaking recommendations to the Governor regarding the award of subgrants throughout the Stateto implement those priorities.One priority is the monitoring of juvenile facilities for compliance with the JJDP Act’sDSO core requirement. As of October 1, 2007, the SAG has designated the AUM ACPCTI to bethe agency that will perform the DSO compliance monitoring activities and report the results ofsuch activities back to the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division. Thus, the SAG has voted tosubgrant juvenile justice Formula Program funds to the AUM ACPCTI for performing theState’s DSO compliance monitoring activities and reporting requirements effective October 1,2007. The results of said activities will continue to be reported to the ADECA LETS Divisionand the SAG – by the AUM ACPCTI – in the form of subgrantee quarterly narrative progressreports as well as in the form of Alabama’s Annual Compliance Monitoring Report which is65

submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP. By the information contained in the reports, the SAG willcontinue to be able to monitor the State’s compliance with the DSO requirement, makerecommendations to award continued subgrant funding, and make program implementation andcompliance priority adjustments when and where necessary.Alabama's SAG Chairman, Mr. Gerald H. Love (as of January 1, 2007), and SAG ViceChairman, Mr. Tim Bagwell, accompany the USDOJ OJP OJJDP SRAD's representatives andthe ADECA LETS Division's juvenile justice specialists during the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’sprogram site monitoring visits and juvenile jail compliance monitoring visits. SAG ChairmanLove and Vice Chairman Bagwell contribute to these annual federal compliance monitoringvisits by providing the federal monitors with explanations of the SAG's program priorities thatare used to make funding recommendations for these programs. In addition, other SAGmembers participate in the compliance monitoring activities by meeting with the federalmonitors during their entrance and/or exit interviews at the ADECA LETS Division'sheadquarters offices located in Montgomery, Alabama, to discuss program compliance, as wellas by meeting with the federal monitors during their site visits to the individual counties’programs.The State also provides the following assurances as part of its plan for compliance withthe DSO core requirement of the JJDP Act and the State’s plan for compliance monitoring:1. The Alabama Legislature, in enacting the former “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act”via the passage of Alabama Act No. 75-1205, as variously amended by Alabama Acts No. 90-674 and No. 97-621, and codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-1 through §12-15-176, andin enacting the new “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act” via the passage of Alabama Act No. 2008-277, and codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-101 et seq., established the State’s authorityto facilitate the care, protection, and discipline of children who come within the jurisdiction ofthe State’s juvenile courts, while acknowledging the responsibility of the State’s juvenile courtsto preserve the public peace and security. As such, Alabama’s statutory law at §12-15-101 etseq. mandates compliance with Section 223(a)(12)(A) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C.§5633(a)(12)(A); or, under the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC§5633(a)(11)(A)].2. The State has allocated resources (financial, personnel staff, equipment, supplies,and physical plant facilities) necessary to maintain the State’s compliance with Section223(a)(12) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(12); or, under the Consequences of JuvenileOffenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(11)]. The State will notify the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ifcircumstances arise which would jeopardize the State’s capability of maintaining compliancewith the DSO requirement.3. The State, through the DYS, has the statutory authority to, and shall, imposecensuring the license of any facility found to be out of compliance with the mandates of Section223(a)(12) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(12); or, under the Consequences of JuvenileOffenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(11)], which noncompliance could jeopardize theState’s capability of maintaining overall compliance with the DSO requirement.66

4. The State submits to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP an annual report that providesinformation on the progress made by the State in achieving DSO compliance. The State providesthat such juveniles, if placed in facilities, are placed in facilities which (i) are the least restrictivealternatives appropriate to the needs of the child and the community, (ii) are in reasonableproximity to the family and the home communities of such juveniles, and (iii) provide therequired services.As a result of these plan components, the State of Alabama has had a determination madethat the State is in compliance with Section 223(a)(12) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(12);or, under the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(11)]. See theUSDOJ OJP OJJDP’s letters of determination dated July 30, 2002, August 4, 2003, June 28,2004, October 26, 2004, September 6, 2005, March 8, 2006, November 21, 2006, May 9, 2007,September 5, 2007, July 15, 2008, September 16, 2008, July 13, 2009, October 2, 2009, July 7,2010, August 23, 2010, September 30, 2011, and December 1, 2011.B. Plan for Separation of Juveniles from Adult Offenders (Separation)With regard to the “sight and sound separation of juveniles from the adult jail population”(Separation) requirement made pursuant to the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(13) [or, under theConsequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(12)], the State mustdevelop a plan that provides that juveniles alleged to be or found to be delinquent and statusoffenders shall not have contact with an individual who has reached the age of full criminalresponsibility under applicable State law and has been arrested and is in custody for or awaitingtrial on a criminal charge, or is convicted of a criminal offense (i.e., adult inmates who areincarcerated because they have been convicted of a crime or are awaiting trial on criminalcharges). To this requirement, the State of Alabama states as follows.1. Trend analysis of the State’s Separation rates in preceding years, andthe nature of Separation violations.The statistics indicating and validating Alabama’s compliance with the Separationrequirement are reported in the form of Alabama’s Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that issubmitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP by March 30 th of each year. In reviewing these reports, atrend analysis can be done concerning Alabama’s Separation rates in preceding years (2011,2010, and 2009).As reported in Alabama’s 2011 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2012, the Separation statistics reveal that (i) for the number of public and private correctionalfacilities used for secure detention and confinement of both juvenile offenders and adultoffenders which did not provide sight and sound separation, the number of juvenile detentioncenters was zero, the number of juvenile training schools was zero, the number of adult jails waszero, and the number of adult lockups was zero; (ii) for the number of juvenile offenders andnonoffenders not sight and sound separated from adult criminal offenders, the number ofoffenders and nonoffenders in juvenile detention centers was zero, the number of offenders and67

nonoffenders in juvenile training schools was zero, the number of offenders and nonoffenders inadult jails was zero, and the number of offenders and nonoffenders in adult lockups was zero;and (iii) the number of collocated facilities within the State that utilize the same staff to workwith both juvenile and adult offenders was 3. These statistics indicate that the total number ofSeparation violations is zero, and as such, Alabama is considered to be in full compliance withthe Separation requirement. In response to Alabama’s 2011 Annual Compliance MonitoringReport that was electronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJPOJJDP on March 30, 2012, the ADECA LETS Division has not yet received the USDOJ OJPOJJDP's letter of determination wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP rules that the State has achievedcompliance with the Separation requirement outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(12).As reported in Alabama’s 2010 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2011 [NOTE: Alabama’s 2011 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011 was electronically submitted bythe ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP by the March 30, 2012 submissiondeadline, and remains open and available for questions to be asked and corrections to be madepending its final approval by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP later on in 2012], the Separation statisticsreveal that (i) for the number of public and private correctional facilities used for securedetention and confinement of both juvenile offenders and adult offenders which did not providesight and sound separation, the number of juvenile detention centers was zero, the number ofjuvenile training schools was zero, the number of adult jails was zero, and the number of adultlockups was zero; (ii) for the number of juvenile offenders and nonoffenders not sight and soundseparated from adult criminal offenders, the number of offenders and nonoffenders in juveniledetention centers was zero, the number of offenders and nonoffenders in juvenile trainingschools was zero, the number of offenders and nonoffenders in adult jails was zero, and thenumber of offenders and nonoffenders in adult lockups was zero; and (iii) the number ofcollocated facilities within the State that utilize the same staff to work with both juvenile andadult offenders was 4. These statistics indicate that the total number of Separation violations iszero, and as such, Alabama is considered to be in full compliance with the Separationrequirement. In response to Alabama’s 2010 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2011, the ADECA LETS Division received the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's letter of determinationdated December 1, 2011 wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ruled that the State had achieved fullcompliance with the Separation requirement outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(12).And as reported in Alabama’s 2009 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March23, 2010, the Separation statistics reveal that (i) for the number of public and private correctionalfacilities used for secure detention and confinement of both juvenile offenders and adultoffenders which did not provide sight and sound separation, the number of juvenile detentioncenters was zero, the number of juvenile training schools was zero, the number of adult jails waszero, and the number of adult lockups was zero; (ii) for the number of juvenile offenders andnonoffenders not sight and sound separated from adult criminal offenders, the number of68

offenders and nonoffenders in juvenile detention centers was zero, the number of offenders andnonoffenders in juvenile training schools was zero, the number of offenders and nonoffenders inadult jails was zero, and the number of offenders and nonoffenders in adult lockups was zero;and (iii) the number of collocated facilities within the State that utilize the same staff to workwith both juvenile and adult offenders was 3. These statistics indicate that the total number ofSeparation violations is zero, and as such, Alabama is considered to be in full compliance withthe Separation requirement. In response to Alabama’s 2009 Annual Compliance MonitoringReport that was electronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJPOJJDP on March 23, 2010, the ADECA LETS Division received the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's letterof determination dated August 23, 2010 wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ruled that the State hadachieved full compliance with the Separation requirement outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC§5633(a)(12).2. Strategy for maintaining compliance with Separation, including adescription of State or local laws impacting compliance, and information on how thedesignated State agency and SAG will work together to address circumstances in whichSeparation violations have occurred (specific activities, timetable covering the three-yearplanning cycle, and resources to support the implementation of the plans).(a)Description of State or local laws impacting compliance.The State has enacted the following legislation which the State implements to complywith the “sight and sound separation of juveniles from the adult jail population” (Separation)requirement of the JJDP Act:1. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-208 (c), (d), (e), and (g). This legislation isfurther detailed below, and states as follows:“Facilities to be used for detention or shelter care of children generally; when child may bedetained in jail or other facility for detention of adults; notification of juvenile court, when childreceived at facility for detention of adult offenders or persons charged with crimes; developmentof statewide system; Department of Youth Services to subsidize detention in regional facilities,may contract for detention; transfer of child to detention facility, when case transferred fromjuvenile court for criminal prosecution.* * *(c) Compliance with jail removal. No person under the age of 18 years shall be detained orconfined in any jail or lockup for adults except for the following exceptions:(1) A child may be detained in a jail or lockup for adults for up to 6 hours while processing thecase of the child.(2) A child transferred for criminal prosecution pursuant to Section 12-15-203 may be detainedin a jail or lockup for adults.(3) A person charged pursuant to Section 12-15-204 may be detained in a jail or lockup foradults.69

When a case is transferred to another court for criminal prosecution, the person shall betransferred to the appropriate officer or jail or lockup in accordance with the law governing thedetention of the person charged with the crime. Jails and lockups used for holding adults shallnot hold status offenders in secure custody at any time. An accused status offender may bedetained in a nonsecure area of a jail or lockup for processing while waiting transportation to anonsecure shelter care facility or a juvenile detention facility or while waiting for release to aparent, legal guardian, or legal custodian.Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a circuit court judge exercising criminal jurisdictionfrom recommending that a child described in subdivision (2) or (3) should be placed in a juveniledetention center instead of an adult jail or lockup.(d) Compliance with Separation. Accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offendersshall not have contact with adult inmates, including trusties. Contact is defined to include anyphysical or sustained sight and sound contact. Sight contact is defined as clear visual contactbetween adult inmates and accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offenders withinclose proximity to each other. Sound contact is defined as direct verbal communication betweenadult inmates and accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offenders.No child shall enter pursuant to public authority, for any amount of time, in secure custody in asecure section of a jail, lockup, or correctional facility for adults as a disposition of an offense oras a means of modifying his or her behavior (e.g., Shock Incarceration or Scared Straight).(e) Except as provided above, in providing detention and shelter or other care for childrenreferred to or coming under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, the juvenile court shall utilizeonly those facilities as have been established, licensed, or approved by the Department of YouthServices or Department of Human Resources for those purposes.* * *(g) Except as provided above, the official in charge of a jail or lockup for the detention of adultoffenders or persons charged with crimes shall inform the juvenile court immediately when achild, who is or appears to be a child as defined by this chapter, is received at the jail or lockup.Upon request, the official shall deliver the child to the juvenile court or transfer him or her to ajuvenile detention facility designated by the juvenile court.”Also, the State is allowed to use the same staff to serve both the adult and juvenilepopulations in approved collocated juvenile detention facilities, but the State must have a Statepolicy in effect that requires individuals who work with both juveniles and adult inmates to betrained and certified to work with juveniles. To comply with this requirement, the State ofAlabama abides by the following:2. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §44-1-27(a);3. Alabama Administrative Code at Rule 950-4-2-.01 et seq.; and4. DYS Minimum Standards for Short-Term (Maximum 72 hours) Detention,Section D: Training and Staff Development.70

2. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §44-1-27(a) states,“Standards for programs and youth detention facilities; licensing and inspection of youthdetention and foster care facilities.(a) The Department of Youth Services shall establish and promulgate reasonable minimumstandards for the construction and operation of detention facilities, programs for the preventionand correction of youth delinquency, consultation from local officials, and subsidies to localdelinquency projects. The standards shall include, but not be limited to, reasonable minimumstandards for detention facilities, foster care facilities, group homes, and correctionalinstitutions.”The standards that have been promulgated in accordance with §44-1-27(a) are containedin the rules published in the Alabama Administrative Code, more specifically at Rule950-4-2-.01, and in the DYS Minimum Standards for Short-Term (Maximum 72 hours)Detention, more specifically at “Section D: Training and Staff Development.”3. Alabama Administrative Code at Rule 950-4-2-.01 states,“950-4-2-.01 ACA Minimum Standards for Juvenile Detention Facilities, 1983, Including the1990 Supplement.The Department of Youth Services is adopting the [American Correctional Association] ACAMinimum Standards for Juvenile Detention Facilities, 1983, and as subsequently amended. . . . ”The staff training and certification requirements are contained in the ACA MinimumStandards for Juvenile Detention Facilities, 1983, as amended. Such training includes securityprocedures, supervision of juveniles, signs of suicide risks and suicide precautions, reportwriting, use of force regulations and restraint techniques, juvenile rules and regulations, rightsand responsibilities of juveniles, fire and emergency procedures, safety procedures, key control,interpersonal relations, social and cultural lifestyles of the juvenile population, communicationskills, first aid and CPR, communicable diseases, counseling techniques, and cultural diversity.Each activity must be part of the overall training program.Once the training and certification is obtained pursuant to the ACA Minimum Standardsfor Juvenile Detention Facilities, 1983, as amended, then additional detention facility training isprovided for staff specific to the individual/respective detention facility wherein they will beworking with the juvenile population. This training is provided to the staff prior to theirassumption of duties at the facility. Such training includes a formal agenda and instruction by ateacher, manager, or official; and physical training or other instruction programs that include atrainer/trainee relationship. Such training also includes requirements for completion, attendancerecording, and a system of recognition of completion. Such training includes orientation of thehistorical perspective of the juvenile detention system and the particular detention facility,detention facility emergency plans, detention facility and program goals and objectives, programrules and regulations, job responsibilities, personnel policies, juvenile supervision, reportpreparation, and medical administration. Subsequent to this facility orientation, alladministrative, managerial, and professional staff receive annual training in addition to theirorientation training. The subsequent training can be obtained by personnel on site, at an71

academy or training center, an institution of higher learning, continuing education professionalmeetings, or through contract service or closely-supervised on-the-job training. Such continuingeducation involves general management, labor law, employee-management relations, thejuvenile justice system, and relationships with other service agencies.4. DYS Minimum Standards for Short-Term (Maximum 72 hours) Detention, madeeffective as of December 8, 1995, and particularly at pages 5-6 concerning “Section D: Trainingand Staff Development,” states,“Section D: Training and Staff Development.M1D-01 The short-term detention facility provides that all new employees who providedirect care receive twenty-four (24) hours orientation training prior to undertaking theirassignments. This training includes at a minimum: (M = Mandatory)- orientation to the purpose, goals, policies and procedures of the facility- working conditions and regulations- employee rights and responsibilities- CPR and first aid- signs of suicide risk- suicide precautions- fire and emergency procedures- severe weather emergency procedures- medical emergency procedures.M1D-02 The short-term detention facility provides that all administrative and managerialpersonnel receive 40 hours training each year that includes:- general management- labor law- staff/management relations- the juvenile justice system- relationships with other service agencies.M1D-03 The short-term detention facility provides that all new juvenile careworkersreceive additional forty (40) hours training for full-time employees and 20 hours training forpart-time employees during their first year of employment and each year thereafter which coversat a minimum the following: (M = Mandatory)- CPR (each year)- First aid (every 3 years)- security procedures- supervision of juveniles- use-of-force regulations and tactics- report writing- juvenile rules and regulations- rights and responsibilities of juveniles- key control- signs of suicide72

- all emergency procedures.M1D-04 All volunteers receive formal orientation appropriate to their assignments andadditional training as needed.”The DYS conducts periodic reviews, drafts reports, and proposes administrative andlegislative changes where necessary concerning the DYS standards and licensing procedures as ameans of assuring that there is proper training and certification in place for the staff supervisingthe juvenile and adult populations within a collocated facility. Currently, the State is notexperiencing any problems with the Separation requirement involving adult inmates and juveniledetainees. This current lack of problems can be directly related to the above-described ACAtraining, facility orientation training, and continuing education training -- particularly the annualand semi-annual training that is conducted by DYS and the AOC for adult jail administrators,detention facility directors, and administrators of collocated facilities in Alabama, for thepurpose of addressing staffing and Separation issues, among other items. The training isconducted by staff members of the AOC, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manning, and isconducted at the AOC’s headquarters offices in Montgomery, Alabama, and at various locations(particularly at the juvenile detention facilities) throughout the State.In accordance with the above-stated requirements, the State has developed a plan toaddress the “sight and sound separation of juveniles from the adult jail population” (Separation)requirement. The plan includes the following 8 components:1. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to State statutorylaws and rules of procedure so that they continue to reflect the JJDP Act’s requirements.2. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to thecompliance monitoring universe, which involves the list of facilities to be monitored forcompliance with the JJDP Act’s core requirements. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by asubgrantee to the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division, which is Auburn University atMontgomery and its Alabama Crime Prevention Clearinghouse and Training Institute (AUMACPCTI), and its subcontractors, Mrs. Sandra Nesbit-Manning of Juvenile Justice Associates inFort Collins, Colorado, and Mr. Mike Rollins of RMR Consultation and Compliance, LLC, inAnniston, Alabama, wherein they collect the most recent information on secure and nonsecurefacilities that may hold juveniles in accordance with statutory authority.]3. Annually conducting on-site monitoring visits to facilities included in the compliancemonitoring universe as a means of assuring the proper classification of youth in those facilities,the proper recording of Separation violations in those facilities, and the accurate collection andproper retention of necessary core requirement data by those facilities. [NOTE: This activity isconducted by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]4. Annually conducting training for the State’s juvenile court judges and juvenile probationofficers on the core requirements of the JJDP Act. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by theAOC, and by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]73

5. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to the DYSstandards so that they come into, or continue to be in, compliance with the JJDP Act standards.[NOTE: This activity is conducted by the AOC, and by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]6. Annually conducting on-site monitoring visits to facilities included in the compliancemonitoring universe as a means of assuring that juveniles are properly held in a sight and soundseparate location away from the adult jail population, and that the core requirements areaddressed and met, as is allowed by USDOJ OJP OJJDP Formula Grants implementingregulations. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]7. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to the sight andsound separation standards, policies, and plans implemented within certain facilities included inthe compliance monitoring universe so that they come into, or continue to be in, compliance withthe JJDP Act, and so that proper sight and sound separate facilities to keep juveniles away fromthe adult jail population are developed and utilized. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by theAOC, and by the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]8. Continuing the development and implementation of the AOC’s coordinatedcomprehensive juvenile justice automated computer information-sharing system to allappropriate juvenile justice professionals in the State, which involves the project’s funding,organization and secure access, infrastructure development, equipment installation, system pilottestingof software, and training of the system’s users. Such information-sharing system allowsthe facilities included in the compliance monitoring universe to timely submit relevant datarelated to the sight and sound separation of juveniles in secure and nonsecure detention facilities.[NOTE: This is conducted by the AOC under the guidance of an oversight committee appointedby the Alabama Supreme Court’s Chief Justice, and is tasked with ensuring the timelydevelopment and implementation of said system.]Resources that are expended to conduct these activities include (1) financial resources, inthat USDOJ OJP OJJDP juvenile justice grant program funds are subgranted from the ADECALETS Division to the AOC and to the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors; (2) staff personnelresources, in that this work is performed by staff members from the AOC, and the AUMACPCTI; (3) contract personnel resources, in that some of this work is contracted by the AUMACPCTI to be performed by its subcontractors; and (4) office space, utilities, equipment,supplies, and other facilities (such as record keeping storage space, etc.) provided by theADECA LETS Division, the AOC, and the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.(b) Information on how the designated State agency and SAG willwork together to address circumstances in which Separation violations have occurred.Alabama’s Advisory Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (the StateAdvisory Group or “SAG”) serves a compliance monitoring role. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP andthe ADECA LETS Division present all requirements of the JJDP Act to new SAG members attheir organizational meeting following their appointment to the SAG by the Governor. The SAGthen establishes State juvenile justice program area priorities which are used to guide the SAG in74

making recommendations to the Governor regarding the award of subgrants throughout the Stateto implement those priorities.One priority is the monitoring of facilities for compliance with the JJDP Act’s Separationcore requirement. As of October 1, 2007, the SAG has designated the AUM ACPCTI to be theagency that will perform the Separation compliance monitoring activities and report the resultsof such activities back to the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division. Thus, the SAG has voted tosubgrant juvenile justice Formula Program funds to the AUM ACPCTI for performing theState’s Separation compliance monitoring activities and reporting requirements effective October1, 2007. The results of said activities will continue to be reported to the ADECA LETS Divisionand the SAG – by the AUM ACPCTI – in the form of subgrantee quarterly narrative progressreports as well as in the form of Alabama’s Annual Compliance Monitoring Report which issubmitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP. By the information contained in the reports, the SAG willcontinue to be able to monitor the State’s compliance with the Separation requirement, makerecommendations to award continued subgrant funding, and make program implementation andcompliance priority adjustments when and where necessary.Alabama's SAG Chairman, Mr. Gerald H. Love (as of January 1, 2007), and SAG ViceChairman, Mr. Tim Bagwell, accompany the USDOJ OJP OJJDP SRAD's representatives andthe ADECA LETS Division's juvenile justice specialists during the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’sprogram site monitoring visits and juvenile jail compliance monitoring visits. SAG ChairmanLove and Vice Chairman Bagwell contribute to these federal compliance monitoring visits byproviding the federal monitors with explanations of the SAG's program priorities that are used tomake funding recommendations for these programs. In addition, other SAG members participatein the compliance monitoring activities by meeting with the federal monitors during theirentrance and/or exit interviews at the ADECA LETS Division's headquarters offices located inMontgomery, Alabama, to discuss program compliance, as well as by meeting with the federalmonitors during their site visits to the individual counties’ programs.The State also provides the following assurances as part of its plan for compliance withthe Separation core requirement of the JJDP Act and the State’s plan for compliance monitoring:1. The Alabama Legislature, in enacting the former “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act”via the passage of Alabama Act No. 75-1205, as variously amended by Alabama Acts No. 90-674 and No. 97-621, and codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-1 through §12-15-176, andin enacting the new “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act” via the passage of Alabama Act No. 2008-277, and codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-101 et seq., established the State’s authorityto facilitate the care, protection, and discipline of children who come within the jurisdiction ofthe State’s juvenile courts, while acknowledging the responsibility of the State’s juvenile courtsto preserve the public peace and security. As such, Alabama’s statutory law at §12-15-101 etseq. mandates compliance with Section 223(a)(13)(A) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C.§5633(a)(13)(A); or, under the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC§5633(a)(12)(A)].2. The State has allocated resources (financial, personnel staff, equipment, supplies,and physical plant facilities) necessary to maintain the State’s compliance with Section75

223(a)(13) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(13); or, under the Consequences of JuvenileOffenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(12)]. The State will notify the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ifcircumstances arise which would jeopardize the State’s capability of maintaining compliancewith the Separation requirement.3. The State provides assurance that juveniles who have been transferred or waivedor are otherwise under the jurisdiction of a criminal court are moved to an adult facility orseparated from other juveniles in secure juvenile detention centers or correctional facilities oncethe youth reaches the State’s age of majority. This assurance is based on Code of Alabama, 1975at §12-15-208(c)(2), and (3) which state,“Facilities to be used for detention or shelter care of children generally; when child may bedetained in jail or other facility for detention of adults; notification of juvenile court, when childreceived at facility for detention of adult offenders or persons charged with crimes; developmentof statewide system; Department of Youth Services to subsidize detention in regional facilities,may contract for detention; transfer of child to detention facility, when case transferred fromjuvenile court for criminal prosecution.* * *(c) Compliance with jail removal. No person under the age of 18 years shall be detained orconfined in any jail or lockup for adults except for the following exceptions:* * *(2) A child transferred for criminal prosecution pursuant to Section 12-15-203 may be detainedin a jail or lockup for adults.(3) A person charged pursuant to Section 12-15-204 may be detained in a jail or lockup foradults.When a case is transferred to another court for criminal prosecution, the person shall betransferred to the appropriate officer or jail or lockup in accordance with the law governing thedetention of the person charged with the crime. Jails and lockups used for holding adults shallnot hold status offenders in secure custody at any time. An accused status offender may bedetained in a nonsecure area of a jail or lockup for processing while waiting transportation to anonsecure shelter care facility or a juvenile detention facility or while waiting for release to aparent, legal guardian, or legal custodian.Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a circuit court judge exercising criminal jurisdictionfrom recommending that a child described in subdivision (2) or (3) should be placed in a juveniledetention center instead of an adult jail or lockup.”4. The State, through the DYS, has the statutory authority to, and shall, imposecensuring the license of any facility found to be out of compliance with the mandates of Section223(a)(13) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(13); or, under the Consequences of JuvenileOffenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(12)], which noncompliance could jeopardize theState’s capability of maintaining overall compliance with the Separation requirement.76

5. The State submits to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP an annual report that providesinformation on the progress made by the State in achieving Separation compliance. The Stateprovides that such juveniles, if placed in facilities, are placed in facilities which (i) are the leastrestrictive alternatives appropriate to the needs of the child and the community, (ii) are inreasonable proximity to the family and the home communities of such juveniles, and (iii) providethe required services.As a result of these plan components, the State of Alabama has had a determination madethat the State is in compliance with Section 223(a)(13) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(13);or, under the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(12)]. See theUSDOJ OJP OJJDP’s letters of determination dated July 30, 2002, August 4, 2003, June 28,2004, October 26, 2004, September 6, 2005, March 8, 2006, November 21, 2006, May 9, 2007,September 5, 2007, July 15, 2008, September 16, 2008, July 13, 2009, October 2, 2009, July 7,2010, August 23, 2010, September 30, 2011, and December 1, 2011.C. Plan for Removal of Juveniles from Adult Jails and Lockups (Jail Removal)With regard to the “removal of juveniles from adult jails or lockups” requirement madepursuant to the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(14) [or, under the Consequences of JuvenileOffenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(13)], the State must develop a plan that provides nojuvenile shall be detained or confined in any adult jail or lockup, except as allowed by theUSDOJ OJP OJJDP's Guidance Manual for Monitoring Facilities Under the Juvenile Justiceand Delinquency Prevention Act of 2002, last revised and published in January 2007. If any ofthe three allowed exceptions (the six-hour hold exception, the rural removal exception, and thetransfer or waiver exception) to the secure holding of juveniles applies, then the State mustdescribe how each exception is utilized. To these requirements, the State of Alabama states asfollows.1. Trend analysis of the State’s Jail Removal rates in preceding years,and the nature of Jail Removal violations.The statistics indicating and validating Alabama’s compliance with the Jail Removalrequirement are reported in the form of Alabama’s Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that issubmitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP by March 30 th of each year. In reviewing these reports, atrend analysis can be done concerning Alabama’s Jail Removal rates in preceding years.As reported in Alabama’s 2011 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2012, the Jail Removal statistics reveal that (i) for the total number of accused juvenilecriminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails, adult lockups, and non-approved collocatedfacilities in excess of six (6) hours, the number of juveniles in adult jails was 7, and the numberof juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (ii) for the total number of accused juvenile criminal-typeoffenders held securely in adult jails, adult lockups, and non-approved collocated facilities forless than six (6) hours for purposes other than identification, investigation, processing, release toparent(s), transfer to court, or transfer to a juvenile facility following initial custody, the number77

of juveniles in adult jails was zero, and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (iii)for the total number of adjudicated juvenile criminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails,adult lockups, and non-approved collocated facilities in excess of six (6) hours prior to orfollowing a court appearance or for any length of time not related to a court appearance, thenumber of juveniles in adult jails was zero, and the number of juveniles in adult lockups waszero; (iv) if Alabama has received approval from the USDOJ OJP OJJDP to use the Removal(Rural) Exception (Alabama has neither requested nor received such approval), then the totalnumber of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offense who were held in excess of six (6) hoursbut less than forty-eight (48) hours awaiting an initial court appearance in areas meeting theRemoval Exception are reported as the number of juveniles in adult jails was zero, and thenumber of juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (v) if Alabama has received approval from theUSDOJ OJP OJJDP to use the Removal Exception (Alabama has neither requested nor receivedsuch approval), then the total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offense who wereheld in excess of forty-eight (48) hours but less than an additional forty-eight (48) hours awaitingan initial court appearance in areas meeting the Removal Exception due to conditions of distanceor lack of ground transportation are reported as the number of juveniles in adult jails was zero,and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (vi) if Alabama has received approvalfrom the USDOJ OJP OJJDP to use the Removal Exception (Alabama has neither requested norreceived such approval), then the total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offensewho were held in excess of twenty-four (24) hours but not more than an additional twenty-four(24) hours after the time such conditions as adverse weather allow for reasonably safe travel inareas meeting the Removal Exception are reported as the number of juveniles in adult jails waszero, and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero. These statistics indicate that thetotal number of Jail Removal violations is 51, indicating a rate of jail removal violations per100,000 population under the age of juvenile court jurisdiction is 4.50. To explain this rate,Alabama provided the following explanation:“Jail Removal Numerical De MinimisThe extent that noncompliance is significant or of slight consequenceA total of 44 status offenders were held in violation in 7 policedepartments between October 1, 2010 and September 30, 2011. A total of 7 accusedjuvenile criminal-type offenders were held over 6 hours in one adult jail. The plan toeliminate noncompliant Jail Removal incidents includes:On-site technical assistance will be provided by Alabama’s compliance monitorsto the violating facilities so as to discuss amendments to policies and procedures, stafftraining, and internal violation response plans. Continuing technical assistance will beavailed to all facilities experiencing compliance challenges.Beginning in January 2012, on a quarterly basis, Alabama’s compliance monitorswill request data from each law enforcement agency so as to assure timely response andaction to any potential concerns.Outreach to professional associations (including the Alabama SheriffsAssociation, the Alabama Association of Chiefs of Police, the Alabama Association ofJuvenile and Family Court Judges, the Alabama Association of Chief Juvenile ProbationOfficers, etc.) will be conducted by Alabama’s compliance monitors so as to access thoseassociations’ members in an effort to share JJDP Act information, resources, andupdates.”78

