Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Cass County Delinquency Plan <br /> <br />Youth Court <br /> <br />Priority Program: Youth Court <br /> <br />Primary Risk Factors Addressed <br />yEarly & Persistent Antisocial Behavior <br />y Academic Failure in School <br />yLack of Commitment to Schoot <br />y Alienation and Rebelliousness <br />yLow Neighborhood Attachment <br /> <br />Protective Factors Enhanced <br />yHealthy Beliefs and Ctear Standards <br />yIndividual Characteristics <br />yBonding <br /> <br />ANALYSIS OF NEED/PROGAM DESCRIPTION: <br />There is a need for an effective alternative to traditional Juvenile Court proceedings. Youth <br />Court meets this need providing ajury of peers holding juvenile offenders accountable for their <br />behavior by having sanctions placed on them. Youth between the ages of 13-18 serve as jurors, <br />clerks, bailiffs, and prosecuting and defense attorneys. A local attorney serves as the Judge. <br />Defendants are between the ages of 10 and 18 years of age. Offenders that complete the Youth <br />Court disposition will not be adjudicated delinquent for the offense. Research shows that <br />diversion programs similar to the Youth Court have lower rates of recidivism than traditional <br />means of corrections, <br />-- Program Operated By: Lutheran Sociat Services, Fargo ND 58] 02 <br />-- Collaborations & Interagency Agreements: Juvenile Court, Local Attorneys <br /> <br />Successes <br />LSS conducts parent and participation evaluations and they are extremely positive, At this time <br />the Juvenile Court does not have data on recidivism. A graduate student is preparing a thesis on <br />youth court and its overall effectiveness during 2002, The East Central Judicial Court completes <br />informal evaluations on the program on an ongoing basis to make certain that it remains an <br />effective diversion tool. In 2001, youthful offenders completed their youth court requirements <br />96% of the time, There are countless cases where parents have shared with the coordinator that <br />they felt the entire process ofY outh Court was not on educational but proved to be a great source <br />of accountability for them as will. It also provided meaningful motivation for their child to make <br />the life adjustments needed to change their behavior more positively for the future <br />Similar stories are being documented from the parents of the youth volunteers, <br /> <br />Challenges <br />The biggest challenge in Youth Court is to have consistent youth volunteers. In 2002 there are <br />65 youth volunteers who serve in Youth Court. Approximately 20 show up each week to <br />volunteer, Most volunteers lead busy lives and have numerous other school an work <br />commitments that interfere with the volunteers consistently coming to Youth Court, Volunteers <br />also serve for a limited lime and then moveon to other activities. They may also graduate which <br />makes them ineligible as volunteers. Constant recruitment and retention efforts are in place to <br />continue with training new recruits. <br /> <br />Funding Issues <br />-- Co-Payments: Youth Court does not charge a participation fee at this time <br />-- Costs per client: 2001 $172 per clients <br />-- Expansion requirements: ,5FTE added in October 2001. <br /> <br />Page II <br />