Juvenile justice head says state incentive could boost funding here
By Bobbi Mlynar
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
The Kansas Legislature will determine this session whether the 29 area juvenile justice offices gain access to “incentive funding” for special programs and services.
Russ Jennings, Kansas Commissioner of Juvenile Justice, talked about the program Tuesday during the noon meeting of the Community Corrections Board. The meeting was attended by board members and Court Services employees who work with juveniles offenders.
Jennings, who became commissioner last year, said that his plans for the agency are to make it “far more responsive than it has been in the past.
“I really do have a passion for salvaging as many of these young folks as we can,” he said.
In the past, the adults in charge have not served the juvenile’s or society’s needs well.
“We’re really working with a population that most people would like to put to the side,” Jennings said.
The youngsters were not being provided the tools they needed to make the adjustments necessary to become successful adults, though the state had allowed $2,000 each to handle the youngsters through the system.
“We might as well have given the kids $2,000 and told them to go out and buy hamburgers,” he said.
Instead, Jennings said he wants the agency to work at changing the lives of the youthful and at-risk offenders and their families.
Jennings has asked Gov. Sebelius to include $3.5 million in additional monies in her budget to use as “incentive funding” for the agency to distribute to its regional offices for unique needs. He could not predict whether the request would be successful and he encouraged those present “to hold everybody’s feet to the fire.”
“This agency has been ignored by the legislature the past seven years,” he said. “ ... Prevention, in particular, is a hard sell. Government’s not great at delayed gratification, just like adolescents.”
In the Fifth Judicial District, comprised of Lyon and Chase counties, the incentive funding could bump the local agency’s budget up an additional $124,000 from the current $289,000 budgeted.
The incentive money would be matched by local entities on a dollar-for-dollar basis, to be used for intervention, prevention, case management, intensive supervised probation or intake and assessment that suits the area.
What works in one area may not be effective in the others, he said, and a professional in researching successful programs has been hired by the agency to assist the area offices.
“We are learning more with adolescents what does work and, more importantly, what doesn’t work and what harms them,” Jennings said.
Effective tools are available to do assessments of individual juveniles and to help evaluate the relative risk of re-offending.
“It’s working well and giving good data about the kids ... but it’s not available at a key decision-making point in the process,” Jennings said.
The information needs to be made available to judges and prosecutors prior to their dealings with the juveniles so they will know the results of the assessments and the recommendations that accompany them.
Jennings said it also is vital that youngsters have continuity of certain programs they begin at the local level; they do not receive full benefit when they start a 12-week program in their home city, only to begin a different one when they are transferred to a residential institution four weeks later.
“That’s an area where the state has failed miserably,” Jennings said.
The youngsters need a “thread of continuity” so the same program components in their home towns follow them through the group home.
“So, we’re trying to integrate that through the system,” he said.
Jennings congratulated the local board for its successes and the efficiency with which the office operates. He was pleased Robert Sullivan had requested an evaluation of the local operation, with an analysis of services and efficiency and to “see where gaps are, and refocus.”
“The nice thing about the Robert Sullivans of the world, they’re willing to go through that,” Jenning said.
The Juvenile Justice Authority’s goals are to:
F prevent youth from becoming involved in the juvenile justice system
F provide community supervision for youths who are involved in the system
F provide safe, secure, humane and restorative confinement of youth to enhance public safety
F promote public safety by holding youths accountable for their behavior, and improve the ability of youths to live productively and responsibly in their communities.