In response to Alabama’s 2011 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report, which waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2012, the ADECA LETS Division has not yet received the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's letter ofdetermination wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP rules that the State has achieved full compliancewith the Jail Removal requirement outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(13).As reported in Alabama’s 2010 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2011, the Jail Removal statistics reveal that (i) for the total number of accused juvenilecriminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails, adult lockups, and non-approved collocatedfacilities in excess of six (6) hours, the number of juveniles in adult jails was 2, and the numberof juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (ii) for the total number of accused juvenile criminal-typeoffenders held securely in adult jails, adult lockups, and non-approved collocated facilities forless than six (6) hours for purposes other than identification, investigation, processing, release toparent(s), transfer to court, or transfer to a juvenile facility following initial custody, the numberof juveniles in adult jails was zero, and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (iii)for the total number of adjudicated juvenile criminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails,adult lockups, and non-approved collocated facilities in excess of six (6) hours prior to orfollowing a court appearance or for any length of time not related to a court appearance, thenumber of juveniles in adult jails was zero, and the number of juveniles in adult lockups waszero; (iv) if Alabama has received approval from the USDOJ OJP OJJDP to use the Removal(Rural) Exception (Alabama has neither requested nor received such approval), then the totalnumber of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offense who were held in excess of six (6) hoursbut less than forty-eight (48) hours awaiting an initial court appearance in areas meeting theRemoval Exception are reported as the number of juveniles in adult jails was zero, and thenumber of juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (v) if Alabama has received approval from theUSDOJ OJP OJJDP to use the Removal Exception (Alabama has neither requested nor receivedsuch approval), then the total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offense who wereheld in excess of forty-eight (48) hours but less than an additional forty-eight (48) hours awaitingan initial court appearance in areas meeting the Removal Exception due to conditions of distanceor lack of ground transportation are reported as the number of juveniles in adult jails was zero,and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (vi) if Alabama has received approvalfrom the USDOJ OJP OJJDP to use the Removal Exception (Alabama has neither requested norreceived such approval), then the total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offensewho were held in excess of twenty-four (24) hours but not more than an additional twenty-four(24) hours after the time such conditions as adverse weather allow for reasonably safe travel inareas meeting the Removal Exception are reported as the number of juveniles in adult jails waszero, and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero. These statistics indicate that thetotal number of Jail Removal violations is 3.34, indicating a rate of jail removal violations per100,000 population under the age of juvenile court jurisdiction is 0.30. To explain this rate,Alabama provided the following explanation:“Jail Removal Numerical De MinimisThe extent that noncompliance is significant or of slight consequenceTwo (2) juvenile offenders were held securely in an adult jail over 6 hours, andone (1) juvenile was held securely in an adult jail with no charges – held for questioning79

only. These appear to be isolated instances reported at the close of the year. The plan toeliminate noncompliant Jail Removal incidents includes:On-site technical assistance will be provided by Alabama’s compliance monitorsto the violating facilities so as to discuss amendments to policies and procedures, stafftraining, and internal violation response plans. Continuing technical assistance will beavailed to all facilities experiencing compliance challenges.Outreach to professional associations (including the Alabama SheriffsAssociation, the Alabama Association of Chiefs of Police, the Alabama Association ofJuvenile and Family Court Judges, the Alabama Association of Chief Juvenile ProbationOfficers, etc.) will be conducted by Alabama’s compliance monitors so as to access thoseassociations’ members in an effort to share JJDP Act information, resources, andupdates.”In response to Alabama’s 2010 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March30, 2011, the ADECA LETS Division received the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's letter of determinationdated December 1, 2011 wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ruled that the State had achieved fullcompliance with the Jail Removal requirement outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(13).And as reported in Alabama’s 2009 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009, which Report waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March23, 2010 [NOTE: Alabama’s 2010 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report covering thereporting period of October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010 will be electronically submittedby the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP by the March 30, 2011 submissiondeadline], the Jail Removal statistics reveal that (i) for the total number of accused juvenilecriminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails, adult lockups, and non-approved collocatedfacilities in excess of six (6) hours, the number of juveniles in adult jails was zero, and thenumber of juveniles in adult lockups was 2; (ii) for the total number of accused juvenilecriminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails, adult lockups, and non-approved collocatedfacilities for less than six (6) hours for purposes other than identification, investigation,processing, release to parent(s), transfer to court, or transfer to a juvenile facility following initialcustody, the number of juveniles in adult jails was zero, and the number of juveniles in adultlockups was zero; (iii) for the total number of adjudicated juvenile criminal-type offenders heldsecurely in adult jails, adult lockups, and non-approved collocated facilities in excess of six (6)hours prior to or following a court appearance or for any length of time not related to a courtappearance, the number of juveniles in adult jails was zero, and the number of juveniles in adultlockups was zero; (iv) if Alabama has received approval from the USDOJ OJP OJJDP to use theRemoval (Rural) Exception (Alabama has neither requested nor received such approval), thenthe total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offense who were held in excess of six(6) hours but less than forty-eight (48) hours awaiting an initial court appearance in areasmeeting the Removal Exception are reported as the number of juveniles in adult jails was zero,and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (v) if Alabama has received approvalfrom the USDOJ OJP OJJDP to use the Removal Exception (Alabama has neither requested norreceived such approval), then the total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offensewho were held in excess of forty-eight (48) hours but less than an additional forty-eight (48)80

hours awaiting an initial court appearance in areas meeting the Removal Exception due toconditions of distance or lack of ground transportation are reported as the number of juveniles inadult jails was zero, and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero; (vi) if Alabama hasreceived approval from the USDOJ OJP OJJDP to use the Removal Exception (Alabama hasneither requested nor received such approval), then the total number of juveniles accused of acriminal-type offense who were held in excess of twenty-four (24) hours but not more than anadditional twenty-four (24) hours after the time such conditions as adverse weather allow forreasonably safe travel in areas meeting the Removal Exception are reported as the number ofjuveniles in adult jails was zero, and the number of juveniles in adult lockups was zero. Thesestatistics indicate that the total number of Jail Removal violations is 2, indicating a rate of jailremoval violations per 100,000 population under the age of juvenile court jurisdiction is 0.18.To explain this rate, Alabama provided the following explanation:“Jail Removal Numerical De MinimisThe extent that noncompliance is significant or of slight consequenceTwo juvenile offenders were held securely in an adult lockup over 6 hours in theValley, Alabama Police Department. These were isolated instances and staff changeswere made in response. On-going communication has been maintained with thedepartment found to be in violation. The plan to eliminate noncompliant Jail Removalincidents includes:On-site technical assistance has occurred with the violating facility to discussamendments to policies and procedures, staff training and internal violation responseplans. Continuing assistance will be availed to all facilities experiencing compliancechallenges.Compliance monitor will support and assist in the development of comprehensiveadult facility policies and procedures to assure compliance and well trained staff.Outreach to professional associations will be developed to access members in aneffort of sharing JJDP Act information, resources and updates.Arrange for training opportunities to be provided on the reauthorization of theJJDP Act.”In response to Alabama’s 2009 Annual Compliance Monitoring Report that waselectronically submitted by the ADECA LETS Division to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP on March23, 2010, the ADECA LETS Division received the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's letter of determinationdated August 23, 2010 wherein the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ruled that the State had achieved fullcompliance with the Jail Removal requirement outlined in the JJDPA at 42 USC §5633(a)(13).2. Strategy for maintaining compliance with Jail Removal, including adescription of State or local laws impacting compliance, and information on how thedesignated State agency and SAG will work together to address circumstances in whichJail Removal violations have occurred (specific activities, timetable covering the three-yearplanning cycle, and resources to support the implementation of the plans).(a)Description of State or local laws impacting compliance.81

The State has enacted the following legislation which the State implements to complywith the “removal of juveniles from adult jails or lockups” (Jail Removal) requirement of theJJDP Act:1. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-2012. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-208, and particularly (g);3. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-209;4. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-215;5. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-219; and6. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §44-1-8.This legislation is further detailed below:1. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-201 states,“Definitions. For purposes of this article, the following terms and phrases shall have thefollowing meanings:(1) AVERAGE COST OF DETENTION. The average cost of detention of children asdetermined from experience in Alabama and as computed by the Department of Youth Services.(2) CONSENT DECREE. An order, entered after the filing of a delinquency or child in need ofsupervision petition and before the entry of an adjudication order, suspending the proceedingsand placing the child under supervision pursuant to terms and conditions agreed to between thechild and his or her parent, legal guardian, or legal custodian and approved by the juvenile court.(3) NONOFFENDER. A child who is subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court forereasons other than the legally prohibited conduct of the child.(4) STATUS OFFENDER. A status offender is an individual who has been charged with oradjudicated for conduct that would not, pursuant to the law of the jurisdiction in which theoffense was committed, be a crime if committed by an adult. An adjudicated status offender whoviolates the terms of his or her probation or aftercare remains a status offender for purposes ofSection 12-15-208 (a)(1), unless the child is contemporaneously adjudicated for havingcommitted a delinquent act that is not a status offense. Status offenses include, but are notlimited to, the following:a. Truancy.b. Violations of municipal ordinances applicable only to children.c. Runaway.d. Beyond control.e. Consumption or possession of tobacco products.f. Possession and consumption of alcohol, which is a status offense by federal law, even thoughconsidered a delinquent act by state law.82

g. Driving under the influence pursuant to Section 32-5A-191(b), which is a status offense byfederal law, even though considered a delinquent act by state law.(5) VALID COURT ORDER. An order given by a juvenile court judge to a child who wasbrought before the juvenile court and made subject to the order; and who received, before theissuance of the order, the full due process rights guaranteed to the child by the Constitution of theUnited States.”2. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-208 states,“Facilities to be used for detention or shelter care of children generally; when child may bedetained in jail or other facility for detention of adults; notification of juvenile court, when childreceived at facility for detention of adult offenders or persons charged with crimes; developmentof statewide system; Department of Youth Services to subsidize detention in regional facilities,may contract for detention; transfer of child to detention facility, when case transferred fromjuvenile court for criminal prosecution.(a) Persons who shall not be detained or confined in secure custody include all of the following:(1) Status offenders. Effective October 1, 2009, status offenders, as defined in this article, shallnot be detained or confined in secure custody, except that a status offender who is charged withor who commits a violation of a valid court order may be detained in secure custody in a juveniledetention facility for up to 72 hours in any six-month period, provided that all conditions setforth in subdivision (3) of subsection (b) are satisfied. Short-term secure custody of accusedstatus offenders may be necessary, such as detention in a juvenile detention facility for a briefperiod, not exceeding 24 hours, prior to formal juvenile court action, for investigative purposes,for identification purposes, or for the purpose of allowing return of a status offender to theparent, legal guardian, or legal custodian. Detention for a brief period of time pursuant tojuvenile court authority may also be necessary in order to arrange for appropriate shelter careplacement. If a petition regarding an alleged status offender is filed in juvenile court and if it isdetermined that the alleged status offender is at imminent risk of being placed in the legal orphysical custody of the Department of Human Resources, the case shall be referred to the countychildren’s services facilitation team, and the procedures in Article 5 shall be followed. Uponreferral to the county children’s services facilitation team, the juvenile probation officer shallcontinue to provide case management to the status offender unless the county children’s servicesfacilitation team appoints another person to act as case manager. The juvenile probation officershall participate in count children’s services facilitation team meetings and share recordsinformation and reports on the status offender with the county children’s services facilitationteam.(2) Federal wards. Federal wards held beyond 24 hours in secure custody in state and localjuvenile detention facilities pursuant to a written contract or agreement with a federal agency andfor the specific purpose of affecting a jurisdictional transfer or appearance as a material witnessor for return to their lawful residence or country of citizenship shall be reported as violations ofthe deinstitutionalization of status offender requirement.83

(3) Nonoffenders. Nonoffenders, as defined in this article, shall not be detained or confined insecure custody.(4) Children 10 years of age and younger. Children 10 years of age and younger shall not bedetained or confined in secure custody, unless the children are charged with offenses causingdeath or serious bodily injury to persons or offenses that would be classified as Class A feloniesif committed by adults. Children 11 or 12 years of age may only be detained or confined insecure custody by orders of juvenile courts, unless the children are charged with offenses causingdeath or serious bodily injury to persons or offenses that would be classified as Class A feloniesif committed by adults.(b) Persons who may be detained or confined in secure custody include all of the following:(1) Persons who violate the federal law, which prohibits possession of a handgun by a childunder the age of 18 years, or who violate a similar state or municipal law, may be placed insecure custody in juvenile detention facilities.(2) Persons in custody pursuant to the Interstate Compact on Juveniles , contained in Section44-2-1, et seq., may be placed in secure custody in juvenile detention facilities.(3) Status offenders who violate a valid court order. A status offender who is charged with orhas committed a violation of a valid court order may be detained in secure custody in a juveniledetention facility for up to 72 hours in any six-month period. Status offenders who violate validcourt orders shall not be committed to the Department of Youth Services, nor shall they be heldin jails or lockups for adult offenders. For this valid court order exception to apply, thefollowing actions must occur whenever a status offender is taken into custody for violating avalid court order:a. The juvenile detention facility shall immediately notify the juvenile court intake or probationofficer that the child is being held in secure custody for violating a valid court order. The noticeshall include the date and time the child entered the juvenile detention facility.b. Within the first 24 hours during which a status offender is held in secure custody for violatinga valid court order, not including weekends or holidays, a juvenile court intake or probationofficer, or an authorized representative of the department or agency having custody orsupervision of the child, shall interview the child, in person.c. Within 48 hours of the admission of the status offender to secure custody for violating a validcourt order, not including weekends or holidays:1. The individual who interviewed the child shall submit a written assessment report to thejuvenile court regarding the immediate needs of the child; and2. If the juvenile court has not yet determined whether the child has, in fact, violated the order,the juvenile court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether there is reasonable cause tobelieve that the child violated the order and the appropriate placement of the child pendingdisposition of the alleged violation.84

(c) Compliance with jail removal. No person under the age of 18 years shall be detained orconfined in any jail or lockup for adults except for the following exceptions:(1) A child may be detained in a jail or lockup for adults for up to 6 hours while processing thecase of the child.(2) A child transferred for criminal prosecution pursuant to Section 12-15-203 may be detainedin a jail or lockup for adults.(3) A person charged pursuant to Section 12-15-204 may be detained in a jail or lockup foradults.When a case is transferred to another court for criminal prosecution, the person shall betransferred to the appropriate officer or jail or lockup in accordance with the law governing thedetention of the person charged with the crime. Jails and lockups used for holding adults shallnot hold status offenders in secure custody at any time. An accused status offender may bedetained in a nonsecure area of a jail or lockup for processing while waiting transportation to anonsecure shelter care facility or a juvenile detention facility or while waiting for release to aparent, legal guardian, or legal custodian.Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a circuit court judge exercising criminal jurisdictionfrom recommending that a child described in subdivision (2) or (3) should be placed in a juveniledetention center instead of an adult jail or lockup.(d) Compliance with Separation. Accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offendersshall not have contact with adult inmates, including trusties. Contact is defined to include anyphysical or sustained sight and sound contact. Sight contact is defined as clear visual contactbetween adult inmates and accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offenders withinclose proximity to each other. Sound contact is defined as direct verbal communication betweenadult inmates and accused or adjudicated delinquent children or status offenders.No child shall enter pursuant to public authority, for any amount of time, in secure custody in asecure section of a jail, lockup, or correctional facility for adults as a disposition of an offense oras a means of modifying his or her behavior (e.g., Shock Incarceration or Scared Straight).(e) Except as provided above, in providing detention and shelter or other care for childrenreferred to or coming under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, the juvenile court shall utilizeonly those facilities as have been established, licensed, or approved by the Department of YouthServices or Department of Human Resources for those purposes.(f) After October 1, 1991, the Department of Youth Services shall accept all children committedto it within seven days of notice of disposition.(g) Except as provided above, the official in charge of a jail or lockup for the detention of adultoffenders or persons charged with crimes shall inform the juvenile court immediately when a85

child, who is or appears to be a child as defined by this chapter, is received at the jail or lockup,Upon request, the official shall deliver the child to the juvenile court or transfer him or her to ajuvenile detention facility designated by the juvenile court.(h) The Department of Youth Services shall continue to develop and implement a statewidesystem of juvenile detention facilities which shall be licensed by the Department of YouthServices for the detention of children.(i) The Department of Youth Services shall subsidize the detention of children in the juveniledetention facilities in an amount up to one half the average cost of detention, which term isdefined in this article, the amount depending on the provision of funds by the Legislature to theDepartment of Youth Services. Juvenile detention facilities may contract with the Department ofYouth Services or other counties for the detention of children.(j) When a case is transferred to another court for criminal prosecution, the child shall betransferred to the appropriate officer or jail or lockup in accordance with the law governing thedetention of the person charged with criminal offenses.(k) Any law enforcement officer, at the direction of the juvenile court, shall provide security andtransportation services for the juvenile court in transporting children to and from juveniledetention facilities.”3. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-209 states,“Children to be released when full-time detention or shelter care not required; conditionsimposed upon release; amendment of conditions or return of child to custody upon failure toconform to conditions imposed.(a) When the juvenile court finds that full-time detention or shelter care of a child is not required,the juvenile court shall order the release of the child, and in so doing, may impose one or more ofthe following conditions:(1) Place the child in the custody of a parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, or any other personwhom the juvenile court deems proper, or place the child with a department, agency, ororganization agreeing to supervise the child.(2) Place restrictions on the travel, association, or place of abode of the child during the period ofhis or her release, or place the child under electronic or telephone monitoring, if available.(3) Impose any other condition deemed reasonably necessary and consistent with the criteria fordetaining children specified in Section 12-15-128, including a condition requiring that the childreturn to custody as required.(b) An order releasing a child on any conditions specified in subsection (a) may at any time beamended to impose additional or different conditions of release or to return the child to custodyfor failure to conform to the conditions originally imposed.”86

4. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-215 states, in part,“Disposition of delinquent children or children in need of supervision generally.(a) If the juvenile court finds on proof beyond a reasonable doubt, based upon comment,material, and relevant evidence, that a child committed the acts by reason of which the child isalleged to be delinquent or in need of supervision, it may proceed immediately to hear evidenceas to whether the child is in need of care or rehabilitation and to file its findings thereon. In theabsence of evidence to the contrary, a finding that the child has committed an act whichconstitutes a felony is sufficient to sustain a finding that the child is in need of care orrehabilitation. If the juvenile court finds that the child is not in need of care or rehabilitation, itshall dismiss the proceedings and discharge the child from any detention or other temporary caretheretofore ordered. If the juvenile court finds that the child is in need of care or rehabilitation, itmay make any of the following orders or dispositions, subject to the limitations and prohibitionson secure custody contained in Section 12-15-208:(1) Permit the child to remain with the parent, legal guardian, or other legal custodian of thechild, subject to the conditions and limitations the juvenile court may prescribe.(2) Place the child on probation pursuant to conditions and limitations the juvenile court mayprescribe.(3) Transfer legal and physical custody to any of the following:a. The Department of Youth Services, with or without an order to a specific institution.b. In the case of a child in need of supervision, the Department of Youth Services, or theDepartment of Human Resources; provided however (i) that prior to any transfer of custody tothe Department of Human Resources, the case shall first be referred to the county children’sservices facilitation team, which must proceed according to Article 5; and (ii) that the child’scommission of one or more status offenses shall not constitute a sufficient basis for transfer oflegal or physical custody to the Department of Human Resources. Upon referral to the countychildren’s services facilitation team, the juvenile probation officer shall continue to provide casemanagement to the status offender unless the county children’s services facilitation teamappoints another person to act as case manager. The juvenile probation officer shall participatein county children’s services facilitation team meetings and share records information andreports on the status offender with the county children’s services facilitation team. When thejuvenile court transfers legal and physical custody to the Department of Human Resources, allrequirements which shall be met for a child to be eligible for federal funding shall apply,including, but not limited to, the requirements set out in Sections 12-15-312, 12-15-315, and 12-15-317.c. A local, public, or private agency, organization, or facility willing and able to assume theeducation, care, and maintenance of the child and which is licensed or otherwise authorized bylaw to receive and provide care for children.87

d. During the term of supervision, a relative or other individual who is found by the juvenilecourt to be qualified to receive and care for the child.(4) Make any other order as the juvenile court in its discretion shall deem to be for the welfareand best interests of the child, including random drug screens, assessment of fines not to exceedtwo hundred fifty dollars ($250), and restitution against the parent, legal guardian, legalcustodian, or child, as the juvenile court deems appropriate. Costs for juvenile court-ordereddrug screening may be ordered paid for by the state out of moneys appropriated as “court costsnot otherwise provided for.” Restitution against the parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, orchild shall be governed by the same principles applicable in the Restitution to Victims of CrimeAct, commencing with Section 15-18-65.(5) Direct the parent, legal guardian, or legal custodian of the child to perform reasonable acts asare deemed necessary to promote the best interests of the child.(6) In any case where a child is adjudicated delinquent for possessing a pistol, short-barreledrifle, or short-barreled shotgun, any pistol, short-barreled rifle, or short-barreled shotgunpossessed by that child is forfeited and shall be ordered to be destroyed by the juvenile court.(b) No child by virtue of a disposition pursuant to this section shall be committed or transferredto a penal institution or other facility used for the execution of sentences of persons convicted ofa crime.(c) No child in need of supervision, unless also a delinquent child, shall be ordered to be placedin an institution or facility established for the care and rehabilitation of delinquent childrenunless the juvenile probation officer submits a written recommendation and the juvenile courtfinds upon a further hearing that the child is not amenable to treatment or rehabilitation pursuantto any prior disposition.In determining if a child is not amenable to treatment or rehabilitation, the juvenile court shallconsider evidence of the following and other relevant factors:(1) Prior treatment efforts, such as, but not limited to:a. Mental health counseling, if any.b. Individualized educational plans, if any.c. Other educational records.d. Individualized service plans, if any.(2) The age of the child.(3) The history of the child being involved with the juvenile court, including, but not limited to,informal adjustments, consent decrees, adjudications, and prior placements.88

(4) Other factors contributing to the behavioral difficulties of the child.The written recommendation of the juvenile probation officer shall include evidence of theforegoing and other relevant factors.”5. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-219 states,“Serious juvenile offenders; disposition; serious juvenile offender review panel; facility andprograms.(a) The juvenile court may find a child to be a serious juvenile offender if:(1) The child is adjudicated delinquent and the delinquent act or acts charged in the petitionwould constitute any of the following if committed by an adult:a. A Class A felony.b. A felony resulting in serious physical injury as defined in subdivision (14) of Section 13A-1-2.c. A felony involving deadly physical force as defined in subdivision (6) of Section 13A-1-2; ora deadly weapon as defined in subdivision (7) of Section 13A-1-2; or a dangerous instrument asdefined in subdivision (5) of Section 13A-1-2.(2) The child has been adjudicated delinquent for an act which would constitute a Class A or Bfelony or burglary in the third degree involving a residence and the child has previously beenadjudicated delinquent of two previous acts which would have been a Class A or B felony orburglary in the third degree involving a residence if the acts had been committed by an adult.(b) A child found to be a serious juvenile offender shall be committed to the custody of theDepartment of Youth Services, where he or she shall remain for a minimum of one year.(c) A serious juvenile offender review panel shall be created by the Board of the Department ofYouth Services. The serious juvenile offender review panel shall review quarterly the progressof each serious juvenile offender and determine at the end of the one-year term served by eachchild, a further treatment plan for that child. The panel may extend the commitment, orderalternative treatment, or release the child. The serious juvenile offender review panel shallprovide the juvenile court with all reports and recommendations, and notify the judge in writingof the decision to release the child at least 30 days in advance of the release.(d) The Department of Youth Services shall maintain and staff a separate, secure facility andimplement programs for serious juvenile offenders. The minimum one-year term required by thissection shall be served at the facility and the review panel may extend the period of confinementin the facility as determined necessary.(e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the juvenile court from transferring achild for criminal prosecution pursuant to Section 12-15-203.”89

6. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §44-1-8 states,“Confinement of youth in adult penal institutions.The department of youth services shall not have the power, by virtue of the vesting in it of thelegal custody of a youth or of anything contained in this chapter, to confine any youth in anyadult jail or adult penal institution now or hereafter established, except under conditions set forthin section 12-15-61 (now Section 12-15-201, 208).”Pursuant to Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-201, 208, there are presently 85 licensedfacilities for youth operating in the State. The licenses for these facilities are issued by the DYS.Of these facilities, 12 operate as licensed youth long term detention centers. These 12 licensedyouth long term detention centers operate as regional centers via a cooperative effort in that eachserves the juvenile clientele in its respective geographic region, but each will also accept andprovide services for juvenile clients from other regions if bed space permits. The remainingfacilities are dedicated facilities which primarily serve the juvenile clients in their respectivegeographic regions. However, they will accept juvenile clients from other geographic regions ifbed space permits.Of these 12 licensed youth long term detention centers, seven are located in the northernregion of the State and five are located in the southern region of the State. The northern regionfacilities include:1. Coosa Valley Regional Juvenile Detention Center in Anniston,2. East Alabama Regional Detention Center (also known as the Lee County YouthDetention Center) in Opelika,3. Jefferson County Youth Detention Center in Birmingham,4. Robert Neaves/Davis Center for Children in Huntsville,5. Shelby County Regional Juvenile Detention Center in Columbiana,6. Tennessee Valley Youth Services Detention Facility in Tuscumbia, and7. Tuscaloosa Regional Detention Center in Tuscaloosa.The southern region facilities include:8. Baldwin County Regional Juvenile Detention Center in Bay Minette,9. James T. Strickland Youth Center in Mobile,10. Montgomery County Youth Detention Facility in Montgomery,11. Southeast Alabama Youth Services Diversion Center in Dothan, and12. Dallas County Regional Juvenile Detention Center (Collocated) in Selma.If a youth detention facility is not immediately available for the detention of a juvenile inneed of bed space there, then Alabama’s statutory law authorizes such juvenile to be detained inan adult facility, but only under those certain conditions described in §12-15-208. At present,such juvenile may statutorily be detained in an adult jail or lockup for not more than 6 hours [see§12-15-208(c)(1)], but can be held longer if charged or transferred for criminal prosecution [see§12-15-208(c)(2), and (3)]. No specific distinction is made for facilities located in isolated andrural areas as opposed to facilities located in urban areas. This detention must be pursuant to acourt order and must comply with the following conditions: The detention must first be90

approved by the official or officer in charge of the jail. At the time the court order is issued, thejail must contain an available room in which the juvenile is detained separate and removed fromall contact with adult inmates. The jail must be able to provide adequate supervision over thejuvenile at the time the detention is ordered by the court. The official in charge of the adult jailmust inform the court immediately when the juvenile is received at the facility. And, the officialmust deliver the juvenile to the court upon the court’s request or transfer the juvenile to anotherdetention facility that has been designated by the court to receive the juvenile.All such adult facilities must be approved by the DYS prior to their use as detentionfacilities for juveniles. The ADECA LETS Division works directly with the DYS -- through theprogram’s compliance monitoring process -- to ensure close coordination in the operationsconducted for juveniles to be detained only in approved detention facilities within the State.Further, Alabama statutory law authorizes the State to execute a bond issue in order to raiserevenue for the purpose of constructing additional juvenile detention facilities across the State.The placement of juvenile detention facilities within easy access to the State’s population centerswill eliminate the need to travel long distances to these facilities from isolated and rural areas,and will allow for a reduction in the number of juveniles being detained in only a few facilities.Legislation has been utilized to address barriers to the State’s compliance with the JailRemoval requirement. While no major operational barriers are presently being encounteredwithin Alabama under the present law, previous to January 1, 2009, the statutory law stated that“juveniles may be detained in an adult jail or lockup for not more than 7 days,” and this wasconsidered to be a major statutory barrier which the State faced in achieving full compliance.That law came under review by the Alabama Legislature during the legislative sessionsconducted over the past several years. In each of those years, the AOC had submitted draftlegislation to alter this “7 days” provision so that the State law could be updated and brought intocompliance with the JJDP Act. In May 2008, the Legislature finally altered this “7 days”provision via the passage of the new “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act” (Alabama Act No. 2008-277), codified in the Code of Alabama, 1975, §12-15-101 et seq., which became effective onJanuary 1, 2009. The particular section that pertains to the revised “7 days” provision is nowcontained at §12-15-208(c)(1), (2), and (3), and is stated herein above.If and when operational barriers to Jail Removal do arise, the methods by which the Statehas chosen to overcome such barriers include the implementation of the 8 plan componentsidentified herein below. With regard to the former statutory barrier (the 7 day provision) and therevised law codified at §12-15-208(c)(1), (2), and (3) passed by the Alabama Legislature in May2008, the AOC conducts semi-annual training sessions for the State’s juvenile court judges,juvenile probation officers, jail administrators, jail personnel, detention center administrators andfacility personnel, and other interested personnel, instructing them on the proper implementationof and compliance with the JJDP Act’s Removal provisions. The training is conducted by staffmembers of the AOC. Additional training is provided by the AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors at various locations (particularly at the juvenile detention facilities) throughoutthe State.91

Legislation has also been utilized to address the six-hour hold exception, the ruralremoval exception, and the transfer or waiver exception. In this regard, the State of Alabamastates as follows:Six-hour hold exception: Under Section 223(a)(13)(A) of the JJDP Actand under the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's regulations, the USDOJ OJP OJJDP allows that a State mayuse a 6-hour period that permits the secure detention in an adult jail or lockup of those juvenilesaccused of committing criminal offenses (offenses which would be considered criminal acts ifcommitted by adults), in which the juvenile may be held by law enforcement in a secure adultjail or lockup facility for purposes of identification, processing, and to arrange for their transferor release. The 6-hour time period applies to a time period both before and after a courtappearance, for a maximum holding period not to exceed 6 hours. However, if this exception isused, the juvenile cannot have sight or sound contact with the incarcerated adults during the timewhich the juvenile is held in secure custody status in the adult jail or lockup.Alabama does utilize this 6-hour hold exception for juveniles, but only for theexception’s purposes of identification, processing, and arranging for the juvenile’s transfer orrelease from secure custody in the adult jail or lockup. This exception is now statutory in naturepursuant to the new “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act” via the passage of Alabama Act No. 2008-277, and codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-101 et seq., and more particularly at §12-15-208(c)(1), (2), and (3), and it is also via the operational policy directive issued from the ADECALETS Division to the AOC as a condition of the State’s receipt of Title II Part B Formula GrantProgram funds. As part of the State’s plan for Jail Removal, the AOC conducts semi-annualtraining sessions for the State’s juvenile judges, juvenile probation officers, jail administrators,jail personnel, facility directors, and other interested personnel, instructing them on the properimplementation of, and compliance with, the JJDP Act’s provisions. This training is provided toadult jail administrators, detention facility directors, and administrators of collocated facilities inAlabama, for the purpose of addressing jail removal issues, among other items. The training isconducted by staff members of the AOC at the AOC’s headquarters offices in Montgomery,Alabama, and at various locations (particularly at the juvenile detention facilities) throughout theState. Additional training is also provided by the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.The AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors also perform the annual compliancemonitoring duties for the ADECA LETS Division, and any discrepancies found during thismonitoring process are addressed immediately by the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors withthe respective facility’s administrative staff. The State’s latest efforts toward monitoring forcompliance with the 6 hour hold exception include having the AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors conduct Alabama’s 2011 compliance monitoring activities encompassing theperiod of October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011, and having the AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors conduct Alabama’s 2010 compliance monitoring activities encompassing theperiod of October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010. The ADECA LETS Division submittedthe 2010 Alabama Compliance Monitoring Report on March 30, 2011 to the USDOJ OJPOJJDP, and the ADECA LETS Division submitted the 2011 Alabama Compliance MonitoringReport on March 30, 2012 to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP. Contained in each Report was the findingthat Alabama did not have any 6-hour hold exception violations during the reporting periodbecause the State ensures that an adequate system of monitoring the State’s jails, lockups,92

detention facilities, correctional facilities, and non-secure facilities assist in the State'scompliance with the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s Jail Removal requirement.Rural removal exception: Under Section 223(a)(13)(B) of the JJDP Actand under the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's regulations, the USDOJ OJP OJJDP allows that a State mayhold a juvenile, who is accused of delinquent offenses and who is awaiting an initial courtappearance, in secure detention in an adult jail or lockup facility beyond the 6-hour time period ifthe juvenile is located in a rural area. This rural exception does not apply to status offenders,who may not be held for any length of time in an adult jail or lockup. Alabama does not utilizethis rural exception, as the State does not contain geographic areas so rural in nature from whichjuveniles accused of delinquent offenses could not be transported within their initial 6 hours ofcustody.Transfer or waiver exception: The USDOJ OJP OJJDP allows that aState may detain a juvenile in an adult jail or lockup if criminal felony charges have been filedagainst the juvenile in a court exercising criminal jurisdiction. The jail and lockup removalrequirement does not apply to those juveniles formally waived or transferred to criminal courtand against whom criminal felony charges have been filed, or to juveniles over whom a criminalcourt has original or concurrent jurisdiction and such court’s jurisdiction has been invokedthrough the filing of criminal felony charges. Alabama does utilize the transfer or waiverexception, but only for the exception’s purpose of detaining a juvenile in an adult jail or lockupbecause criminal felony charges have been filed against the juvenile in a court exercisingcriminal jurisdiction. This exception is statutory in nature to the extent that it is addressed inCode of Alabama, 1975 at §12-15-128, which states,“§12-15-128. Authority and criteria for continuation of detention or shelter care of childrentaken into custody beyond 72 hours.(a) An allegedly delinquent child, dependent child, or child in need of supervision lawfully takeninto custody shall immediately be released, upon the ascertainment of the necessary facts, to thecare, custody, and control of the parent, legal guardian, or legal custodian of the child or othersuitable person able to provide supervision and care for the child, unless the juvenile court orjuvenile court intake officer, subject to the limitations in Section 12-15-208, finds any of thefollowing:(1) The child has no parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, or other suitable person able toprovide supervision and care for the child.(2) The release of the child would present a clear and substantial threat of a serious nature to theperson or property of others and where the child is alleged to be delinquent.(3) The release of the child would present a serious threat of substantial harm to the child.(4) The child has a history of failing to appear for hearings before the juvenile court.93

(5) The child is alleged to be delinquent for possessing a pistol, short-barreled rifle, or shortbarreledshotgun, in which case the child may be detained in a juvenile detention facility until thehearing required by Section 12-15-207. Pistol as used in this section shall be as defined insubdivision (1) of Section 13A-11-70. Short-barreled rifle and short-barreled shotgun as used inthis section shall be as defined in Section 13A-11-62.(b) The criteria for continuing the allegedly delinquent child or child in need of supervision indetention or shelter or other care, or for continuing the allegedly dependent child in shelter orother care, as set forth in subsection (a) shall govern the decisions of all persons involved indetermining whether the continued detention or shelter care is warranted pending juvenile courtdisposition and those criteria shall be supported by clear and convincing evidence in support ofthe decision not to release the child.(c) In releasing a child, a juvenile court or the juvenile court intake officer may imposerestrictions on the travel, association, or place of abode of the child or place the child under thesupervision of a department, agency, or organization agreeing to supervise him or her, and mayplace the child under supervision such as electronic or telephone monitoring, if available. Achild, once placed in detention, may also be released pursuant to the same conditions shouldthere be a need to release the child from a juvenile detention facility because of an overcrowdedpopulation.”As a condition of the State’s receipt of Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds andas part of the State’s jail removal plan, the AOC conducts semi-annual training sessions for theState’s juvenile judges, juvenile probation officers, jail administrators, jail personnel, facilitydirectors, and other interested personnel, instructing them on the proper implementation of andcompliance with the JJDP Act’s provisions. The training is conducted by staff members of theAOC at the AOC’s headquarters offices in Montgomery, Alabama, and at various locations(particularly at the juvenile detention facilities) throughout the State. Additional training isconducted by the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.The AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors also perform the annual compliancemonitoring duties for the ADECA LETS Division, and any discrepancies found during thismonitoring process are addressed immediately by the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors withthe respective facility’s administrative staff. The State’s latest efforts toward monitoring forcompliance with the transfer or waiver exception include having the AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors conduct Alabama’s 2011 compliance monitoring activities encompassing theperiod of October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011, and having the AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors conduct Alabama’s 2010 compliance monitoring activities encompassing theperiod of October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010. The ADECA LETS Division submittedthe 2010 Alabama Compliance Monitoring Report on March 30, 2011 to the USDOJ OJPOJJDP, and the ADECA LETS Division submitted the 2011 Alabama Compliance MonitoringReport on March 30, 2012 to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP. Contained in each Report was the findingthat Alabama did not have any transfer or waiver exception violations during the reporting periodbecause the State ensures that an adequate system of monitoring the State’s jails, lockups,detention facilities, correctional facilities, and non-secure facilities assist in the State'scompliance with the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s Jail Removal requirement.94

In accordance with the above-stated statutory requirements, the State has developed aplan to address the JJDP Act’s "Jail Removal" requirement. The plan includes the following 8components:1. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to State statutorylaws and rules of procedure so that they continue to reflect the JJDP Act’s requirements.[NOTE: To address the former Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-61(d) and (e), which allowed thatjuveniles could be detained in an adult jail or lockup for not more than 7 days, the AOC hadissued a policy memo dated October 24, 2000, informing the State’s juvenile court judges of theJJDP Act’s Removal requirement. This statutory law was changed by the passage of AlabamaAct No. 2008-277 in May 2008, so that the Code of Alabama 1975 at §12-15-208 now allowsthat juveniles may statutorily be detained in an adult jail or lockup for not more than 6 hours [see§12-15-208(c)(1)], and longer if charged or transferred for criminal prosecution [see §12-15-208(c)(2), and (3)].2. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to thecompliance monitoring universe, which involves the list of facilities to be monitored forcompliance with the JJDP Act’s core requirements. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by asubgrantee to the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division, which is Auburn University atMontgomery and its Alabama Crime Prevention Clearinghouse and Training Institute (AUMACPCTI), and its subcontractors, Mrs. Sandra Nesbit-Manning of Juvenile Justice Associates inFort Collins, Colorado, and Mr. Mike Rollins of RMR Consultation and Compliance, LLC, inAnniston, Alabama, wherein they collect the most recent information on secure and nonsecurefacilities that may hold juveniles in accordance with statutory authority.]3. Annually conducting on-site monitoring visits to facilities included in the compliancemonitoring universe as a means of assuring the proper classification of youth in those facilities,the proper recording of jail removal violations in those facilities, and the accurate collection andproper retention of necessary core requirement data by those facilities. [NOTE: This activity isconducted by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]4. Annually conducting training for the State’s juvenile court judges and juvenile probationofficers on the core requirements of the JJDP Act, as well as on the proper use of the valid courtorder (VCO) and exceptions thereto. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by the AlabamaAdministrative Office of Courts (AOC), and by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]5. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to the DYSstandards so that they come into, or continue to be in, compliance with the JJDP Act standards.[NOTE: This is conducted by the AOC, and by AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.]6. Annually conducting on-site monitoring visits to facilities included in the compliancemonitoring universe as a means of assuring that no juvenile is detained or confined in any adultjail or lockup, except as is allowed by Alabama’s statutory law and the USDOJ OJP OJJDPFormula Grant Program implementing regulations. [NOTE: This activity is conducted by AUMACPCTI and its subcontractors.]95

7. Annually reviewing and recommending that necessary changes be made to the JailRemoval policies and plans implemented within certain facilities included in the compliancemonitoring universe, and that proper valid court order (VCO) protocols are developed andimplemented at these facilities. [NOTE: This is conducted by the AOC, and by AUM ACPCTIand its subcontractors.]8. Continuing the development and implementation of the AOC’s coordinatedcomprehensive juvenile justice automated computer information-sharing system to allappropriate juvenile justice professionals in the State, which involves the project’s funding,organization, infrastructure and secure access, equipment installation, system pilot-testing ofsoftware, and training of the system’s users. Such information-sharing system allows thefacilities included in the compliance monitoring universe to timely submit relevant data relatedto the secure and nonsecure detention of juveniles. [NOTE: This is conducted by the AOC underthe guidance of an oversight committee appointed by the Alabama Supreme Court’s ChiefJustice, and is tasked with ensuring the timely development and implementation of said system.]Resources that are expended to conduct these activities include (1) financial resources, inthat USDOJ OJP OJJDP juvenile justice grant program funds are subgranted from the ADECALETS Division to the AOC and to the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors; (2) staff personnelresources, in that this work is performed by staff members from the AOC and the AUMACPCTI; (3) contract personnel resources, in that some of this work is contracted by the AUMACPCTI to be performed by its subcontractors; and (4) office space, utilities, equipment,supplies, and other facilities (such as record keeping storage space, etc.) provided by theADECA LETS Division, the AOC, and the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors.(b) Information on how the designated State agency and SAG willwork together to address circumstances in which Jail Removal violations have occurred.Alabama’s Advisory Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (the StateAdvisory Group or “SAG”) serves a compliance monitoring role. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP andthe ADECA LETS Division present all requirements of the JJDP Act to new SAG members attheir organizational meeting following their appointment to the SAG by the Governor. The SAGthen establishes State juvenile justice program area priorities which are used to guide the SAG inmaking recommendations to the Governor regarding the award of subgrants throughout the Stateto implement those priorities.One priority is the monitoring of facilities for compliance with the JJDP Act’s JailRemoval core requirement. As of October 1, 2007, the SAG has designated the AUM ACPCTIto be the agency that will perform the Jail Removal compliance monitoring activities and reportthe results of such activities back to the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division. Thus, the SAGhas voted to subgrant juvenile justice Formula Program funds to the AUM ACPCTI forperforming the State’s Jail Removal compliance monitoring activities and reporting requirementseffective October 1, 2007. The results of said activities will continue to be reported to theADECA LETS Division and the SAG – by the AUM ACPCTI – in the form of subgranteequarterly narrative progress reports as well as in the form of Alabama’s Annual Compliance96

Monitoring Report which is submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP. By the information containedin the reports, the SAG will continue to be able to monitor the State’s compliance with the JailRemoval requirement, make recommendations to award continued subgrant funding, and makeprogram implementation and compliance priority adjustments when and where necessary.Alabama's SAG Chairman, Mr. Gerald H. Love (as of January 1, 2007), and SAG ViceChairman, Mr. Tim Bagwell, accompany the USDOJ OJP OJJDP SRAD's representatives andthe ADECA LETS Division's juvenile justice specialists during the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’sprogram site monitoring visits and juvenile jail compliance monitoring visits. SAG ChairmanLove and Vice Chairman Bagwell contribute to these federal compliance monitoring visits byproviding the federal monitors with explanations of the SAG's program priorities that are used tomake funding recommendations for these programs. In addition, other SAG members participatein the compliance monitoring activities by meeting with the federal monitors during theirentrance and/or exit interviews at the ADECA LETS Division's headquarters offices located inMontgomery, Alabama, to discuss program compliance, as well as by meeting with the federalmonitors during their site visits to the individual counties’ programs.The State also provides the following assurances as part of its plan for compliance withthe Jail Removal requirement of the JJDP Act and the State’s plan for compliance monitoring:1. The Alabama Legislature, in enacting the former “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act”via the passage of Alabama Act No. 75-1205, as variously amended by Alabama Acts No. 90-674 and No. 97-621, and codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-1 through §12-15-176, andin enacting the new “Alabama Juvenile Justice Act” via the passage of Alabama Act No. 2008-277, and codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-101 et seq., established the State’s authorityto facilitate the care, protection, and discipline of children who come within the jurisdiction ofthe State’s juvenile courts, while acknowledging the responsibility of the State’s juvenile courtsto preserve the public peace and security. As such, Alabama’s statutory law at §12-15-201, and208 authorizes compliance with Section 223(a)(14) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(14); or,under the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(13)] in that itprovides for juveniles to be detained in facilities that are in compliance with Section 223(a)(14);or, under the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(13).2. The State has allocated resources (financial, personnel staff, equipment, supplies,and physical plant facilities) necessary to maintain the State’s compliance with Section223(a)(14) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(14); or, under the Consequences of JuvenileOffenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(13)]. The State will notify the USDOJ OJP OJJDP ifcircumstances arise which would jeopardize the State’s capability of maintaining compliancewith the Jail Removal requirement.3. The State, through the DYS, has the statutory authority to, and shall, imposecensuring the license of any facility found to be out of compliance with the mandates of Section223(a)(14) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(14); or, under the Consequences of JuvenileOffenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(13)], which noncompliance could jeopardize theState’s capability of maintaining overall compliance with the Jail Removal requirement.97

4. The State submits to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP an annual report that providesinformation on the progress made by the State in achieving Jail Removal compliance. The Stateprovides that such juveniles, if placed in facilities, are placed in facilities which (i) are the leastrestrictive alternatives appropriate to the needs of the child and the community, (ii) are inreasonable proximity to the family and the home communities of such juveniles, and (iii) providethe required services.As a result of these plan components, the State of Alabama has had a determination madethat the State is in full compliance with Section 223(a)(14) of the JJDP Act [42 U.S.C.§5633(a)(14); or, under the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC§5633(a)(13)]. See the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s letters of determination dated July 30, 2002,August 4, 2003, June 28, 2004, October 26, 2004, September 6, 2005, March 8, 2006, November21, 2006, May 9, 2007, September 5, 2007, July 15, 2008, September 16, 2008, July 13, 2009,October 2, 2009, July 7, 2010, August 23, 2010, September 30, 2011, and December 1, 2011.D. Plan for Compliance Monitoring for the First Three Core Requirements ofthe JJDP ActWith regard to the “compliance monitoring” requirement made pursuant to the JJDPA at42 USC §5633(a)(15) [or, under the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC§5633(a)(14)], the State must provide for an adequate system of monitoring jails, lockups,detention facilities, correctional facilities, and non-secure facilities. The State must provide amonitoring plan that includes the following ten elements:1. Policy and Procedures2. Monitoring Authority3. Monitoring Timeline4. Violation Procedures5. Barriers and Strategies6. Definition of Terms7. Identification of the Monitoring Universe8. Classification of the Monitoring Universe9. Inspection of Facilities10. Data Collection and Verification.The State has enacted the following legislation which the State implements to complywith the “compliance monitoring” requirement of the JJDP Act, which mandates that the Statedevelop a plan which provides for an adequate system of monitoring jails, lockups, detentionfacilities, correctional facilities, and non-secure facilities so that they are in compliance with theseparation and jail removal requirements:1. Code of Alabama, 1975 at §44-1-27(a) and (b) state that the DYS is responsiblefor establishing criteria for juvenile detention and short-term (collocated) facilities, as follows,“(a) The Department of Youth Services shall establish and promulgate reasonable minimumstandards for the construction and operation of detention facilities, programs for the preventionand correction of youth delinquency, consultation from local officials, and subsidies to local98

delinquency projects. The standards shall include, but not be limited to, reasonable minimumstandards for detention facilities, foster care facilities, group homes, and correctional institutions.(b) No county, city, public or private agency, group, corporation, partnership, or individual shallestablish, maintain, or operate any detention facility or any foster care facility for youths founddelinquent or in need of supervision by a juvenile court without a license from the department.A license shall be required on an annual basis or as determined by the department. Thedepartment shall revoke the license of any city, county, or public or private agency, group,corporation, or individual conducting, operating or acting as a detention facility or foster carefacility caring for children and youths alleged or adjudged to be delinquent or in need ofsupervision that fails to meet the standards prescribed by the department. The department mayvisit and inspect any public or voluntary detention facility, foster care facility, or group home asit deems necessary.”Pursuant to this statutory authority, the DYS has established criteria in the AlabamaAdministrative Code at Rule 950-4-9-.01, et seq., pertaining to the minimum standards forjuvenile detention facilities, and these criteria are used for juvenile detention facility monitoringpurposes. The State, by and through the ADECA LETS Division, the AOC, and the AUMACPCTI, utilize said DYS criteria to implement the JJDP Act’s Title II Part B Formula GrantProgram compliance monitoring requirements in that the DYS administrative classifications areused as monitoring guidelines. Thus, in accordance with the above-stated statutory andadministrative rule requirements, the State has developed a plan to address the JJDP Act’scompliance monitoring requirement utilizing the 10 components. These are as follows:1. Policy and ProceduresThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State submit as an attachment to this ThreeYear Plan a copy of the State’s juvenile jail compliance monitoring policy and proceduresmanual. Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manual ismaintained within the ADECA LETS Division’s headquarters offices in Montgomery, Alabama.The Manual is updated annually by the ADECA LETS Division’s subgrantee, the AUMACPCTI and its subcontractors. A copy of Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance MonitoringPolicies and Procedures Manual is attached hereto this application at Attachment 5.2. Monitoring AuthorityThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the agency responsible for compliance monitoringshould have the legal authority to inspect and collect data from all facilities in which juvenilesmight be placed pursuant to public authority. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the Statesubmit as an attachment to this application a copy of the State’s legislative statute or executiveorder that provides the designated State agency with this authority. If this information isincluded in the State’s juvenile jail compliance monitoring policy and procedures manual, thenthe State must reference the specific page number or appendix number.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualreferences the specific legislative statute or executive order that provides for the legal authority99

to inspect and collect data from all facilities in which juveniles might be placed pursuant topublic authority. The ADECA LETS Division directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to“Pages 7-9” of Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manual(Attachment 5 hereto this application) for this information. All statutory legal authority can beobtained at the following website: www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeofAlabama/1975/coatoc.htm.In addition, the ADECA LETS Division states as follows:Alabama’s authority to monitor facilities that might hold juveniles pursuant to publicauthority for compliance with the DSO, Separation, and Jail Removal core requirements is notspecifically outlined by State law. Instead, the authority is delegated to the ADECA LETSDivision via Executive Order No. 5 issued on March 30, 1983, by Alabama Governor George C.Wallace. Executive Order No. 5 authorizes ADECA, by and through its Law EnforcementPlanning Division (now known as the ADECA LETS Division), to be the agency for supervisingthe preparation and administration of the State’s plan and the submission of applications to theOJJDP for federal grant funds to be allocated to the State for the purposes of implementing theJJDP Act within the State. Executive Order No. 5 also creates the Alabama Advisory Council onJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention [the State Advisory Group (SAG)] for the purposesof advising and making recommendations on matters relating to juvenile justice and delinquencyprevention within the State. As such grant programs are funded by the OJJDP, Executive OrderNo. 5 designates the ADECA LETS Division as the agency to administer those programs anddisburse their funds to the State’s units of local government and other qualifying entities forexpenditure on their juvenile justice programs. Thus, included in this authority pertaining togrants administration is the responsibility to conduct the State’s juvenile jail compliancemonitoring activities.Additional State agencies that may hold juveniles pursuant to public authority are alsotasked with the responsibility for promulgating facility standards, practices, and licensing. Theseagencies and statutory authorities include the following:1. The Alabama Department of Human Resources, pursuant to Alabama Act No.1951-703 (at page 1211, §6), Alabama Act No. 1978-359 (at page 300, §2), Alabama Act No.1991-671 (at page 1307, §1), and Alabama Act No. 1996-673 (at page 1139, §1), codified in theCode of Alabama (1975) at §38-2-6.2. The Alabama Department of Mental Health, pursuant to Alabama Act No. 1965-881 (at page 1649, §§8, 10), and Alabama Act No. 1984-242 (at page 365, §1), codified in theCode of Alabama (1975) at §22-50-11, §22-51-1 through 14.3. The Alabama Department of Youth Services, pursuant to Alabama Act No. 1973-816 (at page 1261, §1), codified in the Code of Alabama (1975) at §44-1-1 et seq.; and4. The Alabama Department of Corrections, pursuant to Alabama Act No. 1939-91(at page 118), codified in the Code of Alabama (1975) at §14-1-11.[NOTE: These statutes are contained in the Code of Alabama (1975) that can be accessed atwww.legislature.state.al.us/CodeofAlabama/1975/coatoc.htm.]100

3. Monitoring TimelineThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State must keep an annual calendar denotingwhen and where compliance monitoring will occur. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that theState submit as an attachment to this application a copy of the State’s monitoring timetable. Ifthis information is included in the State’s juvenile jail compliance monitoring policy andprocedures manual, then the State must reference the specific page number or appendix number.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualcontains the specific monitoring timeline that provides the ADECA LETS Division’s subgrantee,the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors with the timeline to inspect and collect data from allfacilities in which juveniles might be placed pursuant to public authority. The ADECA LETSDivision directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to “Pages 4-6” of Alabama’s Juvenile JailCompliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manual (Attachment 5 hereto this application)for this information.4. Violation ProceduresThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State must describe the legislative andadministrative procedures and sanctions that the State has established to receive, investigate, andreport compliance violations. Further, if an agency other than the designated State agency isresponsible for this monitoring, then the State must describe how that agency maintainsaccountability for compliance with this requirement. If this information is included in the State’sjuvenile jail compliance monitoring policy and procedures manual, then the State must referencethe specific page number or appendix number.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualcontains the specific violation procedures that provide the ADECA LETS Division’s subgrantee,the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors with the authority to receive, investigate, and reportcompliance violations from all facilities in which juveniles might be placed pursuant to publicauthority. The ADECA LETS Division directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to “Page 15”of Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manual (Attachment5 hereto this application) for this information.5. Barriers and StrategiesThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State must provide a written description ofbarriers the State faces in implementing an adequate system of compliance monitoring. TheUSDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that this description must include strategies employed toovercome the identified barriers. If an up-to-date description of barriers and strategies isincluded in the State’s juvenile jail compliance monitoring policy and procedures manual, thenthe State must reference the specific page number or appendix number.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualcontains the written description of barriers the State faces in implementing an adequate system ofcompliance monitoring of all facilities in which juveniles might be placed pursuant to public101

authority. The ADECA LETS Division directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to “Page 14”of Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manual (Attachment5 hereto this application) for this information.No major compliance monitoring barriers are presently being encountered withinAlabama. However, if and when such a barrier does arise, the methods by which the State haschosen to overcome such barrier include the implementation of the 9 components identifiedherein below at 10. Data Collection and Verification.6. Definition of TermsThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State must provide a written description of theState’s definitions for key juvenile and criminal justice terms, as such definitions may differfrom those provided in the JJDP Act. The State must identify these differences and address themin the compliance monitoring process. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State providea discussion of how key State terms differ from those provided in the JJDP Act. If thisinformation is included in the State’s juvenile jail compliance monitoring policy and proceduresmanual, then the State must reference the specific page number or appendix number.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualcontains the written description of the State’s definitions for key juvenile and criminal justiceterms utilized in the compliance monitoring of all facilities in which juveniles might be placedpursuant to public authority. The ADECA LETS Division directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’sattention to “Pages 10-12” of Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies andProcedures Manual (Attachment 5 hereto this application) for this information.7. Identification of the Monitoring UniverseThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State must provide an identification of allfacilities in the State that might hold juveniles pursuant to public authority. The USDOJ OJPOJJDP mandates that this list must include every facility that has this potential, regardless of thepurpose for housing juveniles, and that comes under the purview of the compliance monitoringrequirements. This list may include both public and privately-owned or operated facilities. If adetailed description of the State’s identification process is included in the State’s juvenile jailcompliance monitoring policy and procedures manual, then the State must reference the specificpage number or appendix number.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualcontains the identification information for all facilities in the State that might hold juvenilespursuant to public authority, and where a violation of a core requirement is possible. TheADECA LETS Division directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to “Page 16” of Alabama’sJuvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manual (Attachment 5 hereto thisapplication) for this information. In addition, the ADECA LETS Division provides thefollowing information on this requirement.102

This component pertaining to the "identification of the monitoring universe" refers to theidentification of all facilities in the State that might hold juveniles pursuant to public authority.Every facility that has this potential, regardless of the purpose for housing juveniles, comesunder the purview of the monitoring requirements. This also includes those facilities that publicand private agencies own or operate. Pursuant to Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-208, theADECA LETS Division directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to the Alabama 2012Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Universe (Attachment 6 hereto this application) listing thefacilities operating in the State that are identified as able to hold youth pursuant to publicauthority. Where applicable, the license for such facility is provided by the Alabama Departmentof Human Resources (DHR), the Alabama Department of Mental Health (ADMH), and/or theAlabama Department of Youth Services (DYS) pursuant to its respective licensing authority.Included in that list are facilities owned and operated by public and private agencies.Also included are the facilities maintained by each of Alabama’s 67 counties (county jailfacilities and city jail facilities). The juvenile facilities currently house juveniles, and the adultjails and lockups have the “potential” for housing juveniles. Thus, all of these facilities wouldcome under the purview of the monitoring requirements established to maintain the State’scompliance with the JJDP Act.8. Classification of the Monitoring UniverseThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State must provide for the classification of allfacilities in the State that might hold juveniles pursuant to public authority so as to determinewhich facilities should be considered a secure detention or correctional facility, adultcorrectional institution, jail, lockup, or other type of secure or nonsecure facility. The USDOJOJP OJJDP mandates that this classification must determine whether a facility is public orprivate, residential or nonresidential, and whether the population is juvenile only, adult only, orjuvenile and adult (a collocated facility). If a detailed description of the State’s classificationprocess is included in the State’s juvenile jail compliance monitoring policy and proceduresmanual, then the State must reference the specific page number or appendix number.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualcontains the classification of all facilities in the State that might hold juveniles pursuant to publicauthority so as to determine which facilities should be considered a secure detention orcorrectional facility, adult correctional institution, jail, lockup, or other type of secure ornonsecure facility. This classification also determines whether a facility is public or private,residential or nonresidential, and whether the population is juvenile only, adult only, or juvenileand adult. The ADECA LETS Division directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to “Page 17”of Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manual (Attachment5 hereto this application) for this information. In addition, the ADECA LETS Division providesthe following information on this requirement.Each of the DYS-licensed facilities named on the list is identified and classified by DYSfor the State pursuant to its statutory authority, administrative rules, and facility inspectionstandards. In developing and updating those standards, the DYS consults with experts in thefield and confers with the detention facility accreditation standards that have been developed by103

the American Correctional Association for use in the housing and correction of juveniles. TheDYS utilizes its own agency funds and personnel to assist with these classification efforts, butdoes not receive JJDP Act grant program funds from the ADECA LETS Division to do so.9. Inspection of FacilitiesThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State must provide for the inspection of allfacilities in the State that might hold juveniles pursuant to public authority so as to ensure anaccurate assessment of each facility’s classification and record keeping. The USDOJ OJPOJJDP mandates that all facilities classified as secure detention or correctional facilities, jails,lockups, and other facilities must have periodic, on-site inspections to determine that theycomply with Sections 223(a)(11), (12), and (13) of the JJDP Act. If a detailed description of theState’s inspection process is included in the State’s juvenile jail compliance monitoring policyand procedures manual, then the State must reference the specific page number or appendixnumber.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualcontains information on the inspection of all facilities in the State that might hold juvenilespursuant to public authority so as to ensure an accurate assessment of each facility’sclassification and record keeping. All facilities classified as secure detention or correctionalfacilities, jails, lockups, and other facilities have periodic, on-site inspections to determine thatthey comply with Sections 223(a)(11), (12), and (13) of the JJDP Act. The ADECA LETSDivision directs the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to “Pages 18-22” of Alabama’s Juvenile JailCompliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manual (Attachment 5 hereto this application)for this information. In addition, the ADECA LETS Division provides the following informationon this requirement.This component pertaining to the "inspection of facilities" refers to inspections that arenecessary to ensure an accurate assessment of each facility's classification and record keeping.All facilities classified as secure detention or correctional facilities, jails, lockups, and otherfacilities must have periodic, onsite inspections to determine that they comply with Sections223(a)(11), (12), and (13) of the JJDP Act, as amended. The State conducts its inspections ofjuvenile facilities as a necessary measure to ensure an accurate assessment of each facility’sclassification and record keeping activities, and to ensure that all facilities classified as securedetention or correctional facilities, jails, lockups, and other facilities have periodic on-siteinspections to determine the extent of compliance with the core requirements of the JJDP Act.To maintain compliance with the facilities monitoring requirement, the ADECA LETS Divisionhas subgranted a portion of the State’s JJDP Act Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds tothe AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors to be the agency that will perform the juvenile jailcompliance monitoring activities, and report the results of such activities back to the SAG andthe ADECA LETS Division. The SAG has voted to subgrant juvenile justice program funds tothe AUM ACPCTI for performing these activities effective October 1, 2007. The results of saidactivities continue to be reported to the ADECA LETS Division and the SAG in the form ofsubgrantee quarterly narrative progress reports and in the form of Alabama’s Annual JuvenileJail Compliance Monitoring Report which is ultimately be submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP.The State’s 2011 annual report of compliance monitoring activities, which encompassed the104

period of October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011, was submitted by the AUM ACPCTIand its subcontractors to the ADECA LETS Division in March 2012. The ADECA LETSDivision submitted that Report to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP via electronic submission (e-mail) onMarch 30, 2012.10. Data Collection and VerificationThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that the State must collect and report data to determinewhether facilities in the State comply with the DSO, Separation, and Jail Removal requirements.The USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that if the facility self-reports the data, or if an agency otherthan the State agency receiving federal grant funds collects and reports the data, then the planmust describe a statistically valid procedure to verify the reported data. The USDOJ OJP OJJDPmandates that on-site data verification must involve the review of data that a facility self-reports,including a review of the facility’s admissions records and/or booking logs. If a detaileddescription of the State’s process for data collection and verification is included in the State’sjuvenile jail compliance monitoring policy and procedures manual, then the State must referencethe specific page number or appendix number.Further, although the USDOJ OJP OJJDP holds the State agency that is implementing theJuvenile Justice Title II Part B Formula Grant Program to be the agency that is responsible forthe juvenile jail compliance monitoring effort and the validity of the annual monitoring report,the USDOJ OJP OJJDP allows the State agency to contract with a public or private agency toperform this monitoring function. If the State agency selects another agency, then the State mustidentify in its monitoring plan which agency has been authorized and/or tasked to assist in themonitoring functions. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP mandates that this plan should identify thefunding amount and the name, address, and telephone number of the contractor. The USDOJOJP OJJDP mandates that the plan should include the procedures and activities the State uses tomonitor the contractual arrangement.Alabama’s Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Policies and Procedures Manualcontains the data collection and verification information. The ADECA LETS Division directsthe USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s attention to “Pages 23-24” of Alabama’s Juvenile Jail ComplianceMonitoring Policies and Procedures Manual (Attachment 5 hereto this application) for thisinformation. In addition, the ADECA LETS Division provides that this component pertaining to"data collection and verification" refers to States being required to collect and report data todetermine whether facilities in the State comply with the DSO, Separation, and Jail Removalrequirements. The length of the reporting period should be up to 12 months but in no case lessthan 6 months. If a State is reporting only 6 months of data, then that State must project the datafor a full year in a statistically valid manner. If the facility self-reports the data, or if an agencyother than the State agency receiving federal grant funds collects and reports the data, then theplan must describe a statistically valid procedure used to verify the reported data.The legislative and administrative procedures and sanctions that have been establishedfor the State to receive, investigate, and report compliance violations were originally establishedfor the DYS pursuant to Code of Alabama, 1975 at §44-1-27(a) and (b), and AlabamaAdministrative Code Rule 950-4-9-.01, et seq., pertaining to the licensing of facilities and105

maintaining facility minimum standards. However, because the ADECA LETS Division is theState agency designated to receive the Formula Grant Program funds, the ADECA LETSDivision has subgranted funds to the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors to assist in theperformance of these compliance monitoring duties pertaining to the DSO, Separation, and JailRemoval requirements. Each facility’s statistical data are reported on a quarterly basis by therespective facility using the AUM ACPCTI’s forms, and the AUM ACPCTI also works with theAlabama Administrative Office of Courts’ (AOC) juvenile justice information system and theDYS’s information system. Any compliance violations that are reported by the facility or thatwere discovered by the AUM ACPCTI compliance monitors are noted in their records reviewand compliance monitoring processes. This way, the ADECA LETS Division, the AUMACPCTI and its subcontractors maintain accountability for compliance with this “data collectionand verification” requirement by way of quarterly and annually monitoring these facilities forsuch compliance. The length of Alabama’s reporting period is 12 months, and currentlyencompasses the period of October 1 through September 30 of each year (the federal fiscal yearcycle). However, the State is in the process of transitioning to the January 1-December 31calendar year reporting cycle. The data are self-reported by each facility, and are also confirmedand verified by the AUM ACPCTI’s site inspection and records inspection processes. Reporteddata are retained on uniform documents in an established record keeping format, and the recordsare forwarded by the individual facilities to the ADECA LETS Division and to the AUMACPCTI and its subcontractors, according to the ADECA LETS Division’s administrative recordkeeping requirements.The funds provided to support these compliance monitoring activities are subgrantedfrom the JJDP Act’s Title II Part B Formula Grant Program, and totaled $100,000.00 for each ofFY2010 and FY2011. The contact information for this contractor is:Name of Contractor: Auburn University at Montgomery (AUM)Alabama Crime Prevention Clearinghouse and Training Institutec/o Mrs. Linda WrightAddress: Post Office Box 244023Montgomery, Alabama 36124-4023Telephone Number: (334) 244-3961E-Mail Address:Lwright3@aum.edu.The AUM ACPCTI’s subcontractor contact information is as follows:Name of Subcontractor:Address:Mr. Mike RollinsRMR Consultation and Compliance, LLCPost Office Box 6102Anniston, Alabama 36204Telephone Number: (256) 454-2378E-Mail Address:rmrconsult@cableone.netName of Subcontractor: Mrs. Sandra Nesbit-ManningAddress:Juvenile Justice Associates1943 Etton DriveFort Collins, Colorado 80526Telephone Number: (970) 484-9775Fax Number: (970) 484-9775E-Mail Address:Snmjja@aol.com.106

Through these working relationships, the ADECA LETS Division has continued tomaintain accountability for compliance with this monitoring requirement, and monitors itsimplementation through the following procedures and activities:1. The ADECA LETS Division requires the AUM ACPCTI to submit to the ADECA LETSDivision reports that provide detailed information as to the conduct of the AUM ACPCTI’scompliance monitoring activities. The results of said activities are reported by the AUMACPCTI to the ADECA LETS Division (and then provided to the SAG) in the form ofsubgrantee quarterly narrative progress reports and in the form of the State of Alabama’s AnnualCompliance Monitoring Report -- which is submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP during themonth of March each year. By reviewing the information contained in these reports, theADECA LETS Division is able to monitor the State’s compliance with the compliancemonitoring requirement, make recommendations to award continued funding, and makeimplementation and compliance priority adjustments when and where necessary.2. The ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manningcontinue to annually review and recommend necessary changes to be made to State statutorylaws, rules of court, and administrative rules of procedure so that they continue to reflect theJJDP Act’s updated requirements, and so that all necessary compliance monitoring activities canbe performed in the proper legal manner. The AOC’s legislative counsel (Robert Hugh “Bob”Maddox, Esq.) continues to oversee the introduction of such legislation during the AlabamaLegislature’s annual legislative session.3. The ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manningcontinue to annually review and recommend necessary changes to be made to the compliancemonitoring universe, which involves the list of the State’s facilities to be monitored forcompliance with the JJDP Act’s core requirements. This is based on the AOC’s and the DYS'smost recent collected information on secure and nonsecure facilities that may hold juveniles inaccordance with statutory authority.4. The ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manningannually review and recommend necessary changes to be made to the conduct of on-sitemonitoring visits to facilities included in the compliance monitoring universe. This way, theADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manning are assuredof the proper classification of youth in those facilities and the accurate collection and properretention of necessary core requirement data by those facilities.5. The ADECA LETS Division, the AOC, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs.Nesbit-Manning annually review and recommend necessary changes to be made to the AOC’s,AUM ACPCTI’s, Mr. Rollins’s, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manning’s training for the State’s juvenilecourt judges, juvenile probation officers, detention center personnel, and other applicableindividuals on the core requirements and compliance monitoring requirements of the JJDP Act.6. The ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manningannually review and recommend necessary changes to be made to the DYS licensing standards107

so that said standards incorporate the JJDP Act standards. This is accomplished via the ADECADirector maintaining a seat on the governing board of the DYS. The ADECA Director hasdesignated the ADECA LETS Division Director his proxy to sit in his place and vote in his steadon matters that are brought before the DYS Board by the DYS Director at the Board’s quarterlymeetings. By maintaining a seat on the DYS Board, the SAG, and the ADECA LETS Divisionmaintain contact with the DYS personnel (the Director of which also serves on Alabama’s SAG),and vote on matters pending before the Board. By gaining knowledge directly from the State’sdepartment responsible for providing juvenile detention services, the SAG and the ADECALETS Division are able to gain and maintain information on the DYS licensing standards.7. The ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manningannually review and recommend necessary changes to be made to the conduct of on-sitemonitoring visits to facilities included in the compliance monitoring universe. This way, theADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manning are assuredthat the core requirements are addressed and met, as is allowed by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP TitleII Part B Formula Grant Program’s implementing regulations.8. The ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manningannually review and recommend necessary changes to be made to the compliance monitoringplans and procedures implemented for facilities included in the compliance monitoring universe.9. The ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manningannually review and recommend necessary changes to be made to the development andimplementation of the AOC’s coordinated comprehensive juvenile justice automated computerinformation-sharing system (the JJIS), which involves all appropriate juvenile justiceprofessionals in the State, and which includes the project’s funding, organization, infrastructuredevelopment, equipment installation, system pilot-testing, and evaluation. Such informationsharingsystem allows the facilities included in the compliance monitoring universe to timelysubmit relevant data related to the secure and nonsecure detention of juveniles. The ADECALETS Division’s juvenile justice staff also attend the meetings of the AOC’s JJIS oversightcommittee appointed by the Alabama Supreme Court’s Chief Justice, which committee is taskedwith ensuring the timely development and implementation of said system.Resources that are expended to conduct these activities include (i) financial resources, inthat JJDP Act grant funds are subgranted from the ADECA LETS Division to the AOC, theAUM ACPCTI, and DYS, (ii) staff personnel resources, in that the grant-related work isperformed by staff members from the ADECA LETS Division, and the compliance monitoringwork is performed by the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors, and (iii) office space, utilities,equipment, supplies, and other facilities (such as record keeping storage space, etc.) provided bythe ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, Mr. Rollins, and Mrs. Nesbit-Manning.108

4. Plan for Compliance with the Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) CoreRequirementPursuant to Section 223(a)(22) of the JJDP Act, the State must address specificdelinquency prevention and system improvement efforts to reduce, without establishing orrequiring numerical standards or quotas, the disproportionate number of juvenile numbers ofminority groups who come into contact with the juvenile justice system. Disproportionateminority contact (DMC) exists if the rate of contact with the juvenile justice system of a specificminority group is significantly different than the rate of contact for non-Hispanic whites or forother minority groups. The purpose of this core requirement is to ensure equal and fair treatmentfor every youth (regardless of membership in a minority or majority population group) involvedin the juvenile justice system. The State achieves compliance with the DMC core requirementwhen the State meets the requirements at 28 CFR §31.303(j) through the following five phases ofaddressing DMC on an ongoing basis:I. Identification (the State identifies the extent to which DMC exists),II. Assessment/Diagnosis (the State examines and determines the factors thatcontribute to DMC, if it exists),III. Intervention (the State develops and implements strategies to reduce DMC),IV. Evaluation (the State evaluates the efficacy of intervention strategies), andV. Monitoring (the State tracks changes in DMC trends over time).The State shall submit DMC Identification Spreadsheets as part of the DMC CompliancePlan in the State's Juvenile Justice Title II Part B Formula Grant Program application. And whenthe State determines that DMC exists, the State shall provide in its 3-Year Plan and Plan Updatesa DMC Compliance Plan and comply with the implementation guidelines, as follows:Phase I. Identification: The State must determine whether disproportionality(DMC) exists, and the extent to which it exists, by collecting and examining data at contactpoints in the juvenile justice system and making comparisons between races within targetedjurisdictions. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP's requirement for this component includes the following:A. Updated DMC Identification Spreadsheets, to include(1) The most recent available data for the following:(a) Statewide.(b) At least three jurisdictions with the highest minorityconcentrations or, preferably, the localities with focused DMC-reduction efforts.B. DMC Data Discussions, to include(1) A time-limited plan of action for developing and implementing asystem for the routine data collection needed to track progress in DMC reduction and todemonstrate consistent improvement in this area, to include(a) Current and future barriers.(b) Which agencies, organizations, or individuals will collectand analyze the data.(c) The anticipated outcomes.(2) A discussion of the following:(a) The Relative Rate Indices (RRIs) obtained.109

(b) The comparisons made between the updated data and dataobtained in earlier years.(c) An illustration of how the data inform/guide the State'sFY2012-2014 DMC Compliance Plan.(d) Whether the data are from the “duplicated count” (onereflecting the total number of youth contacts with the justice system) or the “unduplicated count”(reflecting one youth who has juvenile justice system contact regardless of the number ofcontacts). If it is unknown whether the data are from the “duplicated count” or the “unduplicatedcount,” then the State must include a time-limited plan of how the State will determine whetherthe counts are duplicated, unduplicated, or a combination, to include(i) Current and future barriers.(ii) Which agencies, organizations, or individuals willdetermine whether the contacts are duplicated, unduplicated, or a combination.(iii) The anticipated outcomes.(3) Use of the RRI tracking sheets to interpret and analyze the valuesthat should drive decision-making by taking the following steps:(a) Identifying those RRI values that are statisticallysignificant.(b) Identifying those RRI values (from those that arestatistically significant) with the greatest magnitude (that reflect the greatest degree ofdisproportionate contact).(c) Identifying those RRI values (from those that arestatistically significant) that involve the greatest volume of activity (the largest number ofminority youth who potentially may be affected).(d) If applicable, comparing the RRI values noted in step (ii) or(iii) with the range of RRI values nationally.(e) Examining the local context for each of the RRI valuesidentified in steps (a) through (d) to consider which jurisdictions may be the more feasible targetpopulations for activities designed to reduce DMC.Phase II. Assessment/Diagnosis: A DMC assessment is a comprehensive analysis,utilizing sophisticated research methodologies, to identify the factors that contribute to DMC byexamining minority over-representation and explaining differences in all contact stages of thejuvenile justice system. The DMC assessment should also include recommendations for specificintervention strategies. If a completed DMC assessment is not available or needed, then theState shall submit a time-limited plan for completing the DMC assessment.The USDOJ OJP OJJDP's requirement for this component includes the following:A. A brief summary of the findings of the Statewide DMC assessment,published from 2005 to 2011, to include any contributing mechanisms identified.B. A time-limited plan for conducting or completing a Statewide DMCassessment, if a Statewide DMC assessment has not been conducted or completed. The timelimitedplan must include:(1) Current and future barriers.(2) Which agencies, organizations, or individuals will complete theassessment study.110

(3) The anticipated outcomes.Phase III. Intervention: The State's DMC Compliance Plan shall, where DMC hasbeen demonstrated and contributing factors determined, provide an intervention plan forreducing DMC. The State shall base the intervention plan on the results of the identification dataand assessment findings. The plan should target comprehensive prevention and interventionprogramming, and system improvement efforts to communities where DMC is most prominentand those contact stages of the system where major disproportionate rates occur. The planshould also address any individual, family, community, systemic (juvenile justice, education,etc.), and related laws and policies that may contribute to DMC.The USDOJ OJP OJJDP's requirement for this component includes the following:A. Progress made in FY2011, as a discussion of the status of each of theplanned activities in the FY2011 DMC Compliance Plan, to include:(1) Which activities have been implemented, a discussion of specificprogress made, and planned Formula Grant-supported activities with DMC-specific goals andobjectives.(2) Which activities were not implemented, a discussion of the reasonthat prevented implementation, and plans to overcome these obstacles.B. A time-limited plan of when delinquency prevention, intervention,and/or systems improvement activity implementation will occur, if States have notimplemented delinquency prevention, intervention, and/or systems improvement activities, toinclude:(1) Current and future barriers.(2) Which agencies, organizations, or individuals will determinewhich strategies will be implemented and why.(3) The anticipated outcomes.Phase IV. Evaluation: The State shall evaluate the efficacy of the State's efforts toreduce DMC. At a minimum, all intervention strategies to reduce DMC shall include specificgoals, objectives, activities, and selected performance measures. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP'srequirement for this component includes the following, if applicable:A. A summary of findings of any formal process or outcome evaluationrelated to DMC activities, to include those that contain a specific research methodology used toevaluate the program’s effectiveness. Or, provide a statement of “Not applicable” if no formalprocess or outcome evaluation has been conducted.B. Performance Measures, as a list of the required DMC PerformanceMeasures in this section.Phase V. Monitoring: The State and its selected localities shall monitor and trackchanges in DMC trends over time, and/or conduct site monitoring visits to identify emergingcritical issues to determine whether there has been progress in DMC reduction. The USDOJ OJPOJJDP's requirement for this component includes the following:A. A time-limited plan of how the State will monitor and track changesin DMC trends over time.111

B. A description of how the State will monitor any delinquencyprevention, intervention, and/or systems improvement activities implemented to reduceDMC.C. An indication of who will be responsible for these monitoringactivities, to include if this is a DMC coordinator, and an indication if this position is a full-timeor a part-time position.D. A timeline of current and/or future monitoring activities.E. DMC-reduction Plan for 2012-2014, to include(1) The specific timeline (used for FY2012, FY2013, and FY2014) toconduct delinquency prevention, intervention, and systems improvement activities.(2) The specific funding amount, and funding sources, designated toconduct delinquency prevention, intervention, and systems improvement activities.For this information and analysis, see this application at “Attachment 2: Plan forCompliance with the Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) Core Requirement.”5. Coordination of Child Abuse and Neglect and Delinquency ProgramsThe Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002 emphasizes interagencycoordination and collaboration in addressing the prevention and treatment of juveniledelinquency. Programming for this interagency coordination and collaboration may be fundedunder the Title II Part B Formula Grant Program's Standard Program Area #19 - Juvenile JusticeSystem Improvement, on which grant funds may be expended for programs, research, and otherinitiatives to examine issues or improve practices, policies, or procedures on a systemwide basis(e.g., examining problems affecting decisions from arrest to disposition and detention tocorrections). The State may utilize Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds for thefollowing:A. Reducing the Caseload of Probation Officers.B. Sharing Public Child Welfare Records with Juvenile Courts.C. Establishing Policies and Systems to Incorporate Relevant Child ProtectiveServices Records into Juvenile Justice Records.A. Reducing the Caseload of Probation OfficersPursuant to Section 223(a)(25) of the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002[42 USC §5633(a)(25)], the State may provide incentive grants to units of general localgovernment that reduce the caseload of probation officers. Funds reserved for this purpose maynot exceed five percent (5%) of the State’s allocation of Title II Part B Formula Grant Programfunds (other than funds made available to the SAG).The State of Alabama, by and through the ADECA LETS Division, states that becausethe federal allocation of FY2012 Juvenile Justice Title II Part B Formula Grant Program fundsawarded to the State equals $421,875.00, the State and the SAG have not allocated any particularamount of these funds to be expended under Standard Program Area #19 - Juvenile JusticeSystem Improvement, specifically for the purpose of reducing the caseload of probation officersas identified in Section 223(a)(25) of the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002 [42USC §5633(a)(25)]. However, the State has allocated funds to be expended under the following112

Standard Program Areas: 23 - Planning and Administration, 31 – State Advisory Group, 08 -Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders (DSO), 10 - Disproportionate Minority Contact(DMC), and 06 - Compliance Monitoring. The State and the SAG allocate funds within programareas 08, 10, and 06 to focus on providing graduated sanctions programs that have the effect ofdiverting youth out of the juvenile justice system at the earliest opportunity. Hence, as youth arediverted out and do not penetrate further into the juvenile justice system, the funding process hasan intended consequence of reducing the caseload of juvenile probation officers. For a thoroughdiscussion of these allocations, refer to Section 9. Statement of the Problem/ProgramNarrative herein below.B. Sharing Public Child Welfare Records (including child protective servicesrecords) With the Courts in the Juvenile Justice SystemPursuant to Section 223(a)(26) of the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002[42 USC §5633(a)(26)], the State shall, to the maximum extent practicable, implement a systemto ensure that each juvenile court shall have access to and be aware of the public child welfarerecords (including child protective services records) generated within its jurisdiction for eachjuvenile before the court.The State of Alabama, by and through the ADECA LETS Division, states that becausethe federal allocation of FY2012 Juvenile Justice Title II Part B Formula Grant Program fundsawarded to the State equals $421,875.00, the State and the SAG have not allocated any particularamount of these funds to be expended under Standard Program Area #19 - Juvenile JusticeSystem Improvement, specifically for the purpose of sharing public child welfare records(including child protective services records) with the courts in the juvenile justice system asidentified in Section 223(a)(26) of the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002 [42 USC§5633(a)(26)]. However, the State (by and through the ADECA LETS Division) and the SAGare currently working in concert with the AOC, the DYS, and the Alabama Criminal JusticeInformation Center (ACJIC), and intend to include the Alabama Department of Mental Health,the Alabama Department of Human Resources (ADHR), and the Alabama Department ofEducation (at a later date), in the development of a computerized/electronic juvenile informationsharing system that will enable these youth-service agencies to (i) share essential information ona “need to know basis,” (ii) protect personal information, and (iii) employ technology to facilitatethe exchange and security of information. As funding permits, these agencies' decision makersare developing what information they need so that the State's juvenile information sharingsystem will support effective collaborative practices and achieve goals for improving servicesand outcomes for children, youth, families, communities, and jurisdictional agencies in the State.To initiate these efforts in a collaborative way, the State sent representatives from theADECA LETS Division, AOC, DYS, and ACJIC to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's JuvenileInformation Sharing Workshop that was conducted in Santa Fe, New Mexico from April 24-25,2006. Also, the State has allocated funds to be expended under the following Standard ProgramAreas: 08 - Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders (DSO), 10 - Disproportionate MinorityContact (DMC), and 06 - Compliance Monitoring. For a thorough discussion of theseallocations, refer to Section 9. Statement of the Problem/Program Narrative herein below.113

C. Establishing Policies and Systems to Incorporate Relevant Child ProtectiveServices Records into Juvenile Justice RecordsPursuant to Section 223(a)(27) of the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002[42 USC §5633(a)(27)], the State shall establish policies and systems to incorporate relevantchild protective services records into juvenile justice records when establishing andimplementing treatment plans for juvenile offenders. And pursuant to Section 223(a)(28) of theConsequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002 [42 USC §5633(a)(28)], the State’s Title II PartB Formula Grant Program application must provide an assurance that juvenile offenders whoseplacement is funded through Section 472 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §672) receive theprotections specified in Section 471 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §671), including a caseplan and case plan review as defined in Section 475 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §675).The State of Alabama, by and through the ADECA LETS Division, states that becausethe federal allocation of FY2012 Juvenile Justice Title II Part B Formula Grant Program fundsawarded to the State equaled $421,875.00, the State and the SAG have not allocated anyparticular amount of these funds to be expended under Standard Program Area #19 - JuvenileJustice System Improvement, specifically for the purpose of establishing policies and systems toincorporate relevant child protective services records into juvenile justice records as identified inSection 223(a)(27) of the Consequences of Juvenile Offenders Act of 2002 [42 USC§5633(a)(27)], nor specifically for the purpose of providing assurance that juvenile offenderswhose placement is funded through Section 472 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §672) willreceive the protections specified in Section 471 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §671)including a case plan and case plan review as defined in Section 475 of the Social Security Act(42 USC §675), as identified in Section 223(a)(28) of the Consequences of Juvenile OffendersAct of 2002 [42 USC §5633(a)(28)]. However, the State (by and through the ADECA LETSDivision) and the SAG are currently working in concert with the AOC, the DYS, and theAlabama Criminal Justice Information Center (ACJIC), and intend to include the AlabamaDepartment of Mental Health, the Alabama Department of Human Resources (ADHR) and theAlabama Department of Education at a later date, in the development of a computerized/electronic juvenile information sharing system that will enable these youth serving agencies toshare essential information on a “need to know basis,” protect personal information, and employtechnology to facilitate the exchange and security of information. These agencies' decisionmakers are developing what information they need so that the State's juvenile informationsharing system will support effective collaborative practices and achieve goals for improvingservices and outcomes for children, youth, families, communities, and jurisdictional agencies inthe State. To assist with these efforts, the State sent representatives from the ADECA LETSDivision, AOC, DYS, and ACJIC to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's Juvenile Information SharingWorkshop that was conducted in Santa Fe, New Mexico from April 24-25, 2006. Also, the Statehas allocated funds to be expended under the following Standard Program Areas: 08 -Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders (DSO), 10 - Disproportionate Minority Contact(DMC), and 06 - Compliance Monitoring. For a thorough discussion of these allocations, referto Section 9. Statement of the Problem/Program Narrative herein below.114

And because the State must provide an assurance that juvenile offenders whoseplacement is funded through Section 472 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §672) receive theprotections specified in Section 471 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §671), including a caseplan and case plan review as defined in Section 475 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §675),the State of Alabama provides the following assurance:ASSURANCEThe State of Alabama assures that juvenile offenders whose placement within Alabama isfunded through Section 472 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §672) will receive theprotections specified in Section 471 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §671), including a caseplan and case plan review as defined in Section 475 of the Social Security Act (42 USC §675).6. Disaster Preparedness PlanThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP requires that States that have completed a disaster preparednessplan – detailing how juveniles in secure and nonsecure placements are handled during a disaster– should attach a copy of that plan with the State’s FY2012 Title II Formula Grant Programapplication. States that have not completed such plan should complete one by the time of thenext Three-Year Plan due date (March 31, 2015).In Alabama, the ADECA LETS Division serves as the State Administering Agency(SAA) for the State’s FY2012 Title II Formula Grant Program, and is the SAA that submitsAlabama’s Title II Formula Grant Program grant application and Three-Year Plan. The ADECALETS Division is not a “juvenile justice agency,” does not “handle juveniles in secure andnonsecure placements,” and does not “handle juveniles in secure and nonsecure placementsduring a disaster.” Because the ADECA LETS Division is serving in the capacity of SAA, theADECA LETS Division is not responsible for developing and maintaining a disasterpreparedness plan for Alabama’s secure and nonsecure facilities that may hold juveniles viasecure and nonsecure placements; that responsibility rests with the Alabama Department ofYouth Services (DYS) as well as with each of the local facilities that house juveniles in secureand nonsecure placements. As such, the ADECA LETS Division itself has no “disasterpreparedness plan” to submit with this grant application.The ADECA LETS Division did, however, request that DYS make available its plan inorder that said plan could be included as an attachment to this application. DYS informed theADECA LETS Division that although DYS does have a disaster preparedness plan, said plan iscurrently not in an electronic format; it is presently in a voluminous paper-only format comprisedof 500+ pages that are contained in 4” binders. Additionally, each local facility has its own plan,and these plans are continually being revised and updated by the facilities. As that is the case,these State and local plans are not available to be shared in their current format at this time. Theplans are, however, scheduled to be reformatted into an electronic format during the upcomingyear (2012-2013), so the ADECA LETS Division envisions that such plan should be available tobe submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP by the next (March 31, 2015) due date.115

7. Suicide PreventionThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP encourages States to include suicide prevention initiatives intheir Title II Part B Formula Grant Program grant application and Three Year Plan. Initiativesinclude the development or expansion of suicide prevention programs at each point of contact inthe juvenile justice system (the nine contact points identified for purposes of determining theextent of DMC in the juvenile justice system include arrest, referral to juvenile court, diversionbefore adjudication, secure detention, issuance of petitions, adjudication, placement onprobation, placement in secure corrections, and transfer to adult court), public awarenesscampaigns, research on suicide and suicide prevention for youth in contact with the juvenilejustice system, unique training targeted to suicide prevention in juvenile facilities, and increasedcollaboration between the mental health and juvenile justice systems.The State of Alabama, by and through the ADECA LETS Division, states that becausethe federal allocation of FY2012 Juvenile Justice Title II Part B Formula Grant Program fundsawarded to the State equals $421,875.00, the State and the SAG have not allocated any particularamount of these funds to be expended specifically for the purpose of establishing orincorporating juvenile suicide prevention services in the State. Because the ADECA LETSDivision is serving in the capacity of SAA, the ADECA LETS Division is not responsible fordeveloping and maintaining suicide prevention services for Alabama’s youth being processedthrough the nine contact points in the juvenile justice system, including those youth placed insecure and nonsecure facilities that hold juveniles via secure and nonsecure placements. Thatresponsibility rests with the Alabama Department of Youth Services (DYS) as well as with eachof the local facilities that house juveniles in secure and nonsecure placements. As such, theADECA LETS Division itself has no “suicide prevention services plan” to submit with this grantapplication.8. Collecting and Sharing Juvenile Justice InformationThe USDOJ OJP OJJDP requires that, in order to better understand the difficultiesencountered by State agencies that administer Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds incollecting and sharing juvenile justice information, the State agencies must provide informationconcerning the following:A. A description of the State’s process for gathering juvenile justice information anddata across State agencies (for example, State departments of education, welfare, mental healthservices, and local law enforcement), how the State makes this information available acrossagencies, and how the State incorporates the data into its comprehensive 3-year plan and annualplan updates.B. An identification of the specific barriers the State encounters with the sharing ofjuvenile information of at-risk youth among State agencies, including local law enforcement (forexample, where State statute, regulation, or policy prohibits the sharing of this information).The USDOJ OJP OJJDP has mandated the States to direct sufficient resources toaccomplish this effort and increase the capacity to implement new or improve existing juvenilejustice information sharing systems.116

A. Description of the State’s Process for Gathering Juvenile Justice Informationand Data Across State AgenciesWith regard to gathering the juvenile justice information and data on which Alabamabases its measurements to indicate the at-risk youth who are making contact with, andprogressing through, the State’s juvenile justice system, the Alabama Legislature, in enacting the“Alabama Juvenile Justice Act” via the passage of Alabama Act No. 75-1205, as variouslyamended by Alabama Acts No. 90-674 and No. 97-621, and formerly codified at Code ofAlabama 1975, §12-15-1 through §12-15-176, and the most recent passage of the new “AlabamaJuvenile Justice Act” (Alabama Act No. 2008-277), codified in the Code of Alabama, 1975, §12-15-101 et seq., which became effective on January 1, 2009, established, among other things, theState’s authority to develop a systematic data collection and monitoring procedure regarding theyouth being processed through the juvenile justice system. As such, Alabama statutory law atCode of Alabama 1975, §12-15-134 authorizes compliance with the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’srequest for States to adopt information and data collection procedures regarding the youth beingprocessed through each stage of the juvenile justice system in that it provides to law enforcementagencies the authority to maintain records and to collect and report statistics on juveniles beingprocessed through the justice system. Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-134states as follows:“Section 12-15-134. Maintenance and inspection of law enforcement records.(a) Law enforcement agencies shall take special precautions to ensure that law enforcementrecords and files concerning a child will be maintained in a manner and pursuant to thosesafeguards that will protect against disclosure to any unauthorized person, department, agency,or entity. Unless a charge of delinquency is transferred for criminal prosecution pursuant toSection 12-15-203 or the juvenile court otherwise orders in the interests of the child or ofnational security, the law enforcement records and files with respect to the child shall not beopen to public inspection nor their contents disclosed to the public.(b) Law enforcement records and files described in subsection (a) shall be open to inspection andcopying by the following:(1) A juvenile court having a child currently before it in any proceeding.(2) Personnel of the Department of Human Resources, the Department of Youth Services, publicand private institutions or agencies of which the child under the jurisdiction of the juvenile courthas been placed into the legal custody and those responsible for his or her supervision afterrelease.(3) Law enforcement officers of other jurisdictions when necessary for the discharge of theircurrent official duties.(4) The probation and other professional staff of a court in which the child is subsequentlyconvicted of a criminal offense or adjudicated as a youthful offender for the purpose of apresentence report or other dispositional proceedings, officials of penal institutions and other117

penal facilities into which the child is placed or a parole board in considering his or her parole ordischarge or in exercising supervision over him or her.(5) The probation and other professional staff serving a court handling criminal cases wheninvestigating or considering youthful offender applications.(6) The parent, except when parental rights have been terminated, or legal guardian of the childand the child’s attorney and guardian ad litem.(7) The principal of the school in which the child is enrolled, or the representative of theprincipal, upon written petition to the juvenile court setting forth the reasons why the safety orwelfare, or both, of the school, its students, or personnel necessitate production of theinformation and without which the safety and welfare of the school, its students, and personnelwould be threatened.(c) Law enforcement records may be viewed by victims during the investigation of a crime at thediscretion of the investigating officer.(d) All law enforcement agencies shall report to the Alabama Criminal Justice InformationCenter that a child has been charged with an act of delinquency along with any pertinentidentifying information or historical data concerning that child, when either of the followingoccurs:(1) The child is taken into custody and charged with an act of delinquency for an act whichwould constitute a felony if committed by an adult.(2) The child is taken into custody and charged with an act of delinquency for an act whichwould constitute a misdemeanor, according to subdivision (2) of Section 41-9-622 if committedby an adult.(e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or otherwise limit counsel fromdisclosing confidential law enforcement records relating to a client as needed to investigate thecase of the client or prepare a defense for that client, provided that the disclosure is infurtherance of counsel’s representation of the party.(f) Except as provided in this section, whoever directly or indirectly discloses or makes use of orknowingly permits the use of information describing in this section that identifies a child, or thefamily of a child, who is or was under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, upon convictionthereof, shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court.”In addition to Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-134, the Alabama Rules of JuvenileProcedure at Rule 18 provides to following: “[A] law enforcement agency may enter identifyinginformation from its records concerning a person who is under 18 years of age or otherwise a‘child,’ into local, state and national criminal justice information systems for the purpose ofassisting in the location and/or apprehension of a child who is being sought for any reason.Information so entered into a criminal justice information system shall be limited to physical and118

identifying information, the reason the child is being sought, and other information deemednecessary by the entering agency to protect the well being of the child.”As a result of these information, data collection, and record-keeping practices andactivities, the State’s law enforcement, judicial, and juvenile detention systems (DYS) supply tothe Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center (ACJIC), the AOC, and subsequently to theADECA LETS Division, on an annual basis, the statistics required to be included in thoseagencies’ annual reports and, in particular, the ADECA LETS Division’s Title II Part B FormulaGrant application and annual updates submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP pursuant to the JJDPAct. Because the law enforcement, judicial, and juvenile detention systems have establishedinformation, data collection, and record-keeping practices and activities that already includeprocedures for collecting and reporting statistics for youth being processed through each stage ofthe juvenile justice system at regular intervals, the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division haveadopted those established methods for purposes of the JJDP Act’s Title II Part B Formula GrantProgram. Thus, the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division accept as valid those methods bywhich the State’s law enforcement, judicial, and juvenile detention systems collect, process, anddisseminate juvenile justice system statistics and calculated percentages for inclusion in any andall reports related thereto. Said statistics are utilized by the SAG and the ADECA LETSDivision as the process for gathering juvenile justice information and data across State agencies.This information is then made available across agencies (including the State Department ofEducation, the Alabama Department of Human Resources, the Alabama Department of MentalHealth, county sheriff’s departments, and city police departments) via requests for saidinformation from one agency to another. The State then incorporates this data into thecomprehensive Three Year Plan and annual plan updates.Also, the State Judicial Department has developed (through the AOC with additionalgrant funds supplied by the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division) a coordinated comprehensivejuvenile justice automated computer information-sharing system (the Juvenile JusticeInformation System or “JJIS”) that involves all appropriate juvenile justice professionals in theState, and which includes the project’s funding, organization, infrastructure development,equipment installation, system pilot-testing, and evaluation. Such information-sharing systemallows the State and local juvenile court judges, juvenile probation officers, intake officers, lawenforcement officers, detention center personnel, and jail administrators (among others) to accessthis secure intranet system so that they can timely submit and access relevant data related to theirjuveniles. The technological development of the JJIS allows it to function as an automatedjuvenile justice record keeping system that includes modules such as (i) the detention/correctionsmodule – which is utilized in all twelve juvenile detention centers in the State, (ii) the probationmodule – which is utilized in all 67 counties in the State, (iii) the juvenile intake module – theversion (termed “JUPITIR”) that is currently being tested in several counties and that is projectedto eventually be utilized in all 67 counties, and (iv) the probation module – the version that isincluded as part of “JUPITIR.” Modules that include (v) the court services module, (vi) thedistrict attorney/prosecution module, (vii) the treatment module, and (viii) the critical analysisresearch and evaluation (CARE) module, continue to be targeted efforts for development withinthe JJIS. The JJIS is currently administered by the AOC’s Judicial Data Center located inMontgomery, Alabama.119

A JJIS oversight committee was appointed by the Alabama Supreme Court’s ChiefJustice, and this committee is tasked with ensuring the development, maintenance, andimplementation of the JJIS on a Statewide basis. The ADECA LETS Division’s juvenile justicestaff, along with State agency staff members from the Alabama Department of Children’sAffairs, the Alabama Department of Youth Services/DYS, the Alabama Department of HumanResources/DHR, the Alabama Department of Mental Health, and other relevant agencies, attendthe meetings of the AOC’s JJIS oversight committee to keep abreast of this system’s needs anddevelopments. At the local level, the operation of this automated system includes theparticipation of local police departments and related law enforcement agencies, courts and theirjuvenile probation officers, corrections agency (DYS) centers, and possibly other local agencies(for example, treatment providers, tribal government personnel) which contribute information tothe JJIS on a continual/daily basis.Through the JJIS, the AOC collects in real-time format the available statistics on thenumbers of juveniles processed through the State’s police departments, courts (AOC),corrections agency (DYS), and juvenile probation offices on a continual basis. The JJIS alsoidentifies where these youth are located (for example, within the custody of DYS, the DHR, aprivate care provider, etc.), as well as provides other information on them (identification ofparents, school attendance, medications, etc.). For purposes of the Title II Part B Formula GrantProgram, the AOC annually separates the collected statistical information into respective datacategories of offenses, arrests, prosecutions, adjudications, and sentencing alternatives, and thenprovides this information to the ACJIC and/or the ADECA LETS Division for use in programplanning and subgrant funding determinations.B. Identification of Specific Barriers the State Encounters with the Sharing ofJuvenile Information of At-Risk Youth Among State Agencies and Local Law EnforcementAgenciesWith regard to identifying the specific barriers the State encounters with the sharing ofjuvenile information of at-risk youth among State agencies and local law enforcement, one majorbarrier pertains to continued funding needed to operate the information systems that have alreadybeen established and are operational. A constant stream of government funding – or aspecifically dedicated source of funding (preferably at the State level and appropriated by theState Legislature) – is needed for the user agencies to expend on continually developing softwareand testing it, purchasing necessary updated computer equipment/browsers/software licenses,distributing the equipment to those working in the field who are collecting and importing thedata into the applicable agencies’ databases (such as the JJIS used by the AOC, the FBI databaseused by the ACJIC, or the family/child welfare information database used by the DHR), trainingcurrent and new employees on how to use the equipment as well as how to collect the necessarydata required to be collected and recorded, storing/maintaining the data in a secure environmentthat could not be breached by way of an unauthorized user technologically “hacking” into theestablished database, and deciphering the data for use at a later date. Without such a steadysupply of government funds, this work will be done on a piecemeal basis, and consistency in datacollection and the sharing of this information between agencies will be piecemeal as well.120

Another barrier pertains to needed State legislation and/or State agency administrativerules and regulations that would authorize the State agencies to share the applicable informationthat they are collecting. At the present time, and aside from the legislation and administrativerules referenced above, much of the information-sharing that is achieved between agencies isaccomplished either through written memoranda of agreement between those specific agencies,or through the good working relationships that have developed over time by the employeescurrently working at those agencies. With the passage of legislation – and/or with the passage ofadministrative rules and regulations – that would contain specific language describing whatinformation could be exchanged and among which agencies, information could then bevalidly/legally exchanged without the questionable attitude or doubt existing as to whether or notcertain agencies are entitled to – and can be in possession of – such data.Another barrier pertains to keeping the collected and stored information current. Just as a“sex offender registry/database” must be constantly updated, so too must other agency databasesbe constantly updated so that current information can be quickly retrieved from the database andutilized on an immediate basis, and not at “some future point in time” when the needed data iseventually collected and stored in the database in a usable format when some employeeeventually gets around to doing it. The purpose of establishing an information database using thelatest technology is so that its contents can be used – and shared among users – in a timely andaccurate format. But if the database is not constantly updated and maintained in a usable formatby knowledgeable personnel, it is a flaw in the system that hinders progress and delays real-timedecision-making.9. Statement of the Problem/Program NarrativesThis section contains the descriptions of the programs which the State of Alabamaintends to support with JJDP Act Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds during the periodof time encompassed by this FY2012 application.Problem/Program Narrative 1.A. Program Area Code and Title: 23. Planning and Administration.In order for the requirements of the JJDP Act to be properly implemented within theState, the juvenile justice program administrative activities are performed on a continual basis byState-level and local-level employees of the juvenile justice system. One segment of thisadministrative work involves data collection and record retention activities. The State’s datacollection and record retention responsibilities make it essential that the State-level and locallevelemployees of the juvenile justice system maintain proper records in an accessible formatand within a usable information communication system so that program administrators canobtain access to that information during the conduct of program activities and monitoring duties.However, the State is faced with the situation that although there are many separate agenciesadministering to the needs of the juvenile offender population, these agencies do not functionaccording to uniformly established operations policies – including policies for data collection,records retention, and records access by appropriate personnel (courts, JPOs, detention centerstaff, education officials, medical staff, treatment providers, custodial parents, etc.). The result is121

that a usable database of accurate and uniform juvenile justice information does not exist on astatewide basis in order for State-level and local-level employees of the juvenile justice system toobtain information that could be used for program development and evaluation, behavioralassessment, and behavioral prediction.Examples of this situation are as follows. The Alabama Department of Youth Services(DYS) maintains records on individual juvenile offenders without regard to the number ofoffenses committed by each juvenile. As such, one juvenile with ten offenses to his name isrecorded by DYS as one juvenile. The courts maintain records on the number of the juvenileoffender’s offenses or charges that have been brought to and disposed of by the courts. As such,one juvenile with ten offenses is recorded as ten offenses. Local police departments maintainrecords on the number of arrests they have made. As such, police maintain records on thenumber of times that a juvenile has been arrested. Also, several agencies which deal directlywith the juvenile population (for example, juvenile court judges, juvenile probation officers,school administrators, school resource officers, truancy officers, social service agency caseworkers, treatment providers, etc.) possess information which ought to be included in therespective juvenile offender’s records maintained by all of these entities. Although these recordsare accurate and effectively convey a picture of the State’s juvenile justice system, each recorddatabase must be separately examined to determine what information is contained therein andhow that information should be utilized for meaningful purposes, particularly when processingthe juveniles through the justice system.Although the State participates in the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) procedures andactivities, additional information about juvenile cases is continually being sought. Thedevelopment of additional ways by which to make the existing systems of juvenile offender datacollection and records retention more useful is vital to the juvenile justice planning process. Theresults would benefit the effectiveness of treatment programs and correctional programs as wellas ways to reduce recidivism rates, program duplication, and costs.B. Program Goals:Goal 1. Collect comprehensive juvenile justice statistics and necessarily-relatedinformation.Goal 2. Compile the statistics and information into a usable format.Goal 3. Establish and update an information database system that can be sharedstatewide, either in an electronic format or other format developedas technology improves.Goal 4. Make the statistics and information available for dissemination throughthe statewide shared information database system.Goal 5. Utilize the collected statistics and information for juvenile policy andprogram planning, implementation, tracking, analysis, monitoring, andevaluation purposes.C. Program Objectives:Objective 1. To perform on a continual basis the study of the State’s juvenilejustice system as it presently exists and as it changes over time.122

Objective 2.Performance Indicators:(a) Collect available statistics on the numbers of juveniles processedthrough the State’s police departments, courts (AOC), correctionsagency (DYS), and juvenile probation offices on a continual basis.(b) Separate the collected data into respective statistical categories ofoffenses, arrests, prosecutions, adjudications, and selectedaccountability, sentencing, or treatment alternatives.To perform on a continual basis the study of pre-delinquencycausation factors found in the State’s juvenile population and howthese factors change over time.Performance Indicators:(a)(c)Objective 3.Collect available statistics on the family, home, school, and socialenvironment factors associated with those juveniles processedthrough the State’s police departments, courts (AOC), correctionsagency (DYS) centers, and juvenile probation offices on acontinual basis.Separate the collected data into respective statistical categories offactors associated with the reported offenses, arrests, prosecutions,adjudications, and selected accountability, sentencing, or treatmentalternatives.To design and implement an information management systemwhich contains computerized databases of the collected informationwhich could then be integrated for sharing among court and juvenileprobation jurisdictions, education and social service agencies, and othernecessarily included and interested entities.Performance Indicators:(a)(b)Obtain input from the participating jurisdictions and agenciesserving juveniles on what information is available to be provided,how it can be provided, when it can be provided, and the capabilityof updating it on a continual basis.Design the appropriate accessible information system based uponinput from the participating jurisdictions, agencies, and otherentities approved for accessing the system and using theinformation contained therein.Objective 4. To perform on a continual basis an analysis and evaluation of theappropriateness and the effectiveness of maintaining and operatingthis accessible information system.Performance Indicators:(a) Monitor the collection of the available statistics on a continualbasis.(b)(b)Obtain feedback from users of the information system.Make determinations concerning the information system’scompliance with the JJDP Act’s requirements and State laws.123

(c)Make determinations concerning the information system’susefulness and effectiveness, and devise ways for altering andupgrading the system to accommodate needed changes whennecessary.D. Activities & Services:1. At the State level, the operation of this program would be coordinated by andamong the State-level grant administrators in the ADECA LETS Division, and personnel withinthe AOC, the DYS, the Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center (ACJIC), the State ofAlabama’s SAG, and other agencies (for example, the Alabama State Department of Education)which could contribute useful information to the contents of and use of the information databasesystem.2. At the local level, the operation of this program would include the participation oflocal police departments and related law enforcement agencies, courts and their juvenileprobation officers, corrections agency (DYS) centers, and possibly other local agencies (forexample, the local boards of education) which could contribute useful information to the contentsof and use of the information database system.3. The staff at these various agencies would contribute to supplementing the juvenilejustice system planning and administration process by coordinating program implementation inaccordance with the JJDP Act’s requirements for program monitoring and data collection,conducting research and inputting research results via data entry, and effectuating changes to theinformation system as, where, when, and however necessary.4. The staff at these various agencies would also contribute to supplementing thejuvenile justice system planning and administration process by conducting an analysis ofinformation needs within their own jurisdictions.5. The staff at these various agencies would also contribute to supplementing thejuvenile justice system planning and administration process by conducting monitoring andevaluations in accordance with the JJDP Act’s requirements for their respective jurisdictions, anddocumenting their findings with appropriate documentation.6. At the State level, program operating funds would be provided through the State’sJJDP Act funding allocation as well as through State funds, and the program would continue foras long as the said funds are appropriated or allocated for the State’s participation inimplementing the JJDP Act’s requirements within the State.E. Performance Measures: It is mandatory to report on selected output measures andoutcome measures identified by the USDOJ on its Data Collection and Technical AssistanceTool (DCTAT) website. For Program Area 23, Planning and Administration, these performancemeasures are listed by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP as follows:124

#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ReportsRecord Data Here1 FG fundsawarded forP & A2 Number ofMOUsdeveloped3 Number ofFTEs fundedwith FG $4 Number of SAGcommittee andsubcommitteemeetingsstaffed5 Number ofplanningactivitiesconducted6 Number ofprogram/agencypolicies orprocedurescreated,amended, orrescinded7 Number ofsubgrantsawarded8 Number ofsubgranteetechnicalassistance (TA)events (e.g.,biddersconferences)9 Number ofRFPsdeveloped thatsupportprogrammingidentified in thePlanThe amount of Formula Grants funds in wholedollars that are awarded for planning andadministration during the reporting period. Programrecords are the preferred data source.The number of Memoranda of Understanding orinteragency agreements developed during reportingperiod of the program. Include all formal partnershipor coordination agreements. Program records arethe preferred data source.The number of program staff, as measured throughthe number of Full-Time Equivalents, working forthe program during the reporting period. Tocalculate FTE, divide the number of staff hoursused by the program by 2080.The number of SAG committee and subcommitteemeetings staffed during the reporting period.The number of planning activities undertaken duringthe reporting period. Planning activities includemeetings held, needs assessments undertaken.The number of program/agency policies orprocedures created, amended, or rescinded duringthe reporting period. A policy is a plan or specificcourse of action that guides the general goals anddirectives of the program or agency. Includepolicies that are either relevant to the topic area ofthe program or policies that affect programoperations.The number of subgrants awarded during thereporting period.The number of TA events held during the reportingperiod (e.g., bidders conferences) that providedfunding and other information to subgrantees orprospective subgrantees.The number and percent of Requests for Proposals(RFPs) developed that support the juvenile justiceprogramming identified in the State Plan.A.FG funds awarded to program forservicesA. Number of Memoranda ofUnderstanding in effectA. Number of Full-Time EquivalentsA. Number of SAG meetings staffedA. Number of planning activitiesconductedA. Number of policies or procedurescreated, amended, or rescindedA. Number of subgrantsA. Number of TA events heldA. Number of RFPs developed125

#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ReportsRecord Data Here10 Number andpercent ofprogramsmonitoredThe number and percent of programs that weremonitored by the State with a site visit to assessprogram implementation and compliance.A. The number of programs monitoredB. The number of programsC. Percent (A/B)11 NumberandpercentofprogramsusingevidencebasedmodelsstrategiesThe number and percent of programs funded by the SAGusing an evidence-based model. Evidence-based modelsinclude programs that have been shown, throughrigorous evaluation and replication, to be effective atpreventing or reducing juvenile delinquency or relatedrisk factors, such as substance abuse. Model programscan come from many valid sources (e.g., Blueprints,OJJDP’s Model Programs Guide, SAMHSA’s ModelPrograms, etc.).A. The number of programs fundedusing an evidence based modelB. The number of programs fundedC. Percent (A/B)# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee ReportsRecord DataHere12 Average time fromreceipt of subgrantapplication to date ofawardThe average time (in days) from receiptof subgrant grant application to date ofaward during the reporting period.A. Total number of days from receipt ofapplication to award dateB. Number of awards madeC. Average (A/B)13 Number and percentof programs fundeddirectly in line with the3-year PlanNumber and percent of programsfunded in the reporting period thatdirectly support the 3-year Plan.A. Number of funded programs that support the3-year PlanB. Number of programs fundedC. Percent (A/B)14 Number and percentof FG programsevaluatedNumber and percent of programsfunded in the reporting period that weresubjected to an outcome evaluation.A. Number of funded programs that wereevaluatedB. Number of funded programsC. Percent (A/B)15 Percent change intechnically acceptableproposals received16 Number of FG-fundedprograms sustainedafter 3 yearsNumber and percent of proposals thatare received that are rated as technicallyacceptable during proposal reviewprocess. Technically acceptableproposals are defined as those that aredeemed worthy of funding.Number of FG funded programssustained through other funds at the endof the 3 -year grant funding cycle.A. Number of proposals deemed technicallyacceptable during the current funding periodB. Number of proposals deemed technicallyacceptable during the prior funding periodC. Percent Change (A-B/B)A. Number of FG funded programs sustainedF. Budget:Fiscal Year Formula Grant Funds ($) State/Local/Private Funds ($) Total ($)2012 $42,188.00 $42,188.00 $84,376.002013 Unknown Unknown Unknown2014 Unknown Unknown Unknown126

Problem/Program Narrative 2.A. Program Area Code and Title: 08. Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders.This priority pertains to providing community-based youth diversions to minimizepenetration into the juvenile justice system. The number of juvenile offenders processed by theState’s juvenile justice system has steadily increased throughout the 1990s and into the 2000s.The statistics quoted herein above reflect this increase over time. As this number increases, thequality and effectiveness of the current juvenile justice system will tend to decrease due to moretime and resources needing to be provided to treat those in need of juvenile justice services, butwhich time and resources are not necessarily available as, when, and where they are neededimmediately and long-term.Alabama’s statutory law, codified at Code of Alabama 1975, §12-15-208 and §12-15-215, mandates that juveniles who are adjudicated to be delinquent must be committed to orconfined in a detention facility or in an institution established for the care and rehabilitation ofdelinquent children, and that children who are adjudicated to be dependent or in need ofsupervision (CHINS) must be placed in facilities separate from those delinquent children indetention facilities. The State’s courts and law enforcement agencies need to have the resourcesand alternatives available to them so as to allow them to process and manage juvenile offendersprior to fully and formally processing them into the criminal justice system. This would coincidewith the intent of the JJDP Act and the State’s statutory law.If juveniles who commit non-serious offenses or status offenses cannot be successfullydiverted from more serious involvement with the juvenile justice system, then the State will beforced to bear the financial burden of providing care for these juveniles as well as for thoseadjudicated juvenile delinquents who are older, more-experienced, and who have committedmore serious offenses. If the status offender population can be substantially reduced through theimplementation of diversionary programs, then the juvenile courts, juvenile probation offices,and juvenile corrections system will be better able to target their efforts and concentrate theirresources on treating the more serious members of the juvenile offender population.The State’s SAG has established a policy whereby local subgrant recipients of federalJJDP Act funds -- who propose to expend those funds on programs pertaining to juvenilesreferred to non-secure attention facilities – would be eligible to receive said federal JJDP Actfunds for up to a total of three (3) years, with a one-third (33%) decrease in federal funding eachyear during that period (i.e., 100% federal grant funding the first year, 67% federal grant fundingthe second year, 33% federal grant funding the third year, and 0% federal grant funding insubsequent years beyond the third year). At the end of that three year period, the recipient wouldbe required to assume total funding responsibility for its non-secure attention facility program.Thus, as long as the local programs are successfully implementing the terms of the grant award,they may continue their eligibility for federal JJDP Act grant funding in subsequent years up toand including the third (and final) year of the program pursuant to that annual assumption ofcosts policy. At the conclusion of the three year period, the program responsibilities, costs, and127

operations are assumed by the local subgrant recipient for continued implementation duringsubsequent years beyond the third year of federal JJDP Act grant funds received for the program.In addition to this source of grant funds, the State and SAG continue to seek other/additional sources of financial support for operating non-secure attention facility programs in theState. The State also encourages the local grant fund recipients to do the same for theirrespective communities. Although such identification efforts continue, little progress has beenmade at satisfactorily associating new funding sources at the State and local levels to supportexisting program operations.B. Program Goals:Goal 1. Collect comprehensive juvenile justice statistics as reported by the locallaw enforcement agencies, courts, and other agencies within theState on juveniles who are adjudicated as dependent or in need ofsupervision (CHINS).Goal 2. Collect comprehensive juvenile justice statistics as reported by the locallaw enforcement agencies and other agencies within the State onjuveniles who have exhibited non-serious transitory deviantbehavior which can be corrected without court intervention orspecial services.Goal 3. Collect comprehensive juvenile justice statistics as reported by the locallaw enforcement agencies and other agencies within the State onjuveniles who have exhibited non-serious transitory deviantbehavior which can be corrected without court intervention butwhich will need the attention of special services.Goal 4. Collect comprehensive data on special services which can be provided tojuveniles who have exhibited non-serious transitory deviantbehavior, and on how to coordinate those services with theassistance of local law enforcement agencies, courts, and otheragencies within the State.C. Program Objectives:Objective 1. To coordinate the provision of special services within communitiesto diminish the need to adjudicate and institutionalize juvenileswho have not committed serious offenses, so as to properly matchthe appropriate services to the juveniles in need of those services.Performance Indicators:(a) Total number of juveniles adjudicated as non-serious or statusoffenders or CHINS by the juvenile court in each community(designated geographic location).(b) Total number and types of special services already available andexisting or operating within these communities.(c) Total number of juveniles adjudicated as non-serious or statusoffenders or CHINS who are being served by these specialservices.(d) Total number of these juveniles who have recidivated within128

Objective 2.designated time periods following their contact with the juvenilejustice system.To implement successful diversionary techniques so as topositively impact the efficiency and effectiveness of the juvenilejustice system by reducing the quantity of petitions filed and thenumber of juvenile cases on the court dockets, and to divert amajority of the CHINS offenders and other appropriate cases awayfrom the juvenile justice system and into appropriate communityservice agencies.Performance Indicators:(a)(b)(c)(d)Objective 3.Total number of juveniles adjudicated as non-serious or statusoffenders or CHINS by the juvenile court in each community(designated geographic location).Total number and types of special services already available andexisting or operating within these communities.Total number of juveniles adjudicated as non-serious or statusoffenders or CHINS who are being served by these specialservices.Total number of these juveniles who have recidivated withindesignated time periods following their contact with the juvenilejustice system.To provide to the juvenile court and to law enforcement agenciesin those jurisdictions -- with justified or justifiable needs -- theresources to facilitate their decision-making tasks in processing outof the juvenile justice system those CHINS, status, and non-seriousjuvenile offenders, but also to not duplicate or replace existingservices available through the intake and probation phases of thejuvenile justice process.Performance Indicators:(a)(b)(c)(d)Total number of juveniles adjudicated as non-serious or statusoffenders or CHINS by the juvenile court in each community(designated geographic location).Total number and types of special services already available andexisting or operating within these communities.Total number of juveniles adjudicated as non-serious or statusoffenders or CHINS who are being served by these specialservices.Total number of these juveniles who have recidivated withindesignated time periods following their contact with the juvenilejustice system.129

D. Activities & Services Planned:1. This program would continue to receive funding in accordance with the JJDPAct’s funding continuation policy, and as long as the program’s priorities, goals, and objectivescontinue to address the need to provide diversion programs, and as long as funding is sufficientto address the need for program implementation.2. Technical assistance for this program would be provided through the ADECALETS Division and the DYS, wherein the capability and technical expertise is necessarily housedto sufficiently accommodate the needs for such assistance. In instances where these resourcesare not sufficient to meet demands, then the ADECA LETS Division will utilize in-Stateconsultants, service agencies, and other departments to provide the level of assistance requiredfor the particular technical assistance situation(s). The ADECA LETS Division could alsorequest outside assistance for the areas of system planning at both the State and local levels,programming, service delivery, and training criminal justice personnel.E. Performance Measures: It is mandatory to report on selected output measures andoutcome measures identified by the USDOJ on its Data Collection and Technical AssistanceTool (DCTAT) website. For Program Area 08, Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders, theseperformance measures are listed by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP as follows:#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ReportsRecord DataHere1 FG fundsawarded forDSO2 Number ofMOUsdeveloped3 Number oftransportationplansdeveloped4 Number ofprogramsimplemented5 Number ofshelter bedscontractedThe amount of Formula Grants funds in whole dollarsthat are awarded for DSO during the reportingperiod. Program records are the preferred datasource.The number of Memoranda of Understanding orinteragency agreements developed during reportingperiod of the program. Include all formal partnershipor coordination agreements. Program records are thepreferred data source.The number of transportation plans developed duringreporting period. Include all formal partnership orcoordination agreements. Program records are thepreferred data source.The number of new programs implemented duringthe reporting period.The number of beds contracted through private orpublic providers for shelter care during the reportingperiod.A.Dollars awarded to DSO CoreRequirementA. Number of Memoranda of UnderstandingdevelopedA. Number of plans developedA. Number of programs created and/orimplemented during the reporting periodA. Number of shelter beds contracted130

#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ReportsRecord DataHere6 Number andpercent ofstaff trained7 Number ofhours of stafftrainingprovided8 Number ofmaterialsdeveloped9 Number ofsite visitsconducted10 Number offacilitiesreceiving TAThe number and percent of staff that are trainedduring reporting period. The number is the rawnumber of staff to receive any formal training relevantto the program or their position as program staff.Include any training from any source or mediumreceived during the reporting period as long asreceipt can be verified. Training does not have tohave been completed during the reporting period. Toget the percent divide the raw number by the totalnumber of program staff. Program records are thepreferred data source.The number of training hours that are provided toprogram staff during the reporting period. Trainingincludes in-house and external trainings conductedand available to staff.The number of program materials that weredeveloped during the reporting period. Include onlysubstantive materials such as program guidancemanuals, CM manuals, monitoring tools, i.e., colocatedfacility checklists, and model facilitychecklists, etc. Count the number of piecesdeveloped.The number of onsite inspection visits made tosecure juvenile detention and adult jails and lockupsfacilities by the state Compliance Monitor during thereporting period. The Annual Compliance MonitoringReport is the preferred data source.The number of public and private secure detentioncenters, jails, lockups, and correctional facilitiesreceiving technical assistance by state or federalrepresentatives during the reporting period. TheAnnual Compliance Monitoring Report is thepreferred data source.A. Number of staff who participated intrainingB. Total number of program staffC. Percent (A/B)A.Number of hours of training provided tostaffA. Number of materials developed during thereporting periodA. Number of visits conductedA. Number of facilities11 Needs assessmentcompleted (Y/N)12 Number ofprogrampolicies/procedurescreated, amended,or rescindedReport whether a needs assessment was conductedto determine whether and how the program would beimplemented.The number of policies or procedures created,amended or rescinded during the reporting period. Apolicy is a plan or specific course of action that guidesthe general goals and directives of the program oragency. Include policies that are either relevant to thetopic area of the program or policies that affectprogram operations.A. Was a needs assessmentconducted?A. Number of policies or procedurescreated, amended, or rescinded131

13 Number ofprogram youthservedAn unduplicated count of the number of youth servedby the program during the reporting period. Definitionof the number of youth served for a reporting period isthe number of program youth carried over fromprevious reporting period, plus new admissionsduring the reporting period. In calculating the 3-yearsummary, the total number of youth served is thenumber of participants carried over from the yearprevious to the first fiscal year, plus all newadmissions during the 3 reporting fiscal years.Program records are the preferred data source.A. Number of program youth carriedover from the previous reportingperiod, plus new admissions duringthe reporting period# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee Reports Record Data Here14 Number andpercent of programyouth who OFFENDduring the reportingperiod (short term)15 Number andpercent of programyouth who OFFENDduring the reportingperiod(long term)The number and percent ofparticipating program youth who werearrested or seen at a juvenile court fora delinquent offense during thereporting period. Appropriate for anyyouth-serving program. Official records(police, juvenile court) are the preferreddata source. The number of youthtracked should reflect the number ofprogram youth that are followed ormonitored for arrests or offenses.Ideally this number should be all youthserved by the program during thisreporting period. Ex. If I am serving 100youth in my program, A would be 100.If I am following up with 50 of them, Bwould be 50. Of these 50 programyouth I’m tracking, if 25 of them werearrested or had a delinquent offenseduring this reporting period, then Cwould be 25.The number and percent ofparticipating program youth who werearrested or seen at a juvenile court fora delinquent offense during thereporting period. Appropriate for anyyouth-serving program. Official records(police, juvenile court) are the preferreddata source. The number of youthtracked should reflect the number ofprogram youth that are followed ormonitored for arrests or offenses 6-12months after exiting the program. Ex. Ihave a lot of youth who exited myprogram 6-12 months ago, but we areonly tracking 100 of them, so A is 100.Of these 100 program youth that exitedthe program 6-12 months ago 65 had anew arrest or delinquent offense duringthis reporting period, so B is 65.A. Total number of program youth servedB. Number of program youth tracked duringthis reporting periodC. Of B, the number of program youth whohad a new arrest or delinquent offenseduring this reporting periodD. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility during thisreporting periodE. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodF. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodG. Percent OFFENDING (C/B)A. Number of program youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months ago that you aretrackingB. Of A, the number of program youth whohad a new arrest or delinquent offenseduring this reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility duringthis reporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM (B/A)132

# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee Reports Record Data Here16 Number and percentof program youthwhoRE-OFFEND(short term)The number and percent ofparticipating program youth who werearrested or seen at a juvenile court fora new delinquent offense during thereporting period. Appropriate for anyyouth-serving program. Official records(police, juvenile court) are the preferreddata source. The number of youthtracked should reflect the number ofprogram youth that are followed ormonitored for new arrests or offenses.Ideally this number should be all youthserved by the program during thisreporting period. Ex. If I am serving 100youth in my program, A would be 100.If I am following up with 50 of them, Bwould be 50. Of these 50 programyouth I’m tracking, if 25 of them werearrested or had a delinquent offenseduring this reporting period, then Cwould be 25.A. Total number of program youth servedB. Of A, the number of program youth whohad a new arrest or delinquent offenseduring this reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility duringthis reporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM(B/A)17 Number and percent ofprogram youth whoRE-OFFEND(long term)18 Change in thenumber of violationsof DSOThe number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seen ata juvenile court for a new delinquent offenseduring the reporting period. Appropriate forany youth-serving program. Official records(police, juvenile court) are the preferred datasource. The number of youth tracked shouldreflect the number of program youth that arefollowed or monitored for new arrests oroffenses 6-12 months after exiting theprogram. Ex. I have a lot of youth whoexited my program 6-12 months ago, but weare only tracking 100 of them, so A is 100.Of these 100 program youth that exited theprogram 6-12 months ago 65 had a newarrest or delinquent offense during thisreporting period, so B is 65.The change in the number of violations ofthe deinstitutionalization of status offenderrequirement from the previous reportingperiod compared with the current reportingperiod. DSO is determined according to thedefinition in the OJJDP Guidance Manualfor Monitoring Facilities Under the JJDP Actof 2002. The Annual Compliance MonitoringReport is the preferred data source.A. Number of program youth who exitedthe program 6-12 months ago thatyou are trackingB. Of A, the number of program youthwho had a new arrest or delinquentoffense during this reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facilityduring this reporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who receivedanother sentence during thisreporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM(B/A)A. Number of violations of DSO duringthe current reporting periodB. Number of violations of DSO duringthe previous reporting periodC. Percent change (A-B/B)133

# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee Reports Record Data Here19 Number and percent ofstaff with increasedknowledge of programareaThe number and percent of staff who gaineda greater knowledge in the area of CoreRequirements or related information (e.g.,DSO, alternatives) through trainings or otherformal learning opportunities. Appropriatefor any program whose staff receivedprogram-related training. Training does notneed to have been given by the program.Self-report data collected using trainingevaluation or assessment forms are theexpected data source.A. Number of staff trained during thereporting period who report increasedknowledgeB. Number of staff trained during thereporting periodC. Percent (A/B)Additionally, there are “State Level” output measures and outcome measures identifiedby the USDOJ on its Data Collection and Technical Assistance Tool (DCTAT) website forProgram Area 08, Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders. These “State Level” performancemeasures are listed by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP as follows:#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere1 FG fundsawarded forDSO2 Number ofMOUsdeveloped3 Number oftransportationplansdeveloped4 Number ofprogramsimplemented5 Number ofshelter bedscontractedThe amount of Formula Grants funds in wholedollars that are awarded for DSO during thereporting period. Program records are thepreferred data source.The number of Memoranda of Understandingor interagency agreements developed duringreporting period of the program. Include allformal partnership or coordination agreements.Program records are the preferred datasource.The number of transportation plans developedduring reporting period. Include all formalpartnership or coordination agreements.Program records are the preferred datasource.The number of new programs implementedduring the reporting period.The number of beds contracted throughprivate or public providers for shelter careduring the reporting period.A. Dollars awarded to DSO Core RequirementA. Number of Memoranda of UnderstandingdevelopedA. Number of plans developedA. Number of programs created and/orimplemented during the reporting periodA. Number of shelter beds contracted134

#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere6 Number andpercent ofprogramstaff trained7 Number ofhours ofprogramstaff trainingprovided8 Number ofmaterialsdeveloped9 Number ofsite visitsconducted10 Number offacilitiesreceiving TA11 Needsassessmentcompleted(Y/N)12 Number ofpolicies orprocedurescreated,amended, orrescindedThe number and percent of program staff thatare trained during reporting period. Programstaff includes full and part-time employeesand/or volunteers. The number is the rawnumber of staff to receive any formal trainingrelevant to the program or their position asprogram staff. Include any training from anysource or medium received during thereporting period as long as receipt can beverified. Training does not have to have beencompleted during the reporting period. To getthe percent divide the raw number by the totalnumber of program staff. Program records arethe preferred data source.The number of training hours that programstaff are provided during the reporting period.Training includes in-house and externaltrainings.The number of program materials that weredeveloped during the reporting period. Includeonly substantive materials such as programguidance manuals, CM manuals, monitoringtools, i.e., co-located facility checklists, andmodel facility checklists, etc. Count thenumber of pieces developed.The number of onsite inspection visits made tosecure juvenile detention and adult jails andlockups facilities by the state ComplianceMonitor during the reporting period. TheAnnual Compliance Monitoring Report is thepreferred data source.The number of public and private securedetention centers, jails, lockups, andcorrectional facilities receiving technicalassistance by state or federal representativesduring the reporting period. The AnnualCompliance Monitoring Report is the preferreddata source.Report whether a needs assessment wasconducted to determine whether and how theprogram would be implemented.The number of policies or procedures created,amended or rescinded during the reportingperiod. A policy is a plan or specific course ofaction that guides the general goals anddirectives of the program or agency. Includepolicies that are either relevant to the topicarea of the program or policies that affectprogram operations.A. Number of staff who participated in trainingB. Number of program staffC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of hours of training provided to staffA. Number of materials developedA. Number of visits conductedA. Number of facilitiesA.Was a needs assessment conducted? (Yesor No response)A.Number of policies, or procedures created,amended or rescinded135

#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere13 Number ofprogramyouthservedAn unduplicated count of the number of youthserved by the program during the reportingperiod. Definition of the number of youthserved for a reporting period is the number ofprogram youth carried over from previousreporting period, plus new admissionsduring the reporting period. In calculating the3-year summary, the total number of youthserved is the number of participants carriedover from the year previous to the first fiscalyear, plus all new admissions during the 3reporting fiscal years. Program records are thepreferred data source.A. Number of program youth carried over fromthe previous reporting period, plus newadmissions during the reporting period# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere14 Number andpercent of programyouth who OFFENDduring the reportingperiod (short term)The number and percent ofparticipating program youth whowere arrested or seen at a juvenilecourt for a delinquent offenseduring the reporting period.Appropriate for any youth-servingprogram. Official records (police,juvenile court) are the preferreddata source. The number of youthtracked should reflect the numberof program youth that are followedor monitored for arrests oroffenses. Ideally this numbershould be all youth served by theprogram during this reportingperiod. Ex. If I am serving 100youth in my program, A would be100. If I am following up with 50 ofthem, B would be 50. Of these 50program youth I’m tracking, if 25 ofthem were arrested or had adelinquent offense during thisreporting period, then C would be25.A. Total number of program youth servedB. Number of program youth tracked during thisreporting periodC. Of B, the number of program youth who had a newarrest or delinquent offense during this reportingperiodD. Number of program youth who were recommitted toa juvenile facility during this reporting periodE. Number of program youth who were sentenced toadult prison during this reporting periodF. Number of youth who received another sentenceduring this reporting periodG. Percent OFFENDING (C/B)136

# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere15 Number andpercent of programyouth who OFFENDduring the reportingperiod(long term)16 Number andpercent of programyouth whoRE-OFFEND(short term)The number and percent ofparticipating program youth whowere arrested or seen at a juvenilecourt for a delinquent offenseduring the reporting period.Appropriate for any youth-servingprogram. Official records (police,juvenile court) are the preferreddata source. The number of youthtracked should reflect the numberof program youth that are followedor monitored for arrests or offenses6-12 months after exiting theprogram. Ex. I have a lot of youthwho exited my program 6-12months ago, but we are onlytracking 100 of them, so A is 100.Of these 100 program youth thatexited the program 6-12 monthsago 65 had a new arrest ordelinquent offense during thisreporting period, so B is 65.The number and percent ofparticipating program youth whowere arrested or seen at a juvenilecourt for a new delinquent offenseduring the reporting period.Appropriate for any youth-servingprogram. Official records (police,juvenile court) are the preferreddata source. The number of youthtracked should reflect the numberof program youth that are followedor monitored for new arrests oroffenses. Ideally this numbershould be all youth served by theprogram during this reportingperiod. Ex. If I am serving 100youth in my program, A would be100. If I am following up with 50 ofthem, B would be 50. Of these 50program youth I’m tracking, if 25 ofthem were arrested or had adelinquent offense during thisreporting period, then C would be25.A. Number of program youth who exited the program6-12 months ago that you are trackingB. Of A, the number of program youth who had a newarrest or delinquent offense during this reportingperiodC. Number of program youth who were recommitted toa juvenile facility during this reporting periodD. Number of program youth who were sentenced toadult prison during this reporting periodE. Number of youth who received another sentenceduring this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM (B/A)A. Total number of program youth servedB. Of A, the number of program youth who had a newarrest or delinquent offense during this reportingperiodC. Number of program youth who were recommitted toa juvenile facility during this reporting periodD. Number of program youth who were sentenced toadult prison during this reporting periodE. Number of youth who received another sentenceduring this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM (B/A)137

# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere17 Number and percentof program youth whoRE-OFFEND(long term)18 Change in thenumber of violationsof DSO19 Number and percentof staff with increasedknowledge of programareaThe number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested orseen at a juvenile court for a newdelinquent offense during the reportingperiod. Appropriate for any youth-servingprogram. Official records (police, juvenilecourt) are the preferred data source. Thenumber of youth tracked should reflectthe number of program youth that arefollowed or monitored for new arrests oroffenses 6-12 months after exiting theprogram. Ex. I have a lot of youth whoexited my program 6-12 months ago, butwe are only tracking 100 of them, so A is100. Of these 100 program youth thatexited the program 6-12 months ago 65had a new arrest or delinquent offenseduring this reporting period, so B is 65.The change in the number of violations ofthe deinstitutionalization of statusoffender requirement from the previousreporting period compared with thecurrent reporting period. DSO isdetermined according to the definition inthe OJJDP Guidance Manual forMonitoring Facilities Under the JJDP Actof 2002. The Annual ComplianceMonitoring Report is the preferred datasource.The number and percent of staff whogained a greater knowledge in the area ofCore Requirements or related information(e.g., DSO, alternatives) through trainingsor other formal learning opportunities.Appropriate for any program whose staffreceived program-related training.Training does not need to have beengiven by the program. Self-report datacollected using training evaluation orassessment forms are the expected datasource.A. Number of program youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months ago that you aretrackingB. Of A, the number of program youth whohad a new arrest or delinquent offenseduring this reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility during thisreporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM (B/A)A. Number of violations of DSO during thecurrent reporting periodB. Number of violations of DSO during theprevious reporting periodC. Percent change (A-B/B)A. Number of staff trained during the reportingperiod who report increased knowledgeB. Number of staff trained during the reportingperiodC. Percent (A/B)F. Budget:Fiscal Year Formula Grant Funds ($) State/Local/Private Funds ($) Total ($)2012 $81,264.00 $0.00 $81,264.002013 Unknown Unknown Unknown2014 Unknown Unknown Unknown138

Problem/Program Narrative 3.A. Program Area Code and Title: 10. Disproportionate Minority Contact.This priority pertains to minority overrepresentation (minority youth coming into contactwith the juvenile justice system) reduction in the State’s juvenile justice system. Minorityoverrepresentation exists in Alabama’s juvenile justice system. Statistics drawn from the U.S.Census taken in 1990, 2000, and 2010 as well as statistics produced by the DYS indicate thatminority youth in Alabama are disproportionately over-represented in their contact with theState’s juvenile justice system. According to the 1990 Census, Alabama’s total juvenilepopulation contained 577,226 youth, consisting of 403,193 white youth accounting for 69.85%of this population, 164,448 black youth accounting for 28.49% of this population, and 14,170youth of other racial origin comprised of Hispanic, Asian, native American, or mixed raceheritage accounting for 2.45% of this population. Also according to the 1990 Census, the State’spopulation of juveniles under 18 years of age totaled 162,750, equating to 28.2% of thispopulation. According to the 2000 Census, Alabama’s total juvenile population contained1,240,643 youth, equating to 27% of the State’s total population of 4,599,030 citizens, with 71%of this population consisting of White youth, 26% of this population consisting of Black/African-American youth, 2% of this population consisting of Hispanic/Latino youth, 0.9% of thispopulation consisting of Asian youth, 0.03% of this population consisting of Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander youth, 0.5% of this population consisting of American Indian/AlaskanNative youth, and 0.9% of this population consisting of Some Other Race/Mixed Race Originyouth. And according to the 2010 Census, early calculations have Alabama’s total juvenilepopulation containing 1,256,180 youth, equating to 26.28% of the State’s total population of4,779,736 citizens, with 68.5% of this population consisting of White youth, 26.2% of thispopulation consisting of Black/African-American youth, 1.1% of this population consisting ofAsian youth, 0.1% of this population consisting of Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander youth,0.6% of this population consisting of American Indian/Alaskan Native youth, and 3.5% of thispopulation consisting of Some Other Race/Mixed Race Origin youth (although 3.9% of thispopulation are now classified by the U. S. Census Bureau as being of Hispanic/Latino origin).There was a total of 35,115 juveniles processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year2011. Of this total, whites comprised 17,628 of the case adjudications, blacks comprised 16,230of the case adjudications, and other races comprised of hispanic/latino, asian, native hawaiian/other pacific islander, american indian/alaska native, or other/mixed race heritage comprised1,257 of these case adjudications. From these figures, it can be determined that 50.20% of the35,115 juveniles processed consisted of white juveniles, 46.22% consisted of black juveniles,and 3.58% consisted of juveniles of other races comprised of hispanic/latino, asian, nativehawaiian/other pacific islander, american indian/alaska native, or other/mixed race heritage.Thus, white youth accounted for 71% of the State’s population according to the 2000Census, and 68.5% of the State’s population according to the 2010 Census, but accounted for50.20% of the juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year 2011. Blacksaccounted for 26% of the State’s population according to the 2000 Census, and 26.2% of theState’s population according to the 2010 Census, but accounted for 46.22% of the juvenile casesprocessed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year 2011. And juveniles of other races139

comprised of hispanic/latino, asian, native hawaiian/other pacific islander, americanindian/alaska native, or other/mixed race heritage accounted for 3% of the State’s populationaccording to the 2000 Census, and 5.3% of the State’s population according to the 2010 Census,but accounted for 3.58% of the juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in CalendarYear 2011. The specific minority (black) breakdown of the juvenile case petitions filed inCalendar Year 2011 is reflected in the following categories:Total Minority %1. 9.61% were violent crimes (against the person) 5.33%2. 16.26% were property crimes 9.67%3. 36.49% were Part II offenses (victimless) 18.64%4. 28.64% were CHINS (juveniles only) 7.99%5. 7.67% were technical violations (violations of probation or aftercare) 4.05%6. 1.32% were other types of violations 0.54%7. 50.15% were referred from law enforcement 27.30%8. 25.38% were referred from school 6.78%9. 6.45% were referred from probation officers 3.59%10. 7.96% were referred from parents/relatives 3.70%11. 7.76% were referred from victims 4.30%12. 2.14% were referred from social service agencies, 1.07%traffic court, other courts, and other sources.There was a total of 38,690 juveniles processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year2010. Of this total, whites comprised 19,829 of the case adjudications, blacks comprised 17,543of the case adjudications, and other races comprised of hispanic/latino, asian, native hawaiian/other pacific islander, american indian/alaska native, or other/mixed race heritage comprised1,318 of these case adjudications. From these figures, it can be determined that 51.25% of the38,690 juveniles processed consisted of white juveniles, 45.34% consisted of black juveniles,and 3.41% consisted of juveniles of other races comprised of hispanic/latino, asian, nativehawaiian/other pacific islander, american indian/alaska native, or other/mixed race heritage.Thus, white youth accounted for 71% of the State’s population according to the 2000Census, and 68.5% of the State’s population according to the 2010 Census, but accounted for51.25% of the juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year 2010. Blacksaccounted for 26% of the State’s population according to the 2000 Census, and 26.2% of theState’s population according to the 2010 Census, but accounted for 45.34% of the juvenile casesprocessed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year 2010. And juveniles of other racescomprised of hispanic/latino, asian, native hawaiian/other pacific islander, americanindian/alaska native, or other/mixed race heritage accounted for 3% of the State’s populationaccording to the 2000 Census, and 5.3% of the State’s population according to the 2010 Census,but accounted for 3.41% of the juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in CalendarYear 2010. The specific minority (black) breakdown of the juvenile case petitions filed inCalendar Year 2010 is reflected in the following categories:140

Total Minority %1. 10.03% were violent crimes (against the person) 5.94%2. 15.82% were property crimes 9.13%3. 34.16% were Part II offenses (victimless) 17.71%4. 29.75% were CHINS (juveniles only) 19.11%5. 8.37% were technical violations (violations of probation or aftercare) 4.49%6. 1.87% were other types of violations 0.82%7. 43.19% were referred from law enforcement 22.99%8. 26.74% were referred from school 9.83%9. 7.50% were referred from probation officers 4.15%10. 9.66% were referred from parents/relatives 4.57%11. 8.72% were referred from victims 4.95%12. 3.71% were referred from social service agencies, 1.98%traffic court, other courts, and other sources.And, there was a total of 40,940 juveniles processed by the State of Alabama in CalendarYear 2009. Of this total, whites comprised 20,482 of the case adjudications, blacks comprised19,118 of the case adjudications, and other races comprised of hispanic/latino, asian, nativehawaiian/ other pacific islander, american indian/alaska native, or other/mixed race heritagecomprised 1,340 of these case adjudications. From these figures, it can be determined that50.03% of the 40,940 juveniles processed consisted of white juveniles, 46.70% consisted ofblack juveniles, and 3.27% consisted of juveniles of other races comprised of hispanic/latino,asian, native hawaiian/other pacific islander, american indian/alaska native, or other/mixed raceheritage.Thus, white youth accounted for 71% of the State’s population according to the 2000Census, and accounted for 50.03% of the juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama inCalendar Year 2009. Blacks accounted for 26% of the State’s population according to the 2000Census, and accounted for 46.70% of the juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama inCalendar Year 2009. And juveniles of other races comprised of hispanic/latino, asian, nativehawaiian/other pacific islander, american indian/alaska native, or other/mixed race heritageaccounted for 3% of the State’s population according to the 2000 Census, and accounted for3.27% of the juvenile cases processed by the State of Alabama in Calendar Year 2009. Thespecific minority (black) breakdown of the juvenile case petitions filed in Calendar Year 2009 isreflected in the following categories:Total Minority %1. 10.01% were violent crimes (against the person) 6.06%2. 16.21% were property crimes 9.25%3. 35.46% were Part II offenses (victimless) 17.80%4. 28.25% were CHINS (juveniles only) 8.28%5. 8.20% were technical violations (violations of probation or aftercare) 4.38%6. 1.87% were other types of violations 0.93%7. 44.20% were referred from law enforcement 23.00%8. 26.22% were referred from school 7.85%9. 6.62% were referred from probation officers 3.64%141

10. 8.81% were referred from parents/relatives 4.01%11. 9.33% were referred from victims 5.36%12. 4.81% were referred from social service agencies, 2.56%traffic court, other courts, and other sources.As the above figures for the past three years indicate, black youth represented less thanone-half (46.22%) of the juvenile population processed through the State of Alabama’s juvenilejustice system in Calendar Year 2011, and all minority youth represented 49.8% of thispopulation. Black youth represented less than one-half (45.34%) of the juvenile populationprocessed through the State of Alabama’s juvenile justice system in Calendar Year 2010, and allminority youth represented 48.75% of this population. And Black youth represented less thanone-half (46.70%) of the juvenile population processed through the State of Alabama’s juvenilejustice system in Calendar Year 2009, and all minority youth represented 49.97% of thispopulation. The desirable solution to this minority juvenile offender population problem wouldbe to achieve effective delinquency prevention through the implementation of properly-fundedprograms which address the various causes contributing to this overall crime problem. Ifexisting programs were properly-funded via the federal appropriations process, then each couldpossibly be focused on directing additional attention toward addressing the problem of minority(black) juvenile delinquency without compromising the principal missions, goals, and objectivesof these existing programs. If prevention programs were properly-funded via the federalappropriations process, then they could possibly be expanded so as to accomplish their primarymissions, goals, and objectives more effectively. If a major infusion of cash being appropriatedby Congress and administered by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP and the States is directed toward theseprograms as well as many other programs that are administered by other federal agencies (reformof the public welfare system, reform of the public education system, reform of the public housingsystem, and on and on), then minority (black) juveniles might be less likely to come into contactwith, become involved in, and be processed through the State’s juvenile justice system.The State’s SAG places juvenile crime prevention as one of its priorities. Included inthese priorities are addressing the overrepresentation of minorities making contact with thejuvenile justice system, and addressing the particular crime problems throughout the State ingeneral and within certain geographic localities in particular that are associated with highjuvenile crime rates. The guiding premise in developing programs to prevent juveniledelinquency, and especially those programs which can address minority (black)overrepresentation when making contact with the juvenile justice system, is the need to targetand reach young people before they learn, develop, and imitate or exhibit at-risk behavior whichcan bring them into contact with the juvenile justice system and possible entry into the adultcriminal justice system at a later date.B. Program Goals:Goal 1. Collect comprehensive juvenile justice statistics as reported by the locallaw enforcement agencies, courts, juvenile probation offices, andother agencies within the State on minority (black) juvenilesmaking contact with the juvenile justice system at each stage of theproceedings [in initial legal encounters through law enforcement(arrest) and to ongoing contact through actions within the juvenile142

Goal 2.Goal 3.justice system (such as referral to juvenile court, diversion beforeadjudication, secure detention, issuance of petitions, adjudication,placement on probation, placement in secure corrections, andtransfer to adult courts)].Use the collected statistics to make determinations and recommendationsto Alabama’s Administrative Office of Courts (AOC), the State’sjuvenile courts and juvenile probation offices, the AlabamaDepartment of Youth Services (DYS), the State’s SAG, and theAlabama Governor and Legislature on the need for programs thatwould address minority (black) youth who are making contact withthe juvenile justice system.Develop programs that would be tailored to the needs of minority (black)juveniles who are at risk or on the verge of involvement in thejuvenile justice system but who have not yet fully penetrated thesystem in terms of the seriousness of offenses committed, so as toprovide additional sources of available assistance to minority(black) youth who are making contact with the juvenile justicesystem.C. Program Objectives:Objective 1. To provide communities and local law enforcement agencies withestablished programs that address minority (black) juvenile at-riskbehavior.Performance Indicators:(a) Total number of offenses investigated, and minority (black)juvenile arrests made and petitions filed as a result of theseoffenses.(b) Total number of minority (black) adjudications arising from thesepetitions.(c) Total number of each type of sentence / confinement imposed onminority (black) juveniles arising from these adjudications.(d) Total number of minority (black) juveniles lectured and released.(e) Total number of minority (black) juveniles lectured and returned toparents.(f) Total number of minority (black) juveniles referred to socialservice agencies.(g) Total number of these minority (black) juveniles recidivatingwithin designated time periods following their initial contact withthe juvenile justice system.Objective 2.To reduce the number of incidents of delinquency by minority(black) juveniles in selected jurisdictions by fifty percent (50%) orby as much as is reasonably attainable.Performance Indicators:(a)Total number of offenses investigated, and minority (black)juvenile arrests made and petitions filed as a result of these143

(b)(c)(d)offenses.Total number of minority (black) adjudications arising from thesepetitions.Total number and types of agencies that have the opportunity todevelop and teach positive behavior patterns in the minority(black) juvenile population to which they are responsible.Total number and identification of projects operated by theseagencies and how these projects will be subject to the respectiveagency’s teaching of positive behavior patterns to the designatedminority (black) juvenile clientele.Objective 3.To develop and provide assistance to foster interagencycooperation and coordination in the delivery of juvenile services tominority (black) juveniles and their families.Performance Indicators:(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)D. Activities & Services Planned:Total number of offenses investigated, and minority (black)juvenile arrests made and petitions filed as a result of theseoffenses.Total number of minority (black) adjudications arising from thesepetitions.Total number and types of agencies that have developed programs whichteach positive behavior patterns.Total number and identification of programs operated by theseagencies and how these programs will be subject to the respectiveagency’s teaching of positive behavior patterns to the designatedminority (black) juvenile clientele and their parents or guardians.Total amount of funding necessary to provide resources, to coordinate theintegration of these programs’ activities, and to perform the provision ofthese programs’ services to the designated minority (black) juvenileclientele and their parents or guardians.1. This program would continue to receive funding in accordance with the JJDPAct’s assumption of cost requirements as long as the program’s priorities, goals, and objectivescontinue to address the need to provide diversion programs which address minority (black) overrepresentationin making contact with the State’s juvenile justice system, and as long as fundingis sufficient for its continued implementation.2. Technical assistance for this program would be provided through the ADECALETS Division and the DYS, wherein the capability and technical expertise is necessarily housedto sufficiently accommodate the needs for such assistance. In instances where these resourcesare not sufficient to meet demands, then the ADECA LETS Division will utilize in-Stateconsultants, service agencies, and other departments to provide the level of assistance requiredfor the particular technical assistance situation(s). The ADECA LETS Division could alsorequest outside assistance for the areas of system planning at both the State and local levels,144

programming, service delivery, and training criminal justice personnel in addressing minority(black) overrepresentation in making contact with the State’s juvenile justice system. Particularareas to be focused upon include developing procedures for identifying pre-delinquent activitiesdisplayed by at-risk youth, and developing information on implementing successful andinnovative service delivery techniques.E. Performance Measures: It is mandatory to report on selected output measures andoutcome measures identified by the USDOJ on its Data Collection and Technical AssistanceTool (DCTAT) website. For Program Area 10, Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC), theseperformance measures are listed by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP as follows:#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ReportsRecord Data Here1 Number ofFTEs fundedwith FG $2 Number ofprogramsimplemented3 Number andpercent ofprogramstaff trained4 Number ofhours ofprogramstaff trainingprovided5 Number ofnon-programpersonneltrainedThe number of program staff, as measured throughthe number of Full-Time Equivalents, working forthe program during the reporting period. Tocalculate FTE, divide the number of staff hoursused by the program by 2080.The number of new programs implemented duringthe reporting period.The number and percent of program staff that aretrained during reporting period. Program staffincludes full and part-time employees and/orvolunteers. The number is the raw number of staffto receive any formal training relevant to theprogram or their position as program staff. Includeany training from any source or medium receivedduring the reporting period as long as receipt canbe verified. Training does not have to have beencompleted during the reporting period. To get thepercent divide the raw number by the total numberof program staff. Program records are the preferreddata source.The number of training hours that program staff areprovided during the reporting period. Trainingincludes in-house and external trainings.The number of non-program people who aretrained on DMC-related issues such as improvingunderstanding of cultural differences, culturalcontext, cultural diversity, cultural awareness, bias,multicultural workplaces, etc. during the reportingperiod. The number is the raw number of nonprogrampeople from law enforcement, courts,other related agencies, or community memberswho participate in training, conferences, orworkshops. Although DMC program staff may alsoparticipate in such training (e.g., statewide or localDMC conferences) do not count them here. Countthem under #4.A. Number of Full-Time Equivalent DMCCoordinators paid with FG $A. Number of DMC-related programs inoperation during the reporting periodA. Number of staff who participated intrainingB. Total number of program staffC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of DMC-related hours of trainingprovided to staffA. Number of non-program people whoparticipated in training145

#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ReportsRecord Data Here6 Number ofhours ofnon-programpersonneltrainingprovided7 Number ofprogrammaterialsdevelopedThe number of DMC-related training hoursprovided to non-program people during thereporting period. Include DMC training,conferences, and workshops conducted not just forDMC program staff only but for juvenile justicesystem personnel at large (e.g. law enforcement,court, etc.), and other related agencies andcommunity members.The number of program materials that weredeveloped during the reporting period. Include onlysubstantive materials such as program overviews,client workbooks, lists of local service providers. Donot include program advertisements oradministrative forms such as sign-in sheets orclient tracking forms. Count the number of piecesdeveloped. Program records are the preferred datasource.A. Number of DMC-related hours of trainingprovided to non-program personnelA.Number of program materials developedduring the reporting period8 Number ofprogram youthserved9 Number ofservice hourscompleted10 Average lengthof stay inprogramAn unduplicated count of the number of youth servedby the program during the reporting period. Definitionof the number of youth served for a reportingperiod is the number of program youth carried overfrom previous reporting period, plus new admissionsduring the reporting period. In calculating the 3-yearsummary, the total number of youth served is thenumber of participants carried over from the yearprevious to the first fiscal year, plus all newadmissions during the 3 reporting fiscal years.Program records are the preferred data source.The number of hours of service completed byprogram youth during the reporting period. Service isany explicit activity (such as program contact,counseling sessions, course curriculum, communityservice, etc.) delivered by program staff or otherprofessionals dedicated to completing the programrequirements. Program records are the preferreddata source.The average length of time (in days) that clientsremain in the program. Include data for clients whoboth complete program requirements prior toprogram exit and those who do not. Program recordsare the preferred data source.A. Number of program youth carriedover from the previous reportingperiod, plus new admissions duringthe reporting periodA. Total number of program youthservice hoursA. Total number of days between intakeand program exit across all clientsservedB. Number of cases closedC. Average (A/B)11 Number ofplanningactivitiesconducted12 Number ofassessmentstudiesconductedThe number of planning activities undertaken duringthe reporting period. Planning activities includemeetings held, needs assessments undertaken.The number of DMC assessment studies undertakenduring the reporting period to determine factorscontributing to DMC.A. Number of planning activitiesundertakenA. Number of assessment studiesundertaken146

13 Number of dataimprovementprojectsimplemented14 Number ofobjectivedecision-makingtools developed15 Number ofprogram/agencypolicies orprocedurescreated,amended, orrescindedThe number of data improvement projects funded atthe state or local levels specifically to improve thequality and completeness of DMC data.Report whether any objective decision-making toolswere developed, such as detention risk, riskassessment, needs assessment, mental healthassessment were developed to determine thesupervision needs of the youth.The number of program/agency policies orprocedures created, amended, or rescinded duringthe reporting period. A policy is a plan or specificcourse of action that guides the general goals anddirectives of the program or agency. Include policiesthat are either relevant to the topic area of theprogram or policies that affect program operations.A. Number of projects funded during thereporting periodA. Number of tools developedA. Number of program/agency policiesor procedures created, amended, orrescinded# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere16 Number andpercent of programyouth who OFFENDduring the reportingperiod(short term)17 Number andpercent of programyouth who OFFENDduring the reportingperiod(long term)The number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seenat a juvenile court for a delinquent offenseduring the reporting period. Appropriate forany youth-serving program. Officialrecords (police, juvenile court) are thepreferred data source. The number ofyouth tracked should reflect the number ofprogram youth that are followed ormonitored for arrests or offenses. Ideallythis number should be all youth served bythe program during this reporting period.Ex. If I am serving 100 youth in myprogram, A would be 100. If I am followingup with 50 of them, B would be 50. Ofthese 50 program youth I’m tracking, if 25of them were arrested or had a delinquentoffense during this reporting period, then Cwould be 25.The number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seenat a juvenile court for a delinquent offenseduring the reporting period. Appropriate forany youth-serving program. Officialrecords (police, juvenile court) are thepreferred data source. The number ofyouth tracked should reflect the number ofprogram youth that are followed ormonitored for arrests or offenses 6-12months after exiting the program. Ex. Ihave a lot of youth who exited my program6-12 months ago, but we are only tracking100 of them, so A is 100. Of these 100program youth that exited the program 6-12 months ago 65 had a new arrest ordelinquent offense during this reportingperiod, so B is 65.A. Total number of program youth servedB. Number of program youth tracked during thisreporting periodC. Of B, the number of program youth who hada new arrest or delinquent offense duringthis reporting periodD. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility during thisreporting periodE. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodF. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodG. Percent OFFENDING (C/B)A. Number of program youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months ago that you aretrackingB. Of A, the number of program youth who hada new arrest or delinquent offense duringthis reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility during thisreporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM (B/A)147

# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere18 Number andpercent of programyouth whoRE-OFFEND(short term)The number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seenat a juvenile court for a new delinquentoffense during the reporting period.Appropriate for any youth-servingprogram. Official records (police, juvenilecourt) are the preferred data source. Thenumber of youth tracked should reflect thenumber of program youth that are followedor monitored for new arrests or offenses.Ideally this number should be all youthserved by the program during thisreporting period. Ex. If I am serving 100youth in my program, A would be 100. If Iam following up with 50 of them, B wouldbe 50. Of these 50 program youth I’mtracking, if 25 of them were arrested orhad a delinquent offense during thisreporting period, then C would be 25.A. Total number of program youth servedB. Of A, the number of program youth who hada new arrest or delinquent offense duringthis reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility during thisreporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM (B/A)19 Number and percentof program youth whoRE-OFFEND(long term)20 Number of stateagencies reportingimproved datacollection systems(short term)21 Number of stateagencies reportingimproved datacollection systems(long term)The number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seen at ajuvenile court for a new delinquent offenseduring the reporting period. Appropriate for anyyouth-serving program. Official records (police,juvenile court) are the preferred data source.The number of youth tracked should reflect thenumber of program youth that are followed ormonitored for new arrests or offenses 6-12months after exiting the program. Ex. I have alot of youth who exited my program 6-12months ago, but we are only tracking 100 ofthem, so A is 100. Of these 100 program youththat exited the program 6-12 months ago 65had a new arrest or delinquent offense duringthis reporting period, so B is 65.The number of state-level agencies that showimproved data collection systems as evidencedby an ability to collect data by race; collect databy race with increased accuracy andconsistency; report timely data collection andsubmission, etc. during the reporting period.Data improvement project files are thepreferred data source.The number of state-level agencies that showimproved data collection systems as evidencedby an ability to collect data by race; collect databy race with increased accuracy andconsistency; report timely data collection andsubmission, etc. during the reporting period.Data improvement project files are thepreferred data source.A. Number of program youth who exitedthe program 6-12 months ago thatyou are trackingB. Of A, the number of program youthwho had a new arrest or delinquentoffense during this reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facilityduring this reporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who receivedanother sentence during thisreporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM(B/A)A. Number of improved state-level datacollection systems during thereporting periodA. Number of improved state-level datacollection systems during thereporting period148

22 NUMBER OF LOCALAGENCIESREPORTINGIMPROVED DATACOLLECTIONSYSTEMS (short term)23 NUMBER OF LOCALAGENCIESREPORTINGIMPROVED DATACOLLECTIONSYSTEMS (long term)24 Number of minority staffhired(short term)The number of local-level agencies that showimproved data collection systems as evidencedby an ability to collect data by race; collect databy race with increased accuracy andconsistency; report timely data collection andsubmission, etc. during the reporting period.Data improvement project files are thepreferred data source.The number of local-level agencies that showimproved data collection systems as evidencedby an ability to collect data by race; collect databy race with increased accuracy andconsistency; report timely data collection andsubmission, etc. during the reporting period.Data improvement project files are thepreferred data source.The number of staff of a specific minority grouphired during the reporting period.A. Number of improved local-level datacollection systems during thereporting periodA. Number of improved local-level datacollection systems during thereporting periodA. Number of minority staff hired25aSubstance use(short term)The number and percent of program youth whohave exhibited a decrease in substance abuseduring the reporting period. Self-report or staffratings are most likely data sources.A. Number of program youth with thenoted behavioral changeB. Number of youth in the program whoreceived services for this behavior.C. Percent (A/B)25aSubstance use(long term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited a decrease in substance abuse 6months to 1 year after exiting the program.A. Number of youth defined in B withthe noted behavioral change.B. Number of youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months earlier andreceived services for this behavior.C. Percent (A/B)25bSchool attendance(short term)The number of program youth who haveexhibited an increase in school attendanceduring the reporting period. Self-report or staffratings are most likely data sources.A. Number of program youth with thenoted behavioral changeB. Number of youth in the program whoreceived services for this behavior.C. Percent (A/B)25bSchool attendance(long term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited an increase in school attendance 6months to 1 year after exiting the program.A. Number of youth defined in B withthe noted behavioral change.B. Number of youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months earlier andreceived services for this behavior.C. Percent (A/B)25cFamily relationships(short term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited an improvement in familyrelationships during the reporting period. Selfreport,staff ratings are most likely datasources.A. Number of program youth with thenoted behavioral changeB. Number of youth in the program whoreceived services for this behavior.C. Percent (A/B)149

25cFamily relationships(long term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited an improvement in familyrelationships 6 months to 1 year after exitingthe program.A. Number of youth defined in B withthe noted behavioral change.B. Number of youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months earlier andreceived services for this behavior.C. Percent (A/B)25dAntisocial behavior(short term)The number and percent of youth who haveexhibited a decrease in antisocial behaviorduring the reporting period. Self-report or staffratings are the preferred data source. Antisocialbehavior: A pervasive pattern ofbehavior that displays disregard for andviolation of the rights of others, societal mores,or the law (such as deceitfulness, irritability,consistent irresponsibility, lack of remorse,failure to conform to social norms).A. Number of program youth with thenoted behavioral changeB. Number of youth in the program whoreceived services for this behavior.C. Percent (A/B)25dAntisocial behavior(long term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited a decrease in antisocial behavior 6months to 1 year after exiting theprogram. Anti-social behavior: A pervasivepattern of behavior that displays disregard forand violation of the rights of others, societalmores, or the law (such as deceitfulness,irritability, consistent irresponsibility, lack ofremorse, failure to conform to social norms).A. Number of youth defined in B with thenoted behavioral change.B. Number of youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months earlier andreceived services for this behavior.C. Percent (A/B)26 Number and percent ofprogram youthcompleting programrequirements(short term)27 Number and percent ofprogram familiessatisfied with program(short term)28 Number and percent ofprogram youth satisfiedwith program(short term)The number and percent of program youth whohave successfully fulfilled all programobligations and requirements. Programobligations will vary by program, but should bea predefined list of requirements or obligationsthat clients must meet prior to programcompletion. Program records are the preferreddata source. The total number of youthincludes those who exited successfully orunsuccessfully.The number and percent of program familiessatisfied with the program in areas such asstaff relations and expertise, general programoperations, facilities, materials, and service.Self-report data collected using programevaluation or assessment forms are theexpected data source.The number and percent of program youthsatisfied with the program in areas such asstaff relations and expertise, general programoperations, facilities, materials, and service.Self-report data collected using programevaluation or assessment forms are theexpected data source.A. Number of program youth who exitedthe program having completedprogram requirementsB. Total number of youth who were inthe program during the reportingperiodC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of program families whoreport being satisfied with theprogramB. Total number of program familiesC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of program youth who reportbeing satisfied with the programB. Total number of program youthC. Percent (A/B)150

29 Number and percent ofprogram staff withincreased knowledge ofprogram area(short term)30 Number and percent ofnon-program personnelwith increasedknowledge of programarea(short term)The number and percent of program staff whogained a greater knowledge of the programarea through trainings or other formal learningopportunities. Appropriate for any programwhose staff received program-related training.Training does not need to have been given bythe program. Self-report data collected usingtraining evaluation or assessment forms arethe expected data source.The number of non-program personnel, suchas representatives from law enforcement,courts, referral agencies, or communitymembers who gained a greater knowledge ofDMC and DMC-related topics through trainingsor other formal learning opportunities. Trainingdoes not need to have been given by theprogram. Self-report data collected usingtraining evaluation or assessment forms arethe expected data source.A. Number of program staff trainedduring the reporting period whoreport increased knowledgeB. Number of program staff trainedduring the period and returningsurveysC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of non-program personneltrained during the reporting periodwho report increased knowledgeB. Number of non-program personneltrained during the reporting periodand returning surveysC. Percent (A/B)31 NUMBER OFCONTRIBUTINGFACTORSDETERMINED FROMASSESSMENT STUDIES(short term)32 Number of contact pointsreporting reduction indisproportionality at thestate level(long term)Assessment studies are conducted todetermine the factors contributing todisproportionality at certain juvenile justicesystem contact points for certain racial/ethnicminority(ies). Count the number of factors inthe family, the educational system, the juvenilejustice system, and the socioeconomicconditions determined to have contributed tominority overrepresentation at certain juvenilejustice system contact points.Number of contact points reporting significantdisproportionality at the state level during thereporting period compared with the lastreporting period. Contact points include arrest,referral to juvenile court, diversion, detention,petition filed, found delinquent, probation,secure confinement, and transfer/waiver toadult court.A. Number of contributing factorsdetermined from assessment studiesA. Number of contact points (arrest,referral to juvenile court, diversion,detention, petition filed, founddelinquent, probation, secureconfinement, and transfer/waiver toadult court) reporting significantdisproportionality at the state levelduring the reporting period.33 Number of contact pointsreporting reduction indisproportionality at thelocal level(long term)Number of contact points reporting significantdisproportionality at the local level during thereporting period compared with the lastreporting period. Contact points include arrest,referral to juvenile court, diversion, detention,petition filed, found delinquent, probation,secure confinement, and transfer/waiver toadult court.A. Number of contact points (arrest,referral to juvenile court, diversion,detention, petition filed, founddelinquent, probation, secureconfinement, and transfer/waiver toadult court) reporting significantdisproportionality at the local levelduring the reporting period.34 NUMBER ANDPERCENT OFRECOMMENDATIONSFROM ASSESSMENTSTUDIESIMPLEMENTED(long term)Assessment studies contain multiplerecommendations. Count the total number ofthose chosen for implementation.A. Number of recommendations chosenfor implementationB. Number of recommendations madeC. Percent (A/B)151

Additionally, there are “State Level” output measures and outcome measures identifiedby the USDOJ on its Data Collection and Technical Assistance Tool (DCTAT) website forProgram Area 10, Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC). These “State Level” performancemeasures are listed by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP as follows:#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ReportsRecord Data Here1 Number ofFTEs fundedby FG $2 Number ofprogramsimplemented3 Numberand percentof programstaff trained4 Number ofhours ofprogramstafftrainingprovided5 Number ofnon-programpersonneltrained6 Number ofhours ofnon-programpersonneltrainingprovidedThe number of staff funded through Title V orFormula Grants, as measured through the number ofFull-Time Equivalents, working for the programduring the reporting period. To calculate FTE, dividethe number of staff hours used by the program by2080.The number of new programs implemented duringthe reporting period.The number and percent of program staff that aretrained during reporting period. Program staffincludes full and part-time employees and/orvolunteers. The number is the raw number of staff toreceive any formal training relevant to the programor their position as program staff. Include anytraining from any source or medium received duringthe reporting period as long as receipt can beverified. Training does not have to have beencompleted during the reporting period. To get thepercent divide the raw number by the total number ofprogram staff. Program records are the preferreddata source.The number of training hours that program staff areprovided during the reporting period. Trainingincludes in-house and external trainings.The number of non-program people who are trainedon DMC-related issues such as improvingunderstanding of cultural differences, culturalcontext, cultural diversity, cultural awareness, bias,multicultural workplaces, etc. during the reportingperiod. The number is the raw number of nonprogrampeople from law enforcement, courts, otherrelated agencies, or community members whoparticipate in training, conferences, or workshops.Although DMC program staff may also participate insuch training (e.g., statewide or local DMCconferences) do not count them here. Count themunder #4.The number of DMC-related training hours providedto non-program people during the reporting period.Include DMC training, conferences, and workshopsconducted not just for DMC program staff only butfor juvenile justice system personnel at large (e.g.law enforcement, court, etc.), and other relatedagencies and community members.A. Number of FTEs funded with FG$A. Number of DMC-related programs inoperation during the reporting periodA. Number of staff who participated intrainingB. Total number of program staffC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of DMC-related hours of trainingprovided to staffA. Number of non program personnel trainedA. Number of DMC-related hours of trainingprovided to non -program personnel152

#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ReportsRecord Data Here7 Number ofprogrammaterialsdevelopedThe number of program materials that weredeveloped during the reporting period. Include onlysubstantive materials such as program overviews,client workbooks, lists of local service providers. Donot include program advertisements oradministrative forms such as sign-in sheets or clienttracking forms. Count the number of piecesdeveloped. Program records are the preferred datasource.A. Number of program materials developed8 Number ofprogram youthserved9 Number ofservice hourscompleted10 Average lengthof stay inprogramAn unduplicated count of the number of youth servedby the program during the reporting period. Definitionof the number of youth served for a reporting period isthe number of program youth carried over fromprevious reporting period, plus new admissionsduring the reporting period. In calculating the 3-yearsummary, the total number of youth served is thenumber of participants carried over from the yearprevious to the first fiscal year, plus all newadmissions during the 3 reporting fiscal years.Program records are the preferred data source.The number of hours of service completed byprogram youth during the reporting period. Service isany explicit activity (such as program contact,counseling sessions, course curriculum, communityservice, etc.) delivered by program staff or otherprofessionals dedicated to completing the programrequirements. Program records are the preferred datasource.The average length of time (in days) that clientsremain in the program. Include data for clients whoboth complete program requirements prior to programexit and those who do not. Program records are thepreferred data source.A. Number of program youth carriedover from the previous reportingperiod, plus new admissions duringthe reporting periodA. Total number of program youthservice hoursA. Total number of days between intakeand program exit across all clientsservedB. Number of cases closedC. A/B11 Number ofplanningactivitiesconducted12 Number ofassessmentstudiesconducted13 Number ofdataimprovementprojectsimplementedThe number of planning activities undertaken duringthe reporting period. Planning activities includemeetings held, needs assessments undertaken.The number of DMC assessment studies undertakenduring the reporting period to determine factorscontributing to DMC.The number of data improvement projects funded atthe state or local levels specifically to improve thequality and completeness of DMC data.A. Number of planning activitiesundertakenA. Number of assessment studiesundertakenA. Number of projects funded during thereporting period153

14 Number ofobjectivedecisionmakingtoolsdeveloped15 Number ofprogram/agencypolicies orprocedurescreated,amended, orrescindedReport whether any objective decision-making toolswere developed, such as detention risk, riskassessment, needs assessment, mental healthassessment were developed to determine thesupervision needs of the youth.The number of program/agency policies orprocedures created, amended, or rescinded duringthe reporting period. A policy is a plan or specificcourse of action that guides the general goals anddirectives of the program or agency. Include policiesthat are either relevant to the topic area of theprogram or policies that affect program operations.A. Number of tools developedA. Number of program/agency policiesor procedures created, amended, orrescinded# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee Reports Record Data Here16 Number andpercent of programyouth who OFFENDduring the reportingperiod(short term)17 Number andpercent of programyouth who OFFENDduring the reportingperiod(long term)The number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seenat a juvenile court for a delinquent offenseduring the reporting period. Appropriate forany youth-serving program. Officialrecords (police, juvenile court) are thepreferred data source. The number ofyouth tracked should reflect the number ofprogram youth that are followed ormonitored for arrests or offenses. Ideallythis number should be all youth served bythe program during this reporting period.Ex. If I am serving 100 youth in myprogram, A would be 100. If I am followingup with 50 of them, B would be 50. Ofthese 50 program youth I’m tracking, if 25of them were arrested or had a delinquentoffense during this reporting period, then Cwould be 25.The number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seenat a juvenile court for a delinquent offenseduring the reporting period. Appropriate forany youth-serving program. Officialrecords (police, juvenile court) are thepreferred data source. The number ofyouth tracked should reflect the number ofprogram youth that are followed ormonitored for arrests or offenses 6-12months after exiting the program. Ex. Ihave a lot of youth who exited my program6-12 months ago, but we are only tracking100 of them, so A is 100. Of these 100program youth that exited the program 6-12 months ago 65 had a new arrest ordelinquent offense during this reportingperiod, so B is 65.A. Total number of program youth servedB. Number of program youth tracked duringthis reporting periodC. Of B, the number of program youth whohad a new arrest or delinquent offenseduring this reporting periodD. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility duringthis reporting periodE. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodF. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodG. Percent OFFENDING (C/B)A. Number of program youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months ago that you aretrackingB. Of A, the number of program youth whohad a new arrest or delinquent offenseduring this reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility duringthis reporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM (B/A)154

# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee Reports Record Data Here18 Number andpercent of programyouth whoRE-OFFEND(short term)The number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seenat a juvenile court for a new delinquentoffense during the reporting period.Appropriate for any youth-serving program.Official records (police, juvenile court) arethe preferred data source. The number ofyouth tracked should reflect the number ofprogram youth that are followed ormonitored for new arrests or offenses.Ideally this number should be all youthserved by the program during thisreporting period. Ex. If I am serving 100youth in my program, A would be 100. If Iam following up with 50 of them, B wouldbe 50. Of these 50 program youth I’mtracking, if 25 of them were arrested or hada delinquent offense during this reportingperiod, then C would be 25.A. Total number of program youth servedB. Of A, the number of program youth whohad a new arrest or delinquent offenseduring this reporting periodC. Number of program youth who wererecommitted to a juvenile facility duringthis reporting periodD. Number of program youth who weresentenced to adult prison during thisreporting periodE. Number of youth who received anothersentence during this reporting periodF. Percent of Long Term RECIDIVISM (B/A)19 Number and percentof program youth whoRE-OFFEND(long term)The number and percent of participatingprogram youth who were arrested or seen at ajuvenile court for a new delinquent offenseduring the reporting period. Appropriate for anyyouth-serving program. Official records (police,juvenile court) are the preferred data source.The number of youth tracked should reflect thenumber of program youth that are followed ormonitored for new arrests or offenses 6-12months after exiting the program. Ex. I have alot of youth who exited my program 6-12months ago, but we are only tracking 100 ofthem, so A is 100. Of these 100 program youththat exited the program 6-12 months ago 65had a new arrest or delinquent offense duringthis reporting period, so B is 65.A. Number of program youth whoexited the program 6-12 monthsago that you are trackingB. Of A, the number of program youthwho had a new arrest ordelinquent offense during thisreporting periodC. Number of program youth whowere recommitted to a juvenilefacility during this reporting periodD. Number of program youth whowere sentenced to adult prisonduring this reporting periodE. Number of youth who receivedanother sentence during thisreporting periodF. Percent of Long TermRECIDIVISM (B/A)20 Number of stateagencies reportingimproved datacollection systems(short term)21 Number of stateagencies reportingimproved datacollection systems(long term)The number of state-level agencies that showimproved data collection systems asevidenced by an ability to collect data by race;collect data by race with increased accuracyand consistency; report timely data collectionand submission, etc. during the reportingperiod. Data improvement project files are thepreferred data source.The number of state-level agencies that showimproved data collection systems asevidenced by an ability to collect data by race;collect data by race with increased accuracyand consistency; report timely data collectionand submission, etc. during the reportingperiod. Data improvement project files are thepreferred data source.A. Number of improved state-leveldata collection systems during thereporting periodA. Number of improved state-leveldata collection systems during thereporting period155

22 NUMBER OF LOCALAGENCIESREPORTINGIMPROVED DATACOLLECTIONSYSTEMS(short term)23 NUMBER OF LOCALAGENCIESREPORTINGIMPROVED DATACOLLECTIONSYSTEMS(long term)24 Number of minority staffhired (short term)The number of local-level agencies that showimproved data collection systems asevidenced by an ability to collect data by race;collect data by race with increased accuracyand consistency; report timely data collectionand submission, etc. during the reportingperiod. Data improvement project files are thepreferred data source.The number of local-level agencies that showimproved data collection systems asevidenced by an ability to collect data by race;collect data by race with increased accuracyand consistency; report timely data collectionand submission, etc. during the reportingperiod. Data improvement project files are thepreferred data source.The number of staff of a specific minority grouphired during the reporting period.A. Number of improved local-leveldata collection systems during thereporting periodA. Number of improved local-leveldata collection systems during thereporting periodA. The number of minority staff hired25ASubstance use(short term)The number and percent of program youthwho have exhibited a decrease in substanceabuse during the reporting period. Self-reportor staff ratings are most likely data sources.A. Number of program youth servedduring the reporting period with thenoted behavioral changeB. Number of youth in the programwho received services for thisbehavior.C. Percent (A/B)25ASubstance use(long term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited a decrease in substance use 6months to 1 year after exiting the program.A. Total number of youth who exitedthe program 6-12 months ago whohad the noted behavioral changeB. Number of youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months earlier andreceived services for this behaviorC. Percent A/B25BSchool attendance(short term)The number of program youth who haveexhibited an increase in school attendanceduring the reporting period. Self-report or staffratings are most likely data sources.A. Number of program youth servedduring the program period with thenoted behavioral changeB. Number of youth in the programwho received services for thisbehavior.C. Percent A/B25BSchool attendance(long term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited an increase in school attendance 6months to 1 year after exiting the program.A. Total number of youth who exitedthe program 6-12 months ago whohad the noted behavioral changeB. Number of youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months earlier andreceived services for this behaviorC. Percent A/B156

25CFamily relationships(short term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited an improvement in familyrelationships during the reporting period. Selfreport,staff ratings are most likely datasources.A. Number of program youth servedduring the program period with thenoted behavioral changeB. Number of youth in the programwho received services for thisbehavior.C. Percent A/B25CFamily relationships(long term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited an improvement in familyrelationships 6 months to 1 year after exitingthe program.A. Total number of youth who exitedthe program 6-12 months ago whohad the noted behavioral changeB. Number of youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months earlier andreceived services for this behaviorC. Percent A/B25DAntisocial behavior(short term)The number and percent of youth who haveexhibited a decrease in antisocial behaviorduring the reporting period. Self-report or staffratings are the preferred data source. Antisocialbehavior: A pervasive pattern ofbehavior that displays disregard for andviolation of the rights of others, societal mores,or the law (such as deceitfulness, irritability,consistent irresponsibility, lack of remorse,failure to conform to social norms).A. Number of program youth servedduring the program period with thenoted behavioral changeB. Number of youth in the programwho received services for thisbehavior.C. Percent A/B25DAntisocial behavior(long term)Number and percent of program youth whoexhibited a decrease in antisocial behavior 6months to 1 year after exiting theprogram. Anti-social behavior: A pervasivepattern of behavior that displays disregard forand violation of the rights of others, societalmores, or the law (such as deceitfulness,irritability, consistent irresponsibility, lack ofremorse, failure to conform to social norms).A. Total number of youth who exitedthe program 6-12 months ago whohad the noted behavioral changeB. Number of youth who exited theprogram 6-12 months earlier andreceived services for this behaviorC. Percent A/B26 Number and percent ofprogram youthcompleting programrequirements(short term)27 Number and percent ofprogram familiessatisfied with program(short term)The number and percent of program youthwho have successfully fulfilled all programobligations and requirements. Programobligations will vary by program, but should bea predefined list of requirements or obligationsthat clients must meet prior to programcompletion. Program records are the preferreddata source. The total number of youthincludes those who exited successfully orunsuccessfully.The number and percent of program familiessatisfied with the program in areas such asstaff relations and expertise, general programoperations, facilities, materials, and service.Self-report data collected using programevaluation or assessment forms are theexpected data source.A. Number of program youth whoexited the program havingcompleted program requirementsB. Total number of youth who exitedthe program during the reportingperiod (both successfully andunsuccessfully).C. Percent A/BA. Number of program familiessatisfied with the program duringthe reporting periodB. Total number of program familiesserved by the program during thereporting periodC. Percent A/B157

28 Number and percent ofprogram youth satisfiedwith program (shortterm)The number and percent of program youthsatisfied with the program in areas such asstaff relations and expertise, general programoperations, facilities, materials, and service.Self-report data collected using programevaluation or assessment forms are theexpected data source.A. Number of program youth satisfiedwith the program during thereporting periodB. Total number of program youthserved by the program during thereporting periodC. Percent A/B29 Number and percent ofprogram staff withincreased knowledgeof program area(short term)The number and percent of program staff whogained a greater knowledge of the programarea through trainings or other formal learningopportunities. Appropriate for any programwhose staff received program-related training.Training does not need to have been given bythe program. Self-report data collected usingtraining evaluation or assessment forms arethe expected data source.A. Number of program staff trainedduring the reporting period whoreport increased knowledgeB. Number of program staff trainedduring the period and returningsurveysC. Percent A/B30 Number and percent ofnon-program personnelwith increasedknowledge of programarea(short term)31 NUMBER OFCONTRIBUTINGFACTORSDETERMINED FROMASSESSMENTSTUDIES (short term)32 Number of contact pointsreporting reduction indisproportionality at thestate level(long term)The number of non-program personnel, suchas representatives from law enforcement,courts, referral agencies, or communitymembers who gained a greater knowledge ofDMC and DMC-related topics throughtrainings or other formal learning opportunities.Training does not need to have been given bythe program. Self-report data collected usingtraining evaluation or assessment forms arethe expected data source.Assessment studies are conducted todetermine the factors contributing todisproportionality at certain juvenile justicesystem contact points for certain racial/ethnicminority(ies). Count the number of factors inthe family, the educational system, the juvenilejustice system, and the socioeconomicconditions determined to have contributed tominority overrepresentation at certain juvenilejustice system contact points.Number of contact points reporting significantdisproportionality at the state level during thereporting period compared with the lastreporting period. Contact points include arrest,referral to juvenile court, diversion, detention,petition filed, found delinquent, probation,secure confinement, and transfer/waiver toadult court.A. Number of non-program personneltrained during the reporting periodwho report increased knowledgeB. umber of non-program personneltrained during the reporting periodC. Percent A/BA. Number of contributing factorsdetermined from assessmentstudiesA. Number of contact points (arrest,referral to juvenile court, diversion,detention, petition filed, founddelinquent, probation, secureconfinement, and transfer/waiver toadult court) reporting significantdisproportionality at the STATElevel during the reporting period33 Number of contact pointsreporting reduction indisproportionality at thelocal level(long term)Number of contact points reporting significantdisproportionality at the local level during thereporting period compared with the lastreporting period. Contact points include arrest,referral to juvenile court, diversion, detention,petition filed, found delinquent, probation,secure confinement, and transfer/waiver toadult court.A. Number of contact points (arrest,referral to juvenile court, diversion,detention, petition filed, founddelinquent, probation, secureconfinement, and transfer/waiver toadult court) reporting significantdisproportionality at the local levelduring the reporting period158

34 NUMBER ANDPERCENT OFRECOMMENDATIONSFROM ASSESSMENTSTUDIESIMPLEMENTED(long term)Assessment studies contain multiplerecommendations. Count the total number ofthose chosen for implementation.A. Number of recommendationschosen for implementationB. Number of recommendations madeC. Percent A/BF. Budget:Fiscal Year Formula Grant Funds ($) State/Local/Private Funds ($) Total ($)2012 $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.002013 Unknown Unknown Unknown2014 Unknown Unknown UnknownProblem/Program Narrative 4.A. Program Area Code and Title: 06. Compliance Monitoring.Efforts in monitoring the compliance of juvenile detention facilities in accordance withSection 223(a)(15) of the JJDP Act [42 USC §5633(a)(15); or, under the Consequences ofJuvenile Offenders Act of 2002, at 42 USC §5633(a)(14)], are being implemented within theState by the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors (Mr. Rollins and Mrs. Nesbit-Manning).Programs are needed for the development of proper and timely jail monitoring techniques whichcan then be implemented within the State’s communities as a means of improving the juvenilejustice system. As a certain percentage of the juvenile population continues to be incarcerated,and with the advent of new technology over time, more modern, efficient, and effective methodsof conducting the State’s jail compliance monitoring obligations are being devised so that lawenforcement agencies can properly address the problems they face when encountering delinquentyouth who must be detained prior to adjudication or incarcerated following adjudication.Providing the necessary and proper resources to the AUM ACPCTI, its subcontractors, and lawenforcement personnel in order for jail compliance monitoring to be properly and timelyaddressed is a continual problem faced by the State.B. Program Goals:Goal 1. Collect comprehensive juvenile justice statistics as reported by the locallaw enforcement agencies, courts, juvenile probation offices, and otheragencies within the State on juveniles adjudicated as dependent or in needof supervision (CHINS) and on juveniles adjudicated as delinquent andcommitted to or confined in a detention facility or in an institutionestablished for the care and rehabilitation of delinquent youth.Goal 2. Use the collected statistics to make determinations and recommendationsto the AOC and local law enforcement agencies on the existing andprospective methods of incarcerating the juvenile population in theState’s communities.Goal 3. Identify areas of weakness or deficiency in the existing methods ofconducting jail compliance monitoring duties and ways by whichto eliminate those identified weaknesses/deficiencies so as to159

Goal 4.enhance jail compliance monitoring capabilities.Develop programs that would be tailored to the needs of particular localcommunities (urban versus rural, affluent versus poor, differentracial compositions) faced with varying juvenile justice problemsin their areas so as to encourage the proper use of jail incarcerationmethods and procedures when juveniles must be detained.C. Program Objectives:Objective 1. To provide the AUM ACPCTI and local law enforcement agencies withprograms as a means by which monitoring the State’s compliancewith juvenile incarceration procedures can be accomplished whilealso addressing and correcting identified problem areas / weaknesses /deficiencies.Performance Indicators:(a) Total number of juvenile arrests made as a result of offenses.(b) Total number of juvenile adjudications resulting from these arrests.(c) Total number and types of entities that perform juvenile detentionor incarceration activities as a result of adjudicated juveniles.(d) Total number and identification of jail compliance activitiesconducted with or for these entities, and how these activities can beupdated to better assist the respective local law enforcement agencies withtheir jail compliance obligations.(e) Total amount of funding necessary to (i) provide resources, (ii)coordinate the integration of jail compliance monitoring activities,and (iii) conduct jail compliance monitoring activities within thesecommunities and statewide on a timely basis.D. Activities & Services Planned:1. This program area would receive funding in accordance with the State’s SAGpriorities, program administrative rules, and availability of funds to establish and implement amonitoring system for determining the proper jail compliance standards, costs, and procedures.The funds would be expended on costs for personnel and support services for performing jailcompliance monitoring duties as long as the priorities, goals, and objectives continue to addressthe designated compliance needs, and as long as funding is sufficient for such continuedimplementation.2. Technical assistance for this program would be provided through the ADECALETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors (Mr. Rollins and Mrs. Nesbit-Manning), the AOC, and the DYS, wherein the capability and technical expertise is necessarilyhoused to sufficiently accommodate the needs for such assistance. In instances where theseresources are not sufficient to meet demands, then the ADECA LETS Division, the AUMACPCTI and its subcontractors, the AOC, and the DYS will utilize in-State consultants, serviceagencies, and other departments to provide the level of assistance required for the particulartechnical assistance situation(s). The ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors, the AOC, and the DYS could also request outside assistance for the areas of160

system planning at both the State and local levels, programming, service delivery, and trainingcriminal justice personnel in ways to address jail compliance issues that deal with identifiedproblem areas in their respective locations. Particular areas to be focused upon includedeveloping procedures for identifying areas of noncompliance, developing information onimplementing successful jail compliance procedures and techniques, and developing proceduresfor training local law enforcement personnel in the jail compliance process.E. Performance Measures: It is mandatory to report on selected output measures andoutcome measures identified by the USDOJ on its Data Collection and Technical AssistanceTool (DCTAT) website. For Program Area 06, Compliance Monitoring, these performancemeasures are listed by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP as follows:#OutputMeasureDefinitionData Grantee ProvidesRecord data Here1 Number ofMOUsdeveloped2 Numberandpercent ofprogramstafftrained3 Number ofhours ofprogramstafftrainingprovided4 Fundsallocatedto adhereto Section223 (a) (14)of the JJDPAct of 2002The number of Memoranda of Understanding orinteragency agreements developed duringreporting period of the program. Include all formalpartnership or coordination agreements. Programrecords are the preferred data source.The number and percent of program staff that aretrained during reporting period. Program staffincludes full and part-time employees and/orvolunteers. The number is the raw number of staffto receive any formal training relevant to theprogram or their position as program staff. Includeany training from any source or medium receivedduring the reporting period as long as receipt canbe verified. Training does not have to have beencompleted during the reporting period. To get thepercent divide the raw number by the total numberof program staff. Program records are thepreferred data source.The number of training hours that program staffare provided during the reporting period. Trainingincludes in-house and external trainings.The amount of Formula Grants and state money inwhole dollars that are allocated to addresscompliance with Section 223(a)(14) of the JJDPAct of 2002 during the reporting period. Thisshould include money dedicated to develop andimplement compliance monitoring functions(include contracted services). Also include costs ofon-line reporting systems. Program records are thepreferred data source.A. Number of Memoranda of UnderstandingdevelopedA. Number of staff who participated in trainingB. Total number of program staffC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of hours of training provided to staffA. Dollars allocated to compliance161

5 Number ofmaterialsdeveloped6 Number ofactivitiesthataddresscompliancewithSection223 (a) (14)of the JJDPAct of 20027 Number offacilitiesreceivingTAThe number of program materials that weredeveloped during the reporting period. Include onlysubstantive materials such as program guidancemanuals, CM manuals, monitoring tools, i.e., colocatedfacility checklists, and model facilitychecklists, etc. Count the number of piecesdeveloped.The number of meetings held, monitoring visitsconducted, jail inspections performed etc. thatensure adherence to this Section of the Act.The number of public and private secure detentioncenters, jails, lockups, and correctional facilitiesreceiving technical assistance by state or federalrepresentatives during the reporting period. TheAnnual Compliance Monitoring Report is thepreferred data source.A. Number of materials developedA. Number of activities undertakenA. Number of facilities receiving TA8 Number ofprogrampolicies/procedurescreated, amended,or rescindedThe number of policies or procedures created,amended or rescinded during the reportingperiod. A policy is a plan or specific course ofaction that guides the general goals anddirectives of the program or agency. Includepolicies that are either relevant to the topic areaof the program or policies that affect programoperations.A. Number of policies or procedures created,amended, or rescinded# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee Reports Record Data Here9 Submission of completeAnnual Monitoring Reportto OJJDP10 Number and percent ofprogram staff with increasedknowledge of program areaThe complete Compliance MonitoringReport is required to be submitted annuallyto OJJDP. Complete is defined as thereport contains all required informationwithout any missing data.The number and percent of program staffwho gained a greater knowledge of theprogram area through trainings or otherformal learning opportunities. Appropriatefor any program whose staff receivedprogram-related training. Training does notneed to have been given by the program.Self-report data collected using trainingevaluation or assessment forms are theexpected data source.A. The complete AnnualCompliance Monitoring Report issubmitted to OJJDPA. Number of program staff trainedduring the reporting period whoreport increased knowledgeB. Number of program staff trainedduring the reporting periodC. Percent (A/B)162

F. Budget:Fiscal Year Formula Grant Funds ($) State/Local/Private Funds ($) Total ($)2012 $90,000.00 $0.00 $90,000.002013 Unknown Unknown Unknown2014 Unknown Unknown UnknownProblem/Program Narrative 5.A. Program Area Code and Title: 31. State Advisory Group Allocation.In order for the requirements of the JJDP Act to be properly implemented within theState, the Governor has appointed 24 individuals to serve as members of the Alabama AdvisoryCouncil on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (the State Advisory Group or “SAG”).The SAG serves to advise and make recommendations on matters relating to juvenile justice anddelinquency prevention within the State. Examples of the SAG activities conducted under theTitle II Part B Formula Grant Program, as are stated previously herein above, include serving arole in the State's compliance with the deinstitutionalization of status offenders (DSO)requirement, the sight and sound separation requirement, the jail removal requirement, and thejuvenile jail compliance monitoring requirement. The SAG establishes State juvenile justiceprogram area priorities which are used to guide the SAG in making recommendations to theGovernor regarding the award of subgrants in order to maintain compliance with theserequirements.With regard to compliance monitoring, the SAG has designated the AUM ACPCTI to bethe agency that will perform the juvenile jail compliance monitoring activities and report theresults of such activities back to the SAG and the ADECA LETS Division. The SAG has votedto subgrant juvenile justice program funds to the AUM ACPCTI for performing the State’scompliance monitoring activities and reporting requirements effective October 1, 2007. Theresults of said activities are reported to the ADECA LETS Division and the SAG by the AUMACPCTI in the form of subgrantee quarterly narrative progress reports and in the form ofAlabama’s Annual Compliance Monitoring Report – which is then submitted to the USDOJ OJPOJJDP. By the information contained in the reports, the SAG will continue to be able to monitorthe State’s compliance with the DSO requirement, make recommendations to award continuedsubgrant funding, and make program implementation and compliance priority adjustments whenand where necessary.In addition to juvenile jail compliance monitoring, the SAG participates in numerousprogram compliance monitoring activities that are conducted by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP SRAD'srepresentative(s) for the State of Alabama. These representatives conduct periodic federaljuvenile justice subgrant program monitoring site visits and juvenile jail compliance monitoringsite visits to Alabama. The most recent federal juvenile justice subgrant program monitoring sitevisit was conducted by Mr. Jim Antal from March 1-4, 2010 for the review of federally-fundedjuvenile justice programs operating in Montgomery County (two programs), Autauga County,Limestone County, and Cullman County, Alabama. The most recent federal juvenile jailcompliance monitoring site visit was conducted by Mr. Tom Murphy and Mr. Jim Antal from163

September 24-27, 2007, and this consisted of a review of court holding facilities, juvenile grouphomes, secure and nonsecure detention facilities, and adult jails and lockups operating inMontgomery County, Tuscaloosa County, Walker County, and Blount County, Alabama. Nofurther federal juvenile justice subgrant program monitoring site visits nor federal juvenile jailcompliance monitoring site visits have been conducted in Alabama since then. But, at thosevisits, Alabama's SAG Chairman and Vice Chairman served a compliance monitoring role onbehalf of the SAG in that they accompanied Mr. Antal, Mr. Murphy, the ADECA LETSDivision's juvenile justice specialists and juvenile jail compliance monitors during those visits.The SAG Chairman and Vice Chairman contributed to these visits by providing to Mr. Antal andMr. Murphy explanations of the SAG's program priorities that are used to make fundingrecommendations for these programs. In addition, SAG members have participated in thecompliance monitoring activities by meeting with Mr. Antal and Mr. Murphy during theirentrance and/or exit interviews at the ADECA LETS Division's headquarters offices located inMontgomery, Alabama, to discuss program compliance, as well as by meeting with Mr. Murphyand/or Mr. Antal during their site visits to the individual counties’ programs.B. Program Goals:Goal 1. Contract with the AUM ACPCTI via a subgrant award wherein thesubgrant directs the AUM ACPCTI to collect comprehensive juvenilejustice statistics and necessarily-related information as a means ofperforming the compliance monitoring activities required under theTitle II Part B Formula Grant Program.Goal 2. The AUM ACPCTI compiles the statistics and information into a usableformat.Goal 3. The AUM ACPCTI establishes and updates this information into adatabase system format.Goal 4. The AUM ACPCTI makes the collected statistics and informationavailable for dissemination to its subcontractors.Goal 5. The AUM ACPCTI and its subcontractors utilize the collected statisticsand information for reporting purposes wherein the AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors write and submit to the SAG and to the ADECA LETSDivision the State's Annual Juvenile Jail Compliance Monitoring Report.Goal 6. The SAG and the ADECA LETS Division utilize the collected statisticsand information for juvenile policy and program planning,implementation, tracking, analysis, monitoring, and evaluation purposes.C. Program Objectives:Objective 1. To monitor on a continual basis the State’s juvenile justice system as itpresently exists and as it changes over time with regard to DSO,jail removal, sight and sound separation, and compliance with theTitle II Part B Formula Grant Program monitoring requirements.Performance Indicators:(a) The AOC collects in real-time format (through the JJIS) the availablestatistics on the numbers of juveniles processed through the State’s policedepartments, courts (AOC), corrections agency (DYS), and juvenileprobation offices on a continual basis.164

(b)The AOC separates the collected data into respective statistical categoriesof offenses, arrests, prosecutions, adjudications, and sentencingalternatives, and provides this information to the AUM ACPCTI and/orthe ADECA LETS Division.Objective 2.To perform on a continual basis the study of the State’s juvenilepopulation coming into contact with the juvenile justice system and howthese youth are processed through the system with regard to DSO,jail removal, and sight and sound separation.Performance Indicators:(a)(b)D. Activities & Services Planned:The SAG, the ADECA LETS Division, and the AUM ACPCTI collect ona continual basis the statistics available from the AOC on the juvenilesprocessed through the State’s police departments, courts (AOC),corrections agency (DYS) centers/facilities, and juvenile probation offices,for use in determining the State's compliance with the core requirementsof the Title II Part B Formula Grant Program.The SAG and the ADECA LETS Division separate the collected data intorespective statistical categories of offenses, arrests, prosecutions,adjudications, and sentencing alternatives; reviews the State's compliancemonitoring report compiled and submitted by the AUM ACPCTI and itssubcontractors; and utilizes this information to formulate the State'sjuvenile justice and delinquency prevention strategies so as to implementthe Title II Part B Formula Grant Program.1. At the State level, the SAG will continue to work with the State-level grantadministrators/program managers in the ADECA LETS Division as well as personnel within theAUM ACPCTI, the AOC, and other agencies (for example, the ACJIC and the DYS) so as togather useful information from these entities for the purpose of maintaining compliance with thecore requirements of the Title II Part B Formula Grant Program.2. At the local level, the operation of this program would include the participation oflocal police departments and related law enforcement agencies, courts and their juvenileprobation officers, corrections agency (DYS) centers, and possibly other local agencies (forexample, treatment providers) which contribute information to the AOC's juvenile informationdatabase system (the JJIS).3. The staff at the ADECA LETS Division and the AUM ACPCTI would contributeto the SAG's planning and administration process by coordinating program implementation inaccordance with the JJDP Act’s core requirements pertaining to DSO, jail removal, sight andsound separation, and compliance monitoring activities.4. The staff at the ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, the ACJIC, and theAOC would also contribute to the SAG's planning and administration process by conducting ananalysis of core requirement compliance needs among the various State and local jurisdictions.165

5. The staff at the ADECA LETS Division, the AUM ACPCTI, the ACJIC, theAOC, and the DYS would also contribute to the SAG's planning and administration process byconducting monitoring and evaluations in accordance with the JJDP Act’s core requirements,and documenting their findings with appropriate documentation.6. At the State level, program operating funds would be provided through the State’sJJDP Act funding allocation as well as through State funds, and the SAG's program activitieswould continue for as long as the said funds are appropriated or allocated for the State’sparticipation in implementing the JJDP Act’s core requirements within the State.E. Performance Measures: It is mandatory to report on selected output measures andoutcome measures identified by the USDOJ on its Data Collection and Technical AssistanceTool (DCTAT) website. For Program Area 31, State Advisory Group Allocation, theseperformance measures are listed by the USDOJ OJP OJJDP as follows:# Output Measure Definition Data Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere1 Number of SAGcommittee meetingsheld2 Number of SAGsubcommitteemeetings held3 Annual reportsubmitted to theGovernor4 Number of grantsfunded with FormulaGrants funds5 Number and percentof programs usingevidence-basedmodels6 Number and percent ofSAG members trainedThe number of State Advisory Group (SAG)committee meetings held during the reportingperiod. Committees meeting documentationor minutes are the preferred data sources.The number of State Advisory Group (SAG)subcommittee meetings held during thereporting period. Subcommittees meetingdocumentation or minutes are the preferreddata sources.Report whether the annual report wassubmitted to the Governor.The number of grants funded with FormulaGrants funds during the reporting period.The number and percent of programs fundedby the SAG using an evidence-based model.Evidence-based models include programsthat have been shown, through rigorousevaluation and replication, to be effective atpreventing or reducing juvenile delinquencyor related risk factors, such as substanceabuse. Model programs can come from manyvalid sources (e.g., Blueprints, OJJDP’sModel Programs Guide, SAMHSA’s ModelPrograms, etc.).The number and percent of SAG memberswho participated in a SAG training during thereporting period. The number is the rawnumber of SAG members who receivedformal SAG training.A. Number of SAG committee meetingsA.Number of SAG subcommitteemeetingsA. Was the report submitted?A. Number of grants fundedA. The number of programs funded usingan evidence-based modelB. The number of programs fundedC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of SAG that participated intrainingB. Total number of SAG membersC. Percent (A/B)166

# Output Measure Definition Data Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere7 Number of grantapplications reviewedand commented on8 Number and percent ofactivities/meetings thatinvolve youth9 Number of ULGsconsulted duringpreparation of 3 YearPlan10 Number and percent ofSAG memberscontributing to plan orplan updateThe number of grant applications reviewedand commented on to guide the developmentof juvenile justice programming in the state.At least one-fifth of SAG committee membersmust be youth members (age 24 or youngerwhen elected to the committee). The youthmembers must be involved in SAG activities,such as meetings. Committees meetingdocumentation or minutes are the preferreddata sources.The number of units of local government(ULGs) consulted with during preparation ofthe state Plan.The number of SAG committee memberswho participate in the development of thestate Plan or Plan Update. Committeesmeeting minutes or documentation are thepreferred data sources.A. Number of grant applications reviewedA. Number of activities/meetingsattended by youthB. Total number of SAGactivities/meetingsC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of ULGs consulted with duringthe reporting periodA. Total number of SAG memberscontributing to state plan or planupdateB. Total number of SAG membersC. Percent (A/B)11 Percent of SAGallocation usedThe amount of Formula Grants money in wholedollars that are allocated and used for SAGactivities during the reporting period. Programrecords are the preferred data source.A. Dollars used for SAG activitiesB. Dollars allocated to SAGactivitiesC. Percent (A/B)# Outcome Measure Definition Data Grantee ProvidesRecord DataHere12 NUMBER ANDPERCENT OF PLANRECOMMENDATIONSIMPLEMENTED13 Number of FG-fundedprograms sustained after3 years14 Number and percent ofSAG members showincreased knowledge oftheir program areas (forwhich they haveoversight)Number and percent of SAGrecommendations for the state Planimplemented during the reportingperiod. Committee meeting minutes isthe preferred data source.Number of FG funded programssustained through other funds at theend of the 3 -year grant funding cycle.The number and percent of SAGmembers who gained a greaterknowledge of the program areas forwhich they are responsible (e.g., CoreRequirements, state priority fundingareas), program through trainings orother formal learning opportunities.Appropriate for any program whosestaff received program-related training.Training does not need to have beengiven by the program. Self-report datacollected using training evaluation orassessment forms are the expecteddata source.A. Number of recommendations implementedB. Number of recommendationsC. Percent (A/B)A. Number of FG funded programs sustainedA. Number of staff trained during the reportingperiod who report increased knowledgeB. Number of staff trained during the reportingperiodC. Percent (A/B)167

F. Budget:Fiscal Year Formula Grant Funds ($) State/Local/Private Funds ($) Total ($)2012 $8,423.00 $0.00 $8,423.002013 Unknown Unknown Unknown2014 Unknown Unknown Unknown10. Socioeconomic Mapping and Resource Topography (SMART) SystemState grant applicants for FY2012 Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds mustdemonstrate that they have queried the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s web-based SMART MappingSystem to determine program placement in a community facing significant need. The State ofAlabama’s/ADECA LETS Division’s “SMART Mapping System” report is attached hereto at“Attachment 4: SMART Mapping System: Alabama State Report.” This report was createdfrom the information contained in the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s web-based SMART MappingSystem, and is available online at the following USDOJ OJP OJJDP website:http://smart.gismapping.info/.11. State Advisory Group (SAG) MembershipThe State currently maintains 24 individuals as members of the State’s Advisory Councilon Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (the State Advisory Group or “SAG”) for thepurposes of advising and making recommendations on matters relating to juvenile justice anddelinquency prevention within the State. The SAG members serve at the Governor’s pleasure.The current SAG members were appointed beginning in 2003 and afterwards by AlabamaGovernor Bob Riley, and they serve at the Governor’s pleasure. The list of individuals hereinbelow reflects current SAG membership information, beginning with the SAG Chairman,according to the following legend of representation:A = Locally elected official representing general purpose local government.B = Representative of law enforcement and juvenile justice agencies, including1. Juvenile and family court judges2. Prosecutors3. Counsel for children and youth4. Probation workers.C = Representatives of public agencies concerned with delinquency prevention ortreatment:1. Welfare2. Social services3. Mental health4. Education5. Special education6. Recreation7. Youth services.D = Representatives of private nonprofit organizations including persons concerned with:1. Family preservation and strengthening2. Parent groups and parent self-help groups168

3. Youth development4. Delinquency prevention and treatment5. Neglected or dependent children6. Quality of juvenile justice7. Education8. Social services for children.E = Volunteers who work with juvenile justice.F = Youth workers involved with programs that are alternatives to incarceration,including organized recreation activities.G = Persons with special experience and competence in addressing problems related toschool violence and vandalism and alternatives to suspension and expulsion.H = Persons with special experience and competence in addressing problems related tolearning disabilities, emotional difficulties, child abuse and neglect, and youth violence.2012 Alabama Advisory Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency PreventionName Represents Full Time Youth Date of Mailing AddressGovernment Member AppointmentEmployee1. Mr. Gerald H. Love D-3 No No 03/22/2007 (H) 1512 Plaza Drive(SAG Chairman) Dothan, AL 36303Retired Director, (334) 983-8377Southeast Alabama Youth Services Fax: (334) 983-1289E-mail: Lovegeraldh@yahoo.com2. Mr. Tim Bagwell E No No 05/01/2003 (H) 2237 Pinehurst DriveReal estate appraisal Gardendale, AL 35071Home: (205) 608-0633(W) 2603 Decatur HwyGardendale, AL 35071Work: (205) 631-5425E-mail: apprsr@bellsouth.net3. Mr. (Terrence) Lee Blackburn D-3 No Yes 10/17/2006 (H) Alabama Youth Home(involved in the juvenile justice system)C/O Susan ToolePost Office Box 66Westover, AL 35185Home: (205) 678-77464. Hon. Kenneth Boswell A Yes No 11/28/2006 (W) Enterprise City HallMayor Post Office Box 31000City of Enterprise, Alabama Enterprise, Alabama 36331Fax: (334) 348-2613E-mail: cityclerk@entercomp.com5. Hon. John Butler E No No 05/01/2003 (H)722 Natchez Trail CourtRetired Circuit Court Judge, Mobile, AL 36609Mobile County Family Court Home: (251) 660-616813th Judicial Circuit of Alabama Cell: (251) 599-0091169

6. Ms. Jane Cunningham (Cox) E No No 05/01/2003 (H) 1112 Wilmer AvenueAnniston, AL 36201Work: (256) 236-0301E-mail: Janecox@bellsouth.net7. Mr. James Dupree E No No 05/01/2003 (W)PostOfficeBox240903Private Consultant Montgomery, AL 36124Home: (334) 277-6844Cell: (334) 462-0340E-mail: JDJ1D2@netscape.net8. Ms. Martha B. Ellis D-4 No No 05/01/2003 (H) 1313 Huie StreetLicensed Professional Counselor, Prattville, AL 36066Ellis Counseling, LLC(W) 1820 Glynwood DrivePrattville, AL 36066Work: 334-358-4900Fax: 334-358-4909E-mail (H): EllisMartha@bellsouth.net9. Hon. Anthony Everage B Yes No 05/01/2003 (W) City of Troy PoliceRetired Chief of Police,DepartmentCity of Troy Police Department Post Office Box 549Troy, AL 36081Work: (334) 566-0500Fax: (334) 566-7131E-mail: Everage@troycable.net10. Mr. Willard McFarland Faulkner F No Yes 12/30/2008 (H) 9241 Bridge PointeCollege Student (Finance Major at Montgomery, AL 36117-6042Auburn University in Auburn, Alabama) Home: (334) 328-000511. Hon. Bill Franklin B Yes No 05/01/2003 (W) Elmore CountySheriff,Sheriffs OfficeElmore County Sheriffs Office8955 U.S.Highway 231Wetumpka, AL 36092(H) 410 Fortner RoadWetumpka, AL 36092Work: (334) 567-5441Fax: (334) 514-584912. Ms. Jackie Gilbert Johnson E No No 05/01/2003 (H) 376 Lee Road #122Opelika, AL 36801Home: (334) 749-3366Work: (334) 745-3501Cell: (334) 750-2388E-mail: Jacqgib@achievement_center.org13. Mr. Bruce Howell B-4 Yes No 06/15/2005 (W) Montgomery CountyMontgomery County Juvenile Court Administrator,Juvenile CourtMontgomery County Juvenile Court Post Office Box 9219Montgomery, AL 36108Work: (334) 261-4100 ext.123Fax: (334) 261-4132E-mail: Bruce.Howell@alacourt.gov170

14. Mr. James Randall “Randy” Jones B-4 Yes No 05/01/2003 (W) Jefferson CountyJuvenile Probation Officer,Juvenile Probation OfficeJefferson County Juvenile Probation Office120 Second Court NorthBirmingham, AL 35204Work: (205) 325-5462Fax: (205) 325-508015. Ms. Helen McNabb E No No 05/01/2003 (W) 913 Rucker Blvd.Real estate sales representative14-A Morgan Square MallEnterprise, AL 36330Home: (334) 348-9678Work: (334) 347-8863Fax: (334) 393-538216. Richard J. Minor, Esq. B-2 Yes No 05/01/2003 (W)1815 Cogswell Ave.District Attorney Suite 221St. Clair County & Blount County District Attorneys Office Pell City, AL 3512530th Judicial Circuit of Alabama Work: (205) 338-9429E-mail: Richard.minor@alada.govE-mail: Rjminor010@yahoo.com17. Ms. Randa R. Owen F No Yes 12/30/2008 (H) 104 County Road 256College Student (Veterinary Medicine Major at Fort Payne, AL 35967Auburn University in Auburn, Alabama) Home: (256) 413-099918. Mr. Roman A. Rauccio F No Yes 12/30/2008 (H) 2511 Wyngate DriveCollege Student (Political Science Major at Prattville, AL 36067-7270Huntingdon College in Montgomery, Alabama) Home: (334) 361-1881Cell: (334) 799-453219. Ms. Angela (Brooke) Reinhardt F No Yes 12/30/2008 (H) 2031 Finn RoadCollege Student (Pre-Med Major at Pike Road, AL 36064The University of South Alabama in Mobile, Alabama) Home: (334) 301-175720. Hon. William A. “Sonny” Ryan B-1 Yes No 05/01/2003 (W) Hale County CourthouseRetired District Court Judge,1001 Main StreetHale County District Court Greensboro, AL 36744Work: (334) 624-8561Fax: (334) 624-8841E-mail: William.ryan@alacourt.gov21. Mr. Joe Thomas C-2 Yes No 04/01/2003 (H) 10 Camellia LaneAlabama Governor’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives Pell City, AL 35128Home: (205) 338-6669Office: (334) 353-1543Cell: (334) 324-2071E-mail: Joe Thomas166@.aol.com22. Mr. Harry Williams B-4 Yes No 05/01/2003 (W) Morgan CountyRetired Chief Juvenile Probation Officer,Juvenile Probation OfficeMorgan County Juvenile Probation Office Post Office Box 668Decatur, AL 35602Work: (256) 351-4715Fax: (256) 351-4688E-mail: Harry.williams@alacourt.gov171

23. Hon. Kelli Wise B Yes No 05/01/2003 (W) Alabama SupremeAssociate Justice,CourtAlabama Supreme Court300 Dexter AvenueMontgomery, AL 36104Work: (334) 242-4093Cell: (334) 221-980024. Mr. J. Walter Wood, Jr. C-7 Yes No 05/01/2003 (W) Alabama DepartmentDirector,of Youth Services (DYS)Alabama Department of Youth Services Post Office Box 66Mt. Meigs, AL 36057-0066Work: (334) 215-3801Fax: (334) 215-145312. Staff of the JJDP Act Title II Part B Formula Grants ProgramA. Organizational Chart of the Agency Designated to Implement the Title IIPart B Formula Grants ProgramThe State of Alabama has designated the ADECA LETS Division as the agencyresponsible for implementing the Title II Part B Formula Grants Program. The structure ofADECA, as it is configured in the current organizational chart, is in an electronic format that isattached hereto this grant application at Attachment 7. The current ADECA organizational chartis signed by ADECA Director Mr. Jim Byard, Jr.B. A list of the other programs administered by the ADECA LETS Division thatadministers the Formula Grants ProgramThe ADECA LETS Division administers the following grant programs for the State ofAlabama:Type of Program: Name of Grant:1. Corrections Programs: (A) Residential Substance Abuse Treatment for State PrisonersGrant Program (RSAT)2. Highway/Traffic Safety (A) Alcohol-impaired Driving Grant Program (Section 410)Programs: (B) Child Passenger Protection Education Grant Program (Section 405)(C) Seat Belt Incentive Grant Program (Section 406)(D) Data Improvement Incentive Grant Program (Section 408)(E) Highway Safety Plan Grant Program (Section 402)3. Juvenile Justice (A) JJDP Act Title II Part B Formula Grant ProgramPrograms:(B) JJDP Act Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (JABG) Program(C) JJDP Act Title V Community Delinquency Prevention Grant Program(D) Enforcement of Underage Drinking Laws Grant Program (EUDL)4. Law Enforcement (A) Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law EnforcementPrograms:Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program(B) Paul Coverdell National Forensic Science Improvement Act -Formula Grant Program(C) OJP American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Grant Program forByrne JAG and VAWA(D) Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant Program(E) Anti-Gang Initiative Grant Program5. Victim Programs: (A) Family Violence Prevention and Services Act Grant Program172

(B) Victims of Crime Act Grant Program (VOCA)(C) Violence Against Women Act Grant Program (VAWA)(D) Sexual Assault Services Grant ProgramC. Staffing and Management Plan for the ADECA LETS Division thatadministers the Title II Part B Formula Grant ProgramThe State of Alabama, by and through the ADECA LETS Division, provides thefollowing staff members who are responsible for implementing the JJDP Act’s Title II Part BFormula Grant Program. The staff expends the respective amounts of worktime on this grantprogram in the percentages detailed below.Name Title/Position of Staff Member Percentage of Worktime Funding Source/Expended on JJDP Percentage ofFormula Grant Program Salary Paid FromJJDP FormulaGrant ProgramFunds1. Mr. William M. Babington ADECA LETS Division 5% 0% (Salary paidDirectorfrom IndirectCost Category)2. Dr. Kathleen A. Rasmussen Planning and Economic 50% 50%Development Specialist IIIState Juvenile Justice Specialist, andProgram Supervisor of Juvenile Justice, Corrections,and Forensic Sciences Programs3. Mr. William Scott Stewart Planning and Economic 30% 30%Development Specialist I/IIProgram Manager of Juvenile Justice, EUDL,and Corrections Programs4. Mr. Curtis L. Harris Program Integrity Monitor 5% 5%5. Mr. Chris Murphy Program Integrity Monitor 5% 5%6. Ms. Debby Berry Clerical/Secretarial 5% 0% (Salary paidfrom IndirectCost Category)7. Ms. Faye McLain Clerical/Secretarial 5% 0% (Salary paidfrom IndirectCost Category)8. Mr. William T. Waldroff Fiscal Manager 5% 0% (Salary paidfrom IndirectCost Category)9. Mr. Richard Lawler Accountant 5% 0% (Salary paidfrom IndirectCost Category)173

D. A Description of the duties of the Juvenile Justice Specialist and otherJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention staff in the ADECA LETS Division whoadminister the Title II Part B Formula Grant ProgramThe ADECA LETS Division has established the following description of duties forjuvenile justice specialists and other juvenile justice and delinquency prevention staff:(1) Juvenile Justice Specialists: Job duties include researching and reviewing USDOJOJP OJJDP’s federal grant program solicitations and other sources of funding which areapplicable to developing and implementing State juvenile justice programs; working with theState’s SAG and its individual committees to develop the State’s juvenile justice program goalsand objectives; utilizing those goals and objectives to draft annual plans for the Title II Part BFormula Grant Program, the Title V Community Delinquency Prevention Grant Program, theJuvenile Accountability Block Grant Program (JABG), and the Enforcing the Underage DrinkingLaws Grant Program (EUDL); drafting and submitting on an annual basis to the USDOJ OJPOJJDP the respective grant application documentation required for the State to apply for andreceive juvenile justice program funds; conducting subgrant application and complianceworkshops for units of local government and private non-profit corporations; assisting units oflocal government and private non-profit corporations in developing subgrant proposals, plans,and budgets for expending juvenile justice program funds on designated program purpose areasin their respective localities; reviewing and making recommendations to the SAG on whichsubgrant applications to fund in order to achieve overall implementation of programrequirements; creating and maintaining accurate federal grant files and local subgrant files forrecord-keeping and reporting purposes; monitoring the progress or lack thereof made bysubgrantees in achieving their program goals and objectives through reviewing and processingtheir monthly requests to draw down funds for reimbursement of program-related expenses andtheir quarterly financial reports and narrative progress reports; drafting and submitting to theUSDOJ OJP OJJDP each respective grant program’s semi-annual and annual financial reportsand narrative progress reports; drafting and submitting to the SAG / Governor / Legislature theannual reports on the juvenile justice programs; attending periodic training sessions presented bythe USDOJ OJP OJJDP, the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA), the Coalitionfor Juvenile Justice (CJJ), Development Services Group, Inc. (DSG), the National Training andTechnical Assistance Center (NTTAC), and other like organizations, and participating in theirperiodic conference calls so as to maintain proficiency on program issues and implementation,and so as to discuss information on the State’s juvenile justice program objectives,accomplishments, and continuing needs; and providing or obtaining from the USDOJ OJPOJJDP such training and technical assistance as may be requested from time to time.(2) Other juvenile justice and delinquency prevention staff in the ADECA LETSDivision:ADECA LETS Division Director: Job duties involve providing managerial oversight andfinal approval for all ADECA LETS Division work-related activities associated withadministering the juvenile justice grant programs.174

Program Integrity Monitors: Job duties involve conducting juvenile justice programmonitoring site visits to every subgrantee unit of local government and private non-profitcorporation that receives juvenile justice program grant funds from the ADECA LETS Division;providing program implementation guidance, advice, and technical assistance when necessary tothese subgrantees; drafting written findings from the results of these monitoring visits;communicating the monitoring findings via written reports and oral communications to theADECA LETS Division juvenile justice program specialists and to the monitored subgrantees;maintaining accurate monitoring records as part of the ADECA LETS Division’s subgranteefiles; and conducting the program monitoring training portion of the subgrantee application andcompliance workshops for the applicant units of local government and private non-profitcorporations.Program Clerical Staff: Job duties involve providing clerical support to the SAG and tothe ADECA LETS Division’s juvenile justice specialists when and where needed.13. Performance Measures DataIn order to assist the USDOJ OJP OJJDP in fulfilling its responsibilities under theGovernment Performance and Results Act (P.L. 103-62), the ADECA LETS Division, as theState Administering Agency (SAA) for the FY2012 Title II Part B Formula Grant Program, isrequired to provide data that measures the results of its and its subgrantees’ work in this Title IIPart B Formula Grant Program. The ADECA LETS Division is required to discuss herein thisattachment its plan for collecting the data that are required for the performance measuresidentified in the Title II Part B Formula Grant Program. The ADECA LETS Division is alsorequired to include a statement regarding “if they intend to use any information from a projectevaluation or data collection to contribute to ‘generalizeable knowledge’ or if they intend to usethe information solely for the purpose of internal improvements and/or to meet OJP’sperformance measures data reporting requirements.” In response to this requirement, the State ofAlabama, by and through the ADECA LETS Division, states as follows.The ADECA LETS Division intends to use any information from a project evaluation ordata collection solely for the purpose of internal improvements and/or to meet the USDOJ OJP’sperformance measures data reporting requirements.In the USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s solicitation for the FY2012 Title II Part B Formula GrantProgram, the USDOJ OJP OJJDP has identified the following as the performance measures forthe Title II Part B Formula Grant Program:175

ObjectiveProgram objectives willdepend upon the specificproject funded.PerformanceMeasure(s)These will differ,depending on thespecific program goalsand objectives.Examples follow.DescriptionData GranteeProvidesOJJDP has developedan online reportingsystem for state granteesor their subgrantees tosubmit subgrantee dataelectronically.Examples of objectivesmay include decrease ofdelinquent behaviors andincrease ofpro-social behaviors.Number of programyouth served.An unduplicated count ofthe number of youth theprogram served duringthe reporting period.Definition of the numberof youth served for areporting period is thenumber of program youthcarried over from theprevious reportingperiod, plus newadmissions during thereporting period.Program records are thepreferred data source.Number of programyouth carried over fromthe previous reportingperiod, plus newadmissions during thereporting period.Number of granteesimplementing anevidence-basedprogram/practice, asdetermined by OJJDP.Evidence-basedprograms and practicesinclude program modelsthat have been shown,through rigorousevaluation andreplication, to beeffective at preventing orreducing juveniledelinquency or relatedrisk factors, such assubstance abuse. Modelprograms can come frommany valid sources (e.g.,Blueprints, OJJDP'sModel Programs Guide,SAMHSA's ModelPrograms, state modelprogram resources, etc.).Evidence-basedprograms/practices thatthe grantee implements.Percentage of programyouth who completeprogramrequirements.The number andpercentage of programyouth who havesuccessfully fulfilled allprogram obligations andrequirements. Programobligations will vary byprogram.Number of programyouth who exited theprogram havingcompleted programrequirements.176

Percentage of programyouth who wereadjudicated (short andlong term).Percentage of programyouth exhibiting desiredchange in the targetedbehavior, which willdepend on specificprogram goals andactivities and mayinclude academicachievement, schoolattendance, socialcompetence, etc. (shortand long term).Percentage of programyouth who re-offend.Percentage of programyouth who offend.The total number ofyouth includes those whoexited successfully orunsuccessfully.The number andpercentage ofparticipating programyouth who wereadjudicated for a newdelinquent offenseduring the reportingperiod or 6-12 monthspost programcompletion. A juvenileresidential facility is aplace where youngpersons who havecommitted offenses maybe housed overnight. Afacility has living andsleeping units, such aswings, floors, dorms,barracks, or cottages.The number andpercentage of programyouth who haveexhibited a desiredchange in the targetedbehavior during thereporting period or 6-12months post programcompletion.Total number of youthwho exited the programduring the reportingperiod (both successfullyand unsuccessfully).Number of programyouth who werecommitted to a juvenileresidential facility as aresult of a newadjudication.Number of youthsentenced to adult prisonas a result of a newadjudication.Number of youth givensome other sentence asa result of a newadjudication.Number of programyouth tracked foradjudications.Number of youthexhibiting a desiredchange in targetedbehavior which willdepend on specificprogram goals andactivities and mayinclude academicachievement, schoolattendance, socialcompetence, etc. (shortand long term) asindicated on a pre/postsurvey tool.Number of programyouth who re-offend (arearrested) compared withtotal number of programyouth.Number of programyouth who offend (arearrested) compared withthe total number ofprogram youth.177

In addition to the performance measures identified in the above graph that are to bereported to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP, the USDOJ OJP OJJDP has included on its Data CollectionTechnical Assistance Tool (DCTAT) website other and more specific Title II Part B FormulaGrant Program performance measurement “outputs” and “outcomes” that must be reported by theSAA to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP by December 30 th of each year in the form of a Title II Part BFormula Grant Program Annual Report. These particular performance measures are identifiedherein above in Section 9. Statement of the Problem/Program Narrative on pages 121-167.Also, although the submission of performance measures data is not required for thisapplication, the USDOJ OJP OJJDP requires that performance measures be included in thisprogram as an alert that the State’s subgrantees will be required to submit specific data as part oftheir subgrant reporting requirements. The USDOJ OJP OJJDP requires that the State shouldindicate an understanding of these performance measures reporting requirements and discuss howthe State will gather the required data. The State can describe the State's plan to guide subgrantrecipients in selecting relevant and appropriate performance measures for the preventionactivities they will support with Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds, and the State mayalso provide a statement indicative of the State’s commitment to collect performancemeasurement data from all Title II Part B Formula Grant Program subgrantees and submit it tothe USDOJ OJP OJJDP on an annual basis. In response to these requirements, the State ofAlabama, by and through the ADECA LETS Division, states as follows.The ADECA LETS Division states that as part of the federal Title II Part B FormulaGrant Program’s grant application process, the State executes assurance and certification formswhich mandate that the State -- as a Title II Part B Formula Grant Program recipient – shallparticipate in national/federal program evaluations to be conducted by the USDOJ or itsdesignee. The State then imposes this requirement – via its subgrant documents – onto itssubgrantees that are participating as Title II Part B Formula Grant Program subgrantees. Thus,the State and its participating subgrantees are aware of the need for, and are prepared to complywith, their obligations to participate in national program evaluations as part of the on-goingassessment of program viability and impact.Because evaluation is an essential part of the State’s Title II Part B Formula GrantProgram, the ADECA LETS Division and the SAG will agree to fund only those subgrantapplications submitted for implementing Title II Part B Formula Grant programs that agree toparticipate in a sound program evaluation process at the local, State, and national/federal levels.Each entity applying for Title II Part B Formula Grant Program subgrant funds is required tosubmit program evaluation plans as a part of the subgrant application package. If the subgrantapplication is funded, then such entity is required to submit to the ADECA LETS Division thenecessary and timely progress reports identified herein below (discussing the plan for ongoingmonitoring of and support for Title II Part B Formula Grant Program subgrantees) for evaluationof the program’s progress and impact. Through these progress reports, the ADECA LETSDivision collects from its subgrantees data required to be submitted in accordance with theUSDOJ’s revised performance measurement indicators designed specifically for evaluating theTitle II Part B Formula Grant Program.178

It is through the subgrant progress report submissions and the DCTAT reporting tool thatthe ADECA LETS Division facilitates the subgrantees’(i) access to and selection of propersubgrant activities under the program purpose areas, (ii) selection of performance goals for therespective program purpose areas, and (iii) development of sound plans to collect data formeasuring performance and assessing program impact at the subgrantee’s level through use ofthe USDOJ OJP OJJDP’s Title II Part B Formula Grant Program performance measurementcriteria (the DCTAT tool). Also, through the ADECA LETS Division’s monitoring activitiesand fiscal and progress reporting requirements that are conditions of each subgrant [NOTE: Amore detailed discussion of these requirements is included herein below, as well as inAttachment 3 to this application, “Budget Detail Worksheet,” on pages 3 through 10], theADECA LETS Division collects and reports data on Title II Part B Formula Grant Programperformance measures submitted by subgrantees to document the impact of the funds. TheADECA LETS Division can then provide feedback to the subgrantees so as to further guide themin selecting relevant and appropriate performance measures for the subgrant activities they planon continuing to support with the Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds.With regard to plans for ongoing monitoring of and support for Title II Part B FormulaGrant Program subgrantees, the ADECA LETS Division herein describes the State's specificplans for subgrantee progress reports, frequency and nature of onsite subgrantee visits, technicalassistance/training provisions, and other forms of support for subgrantees of the Title II Part BFormula Grant Program, as follows.First, the ADECA LETS Division imposes upon its subgrantees the requirement that eachexecute assurance and certification forms as part of the subgrant application process to ensurethat the subgrantee shall participate in program monitoring and evaluation activities to beconducted by the State or an agency thereof (the ADECA LETS Division, the ADECAAdministrative Division’s Audit Section, the Alabama Examiners of Public Accounts), theUSDOJ, or both.Once the subgrant is awarded, all subgrantees are required to follow the subgrantadministrative requirements that are formally stated in the ADECA LETS Division’s SubgranteeAdministrative Manual (SAM). These requirements are more fully detailed in this application atAttachment 3, “Budget Detail Worksheet,” on pages 3 through 10, and are also included hereinbelow as follows.The subgrantee must commence work on the project for which the subgrantee receivedthe subgrant, and the subgrantee must begin to do what the subgrantee stated it was going to doin the subgrant application. As a means by which the ADECA LETS Division helps thesubgrantee with starting and maintaining work on the project, the ADECA LETS Divisionrequires the subgrantee to submit quarterly reports that explain what work has been performed toimplement the subgrantee’s project. The reports must reflect whether the subgrantee’s project isaddressing the stated “problem” through accomplishment of the stated “goals and objectives” viaimplementation of the stated “methods and procedures” and expenditure of the stated “budget”contained in the subgrant application:(i) what is being done to address the “problem” that was described in the subgrantapplication;179

(ii) what is being done to attain the “goals and objectives” stated in the subgrantapplication;(iii) what is being done to implement the “methods and procedures” stated in the subgrantapplication;(iv) what is being done to expend the “budget” stated in the subgrant application;(iv) what is being done to implement the “evaluation criteria” stated in the subgrantapplication; and(v) are the subgrantee’s “evaluation criteria” accurately (statistically) and adequately(substantively) measuring whether the “problem” is being addressed through the achievement ofthe “goals and objectives” via the implementation of the “methods and procedures” andexpenditure of the “budget” stated in the subgrant application -- so as to determine whether ornot the subgrantee is accomplishing the program’s overall objectives.Second, in accordance with the program evaluation component that is formally mandatedin the ADECA LETS Division’s Subgrantee Administrative Manual, as a condition of the grantagreement, if the subgrant project is not operational within 60 days of the original start date ofthe subgrant period, then the subgrantee must report this in writing to the ADECA LETSDivision, explaining the following information: (i) the steps which are being taken to initiate theproject; (ii) the reasons for the delay in starting the project; and (iii) the expected new startingdate of the project. The ADECA LETS Division will respond to the subgrantee with anacknowledgment of the project’s delayed implementation date. And if the project is notoperational within 90 days of the original start date of the subgrant period, then the subgranteemust report in writing by a second letter to the ADECA LETS Division, explaining the reasonsfor the delay in starting the project. Upon receipt of this report, the ADECA LETS Division willrespond to the subgrantee with an acknowledgment of: (i) the approval for the project’simplementation date to be extended past the 90 day period; or (ii) the cancellation of the subgrantaward for the project and the redistribution of those grant funds to other projects.Once the project is implemented, on a quarterly basis each subgrantee is required tosubmit to the ADECA LETS Division a written and executed financial expenditure report and anarrative progress report detailing the respective program’s operations and accomplishmentsduring the calendar quarter. The reports are submitted based on the four quarters of the calendaryear, following the start date of the subgrantee’s project. At the end of each quarter, thesubgrantee has 15 days in which to submit the quarterly report to the ADECA LETS Division.These calendar quarters and due dates are: Quarter 1 = January 1 through March 31, with thereport due on April 15; Quarter 2 = April 1 through June 30, with the report due on July 15;Quarter 3 = July 1 through September 30, with the report due on October 15; and Quarter 4 =October 1 through December 31, with the report due on January 15. The first report is due at theend of the calendar quarter in which the start date of the project occurs, regardless of whether theproject has made any expenditures by that time. Each remaining quarterly report for the grantyear is to contain information for the three month period which comprises that calendar quarter.The ADECA LETS Division provides LETS Form 54, the “Subgrant Fiscal Report,” asthe form on which the quarterly fiscal progress reports are to be submitted, and LETS Form 55,the “Subgrant Narrative Progress Report,” as the form on which the quarterly narrative progressreports are to be submitted. The fiscal report must be signed and dated by the project’s180

accountant or financial officer. The narrative progress report must be signed by the project’sdirector, it must have the official title of that individual included under the signature block, and itmust be dated. If the subgrant award mandates that additional forms must be included with thequarterly reports, then those additional forms will be detailed in the “special conditions” portionof that particular subgrant’s award documents. For example, the ADECA LETS Divisionrequires that the subgrantee submit a completed “ADECA LETS Data Collection Form-1” withthe quarterly narrative progress reports as a means of reporting gender and ethnic statisticalinformation on the subgrant’s clientele served by the program.If subgrantees fail to timely submit the required reports to the ADECA LETS Division,then the ADECA LETS Division can do the following:(i) if a report is not received by the 16th day following the end of the calendar quarter(i.e., April 16, July 16, October 16, January 16), then the ADECA LETS Division may send awritten delinquent notice to the project director requesting that the report be submitted, with acopy of this written delinquent notice being sent to the subgrantee’s authorizing official;(ii) if a report is not received by the 23rd day following the end of the calendar quarter(i.e., April 23, July 23, October 23, January 23), then the ADECA LETS Division may send acertified written notice to the subgrantee’s authorizing official informing the official that theproject’s grant funds will be withheld until the delinquent report is received, and stating that ifthe report fails to arrive by the 5th day of the next month (i.e., May 5, August 5, November 5,February 5), then such failure may result in cancellation of the subgrant, with a copy of thissecond written delinquent notice being sent to the subgrantee’s project director; and(iii) if a report is not received by the 5th day of the next month (i.e., May 5, August 5,November 5, February 5), then the ADECA LETS Division may send a written notice to thesubgrantee’s authorizing official informing the official that the subgrant has been terminated andthe remainder of the subgrant’s funds have been deobligated from the subgrant’s project andreturned to the ADECA LETS Division’s account for expenditure on other projects.When the subgrant has reached its end date and is being closed out by the ADECA LETSDivision, then the last reports are to be stated in terms of being the “Final Fiscal Report” and the“Final Progress Report” on the grant project. These final reports are due within 60 days after theend date of the subgrant rather than being due by the normal deadline of the 15th day followingthe end of the calendar quarter. The “Final Progress Report” shall include an assessment of theproject’s impact on the problem identified in the subgrant application, is to be in a narrativeformat, and is to be supported by statistical information on the clientele served by the project.Third, the ADECA LETS Division collects from its subgrantees the data that are requiredto be submitted in accordance with the USDOJ’s performance measurement indicators (whichare continually being revised) designed specifically for evaluating the Title II Part B FormulaGrant Program. Through this method, the ADECA LETS Division is better able to facilitate thesubgrantees’ (i) access to and selection of proper evidence-based subgrant activities, (ii)selection of performance goals, and (iii) development of sound plans to collect data formeasuring performance and assessing program impact at the local level. Through the ADECALETS Division’s monitoring activities and fiscal and progress reporting requirements that areconditions of each subgrant, the ADECA LETS Division is able to collect and report data on181

Title II Part B Formula Grant Program performance measures submitted by subgrantees todocument the impact of Title II Part B Formula Grant Program funds.Fourth, to verify the information contained in the “Subgrant Fiscal Report” and the“Subgrant Narrative Progress Report,” the ADECA LETS Division employs individuals in thejob classification of “Planning and Economic Development Specialist I/II” to conduct on-sitemonitoring activities. These program monitors’ tasks include conducting the on-site programmonitoring and evaluation activities -- on a calendar year basis -- in order to maintain viableprogram operations. Each on-site visit consists of a thorough physical inspection of theprogram’s premises and daily operations; an examination of the creation and maintenance ofpaper-formatted and electronic-formatted records, budget expenditures, and equipment andsupply uses; interviews with program personnel and clientele; and a summation of the findings ina written report format. The subgrantees are then notified of the monitoring findings and results,and are provided the opportunity to correct any outstanding or unresolved matters discoveredduring the conduct of the on-site monitoring visits.Fifth, the ADECA LETS Division staff and SAG members also regularly attend trainingconferences presented by the USDOJ as well as the Coalition for Juvenile Justice. The programinformation gained from these training conferences is then imparted to the communities andinterested entities in the ADECA LETS Division’s training sessions as a means of informing theattendees of current program initiatives, guidelines/requirements, and updates, and as a means ofsupporting and encouraging their participation in such programs. If any additional trainingbeyond this extent is required for current/potential subgrantees, then the ADECA LETS Divisionwill consider submitting to the USDOJ a request for such training and technical assistance to beprovided.Sixth, Alabama’s Advisory Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (theState Advisory Group or “SAG”) serves an ongoing monitoring role. The ADECA LETSDivision presents all requirements of the JJDP Act to new SAG members at their organizationalmeeting following their appointment to the SAG by the Governor. The SAG then establishesState juvenile justice program area priorities which are used to guide the SAG in makingrecommendations to the Governor regarding the award of subgrants throughout the State toimplement those priorities.One priority of the Title II Part B Formula Grant Program is the monitoring of juvenilefacilities for compliance with the JJDP Act’s first three core requirements (DSO, jail removal,and sight and sound separation). These compliance monitoring activities are conducted byAuburn University at Montgomery (AUM), by and through its Alabama Crime PreventionClearinghouse and Training Institute (ACPCTI) and its subcontractors -- Mr. Mike Rollins ofRMR Consultation and Compliance, LLC in Anniston, Alabama, and Mrs. Sandra Nesbit-Manning of Juvenile Justice Associates in Fort Collins, Colorado. As a result of their efforts, theADECA LETS Division has submitted to the USDOJ OJP OJJDP the annual AlabamaCompliance Monitoring Report by March 30 th each year. For the 2011 annual compliancemonitoring report, the ADECA LETS Division submitted the 2011 Alabama ComplianceMonitoring Report by March 30, 2012. Overall, as a result of said current and previous Reports,the State of Alabama had determinations made that the State is in compliance with the JJDP182

Act’s DSO, Separation, and Jail Removal core requirements [42 U.S.C. §5633(a)(11), (12), and(13)] via the USDOJ OJP OJJDP's letters of determination dated July 15, 2008, September 16,2008, July 13, 2009, October 2, 2009, July 7, 2010, August 23, 2010, September 30, 2011, andDecember 1, 2011.183