Community Corrections Board puts all its eggs in one basket
By Bobbi Mlynar
Thursday, January 22, 2009
After a lengthy discussion, the Community Corrections Advisory Board voted 7-2 Tuesday afternoon to award all of its prevention funds to the truancy program for the next fiscal year.
The decision left the Family Solutions program without any community corrections funding for the next fiscal year. The program previously had received significant funding from CCAB.
Presentations early in the meeting Tuesday were made by Jennifer Williams, representing the Family Solutions program operated through the Mental Health Center of East Central Kansas, and Joan Olson and Brenda Fisher, Court Services officers who also serve as school resource officers to deal with truant and troubled students in grades kindergarten through eight.
“All of them did a wonderful job,” said Robert Sullivan, director of Community Corrections. “The presentations were very good. The thing that I think helped the truancy program is the Family Solutions is targeting a low-risk program.”
A strategic plan created last year for juvenile offenders in the Fifth Judicial District stated that the district was spending a disproportionate amount of money on low-risk offenders and needed to focus more attention and dollars on the higher-risk offenders with multiple problems. The plan was written by consultant John Paul Wright of the University of Cincinnati.
“Truancy seems to be a marker for future problems — teen pregnancy, drug abuse ...,” Sullivan said. “Just things that take place with unstructured time of kids. There’s just a lot of issues that arises and are related to truancy.
“We want to help the schools by making sure the child is there.”
Before this year, 100 percent of the prevention monies had gone to help low-risk offenders.
“And that was the way our prevention was written,” Sullivan said.
Three new levels of prevention handed down by the Juvenile Justice Authority changed that by dividing it into defined behaviors and criteria within primary, secondary and tertiary levels.
Combined, those factors helped tip the balance of $86,414 in prevention money to the truancy program.
“What the advisory board would like to happen, though, is that they would really like to see Family Solutions continue to operate,” Sullivan said. “It’s an excellent program. Dr. Wright said that also. He said that Jennifer Williams ran the program very, very well. It had nothing to do with that (the funding change), other than the target population.”
Consideration is being given to creating a subcommittee to collaborate in seeking funding sources for Family Solutions, he said.
At next month’s meeting, the advisory board will talk about targeting high-risk, multi-problem families.
toninj (anonymous) says...
I would agree with this as long as commissioners require the school district and community corrections to establish better guidelines for this program.
The way this program is currently working there seem to be several errors. These officers have harassed kindergarteners, which under the state of Kansas guidelines is not even required.
These programs have been in place for almost 10 years now in this district in one form or another and have made very little difference in the attendance of our students. With budget cuts where they are I would think there are many other places this money could be put to use. I would also think that an agency funded by the county should be putting money into the other districts in this county and not just USD 253.
January 22, 2009 at 7 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
I happen to know of two different families that had to attend the Family Solutions classes due to their kids getting in trouble. While they were reluctant to go, they were very pleased after it was all over. They also said that within their group there were kids who had gotten in trouble for vandalism, stealing, battery, drug possession, possession of alcohol, DUIs, etc..... Those don't seem like "low risk" offenders to me, as opposed to kids that skip school. Speaking of which, where are the school counselors on this? Doesn't that fall under their job description? Or at least shouldn't the district chip in a little money since somebody else is doing their job for them? When I was in school, the school counselor would make home visits and go to the ends of the earth to get "truant" kids to school. Maybe they still do, I'm not sure. Anway, seems like awful good program to get the "hook."
January 23, 2009 at 8:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sunshine (anonymous) says...
I have a problem with this...first of all, prevention of truancy should start with the parents and then school. I make sure my kids get on the bus every day and get off the bus after school every day (if they didn't get off the bus I would be grilling them as to why) and I expect that once they arrive at the school on the bus, the school will ensure that they stay at school all day. My child skipped school once, one block, and went back to school for the rest of the day. Major Punishment was given at home and the school gave a Friday school detention. But how the heck is it that a student can walk out the front door of school during school hours without being questioned to begin with? There are security officers, cameras, principles, assistant principles all over the school...so I don't get that.
My child proceeded to get into trouble that day (other than skipping class) and so we became involved in the Family Solutions class. Believe me, at first I was really ticked at having to do this, at my kid, at the system for blaming me for my child's bad decision. We are not parents that allow our kids to run the streets or have kids that are misbehaving and causing all kinds of havoc. I think we might actually be considered to be fairly strict parents and as our kids tell us "over protective". The fact of the matter is that parents can't be with the kids every minute of every day making sure that they make only good decisions. I hope and pray that this is the worst thing we have to worry about but I can honestly say that if not for the Family Solutions class and being forced to deal with the situation over a long period of time rather than it being a thing that is punished and forgotten within a few weeks, there may have been more trouble. It was a valuable thing for all of us. Most of the kids in our group were "low risk", first time offenders, and most offenses seemed relatively minor. But this is how the major problems start. Furthermore, to my knowledge, my child is the only one in our group that got into trouble while skipping school. The others were either at school during school hours or off school property after school hours.
January 23, 2009 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sunshine (anonymous) says...
So while I agree that truancy may be a sign of bigger problems to come, there are so many other things that are more obvious that have absolutely nothing to do with kids being at school....i.e.drinking and drug use (usually happens at parties at night), teen pregnancy (are they getting pregnant during school hours or most likely while they are at the parties that generally take place at night), bullying (guess what, this can take place at school during school hours or immediately after school, therefore not a truancy issue), vandalism and theft (probably happens while they are skipping school, but also during after school hours when they are their parents responsibility). I think a bigger issue (than truancy) is that there are an awful lot of kids running around, of all ages, without rules and consequences at home. Kids who have no curfew and who's parents don't seem to realize that their kids are gone for long periods of time (even very young kids). Maybe a better use of this "prevention" funding would be to set a town curfew and when kids are out past curfew on more than one occasion the kids and parents should have to participate in something like the Family Solutions class. More patroling around the school all year long before and after school, funding such things as having juvenile offenders serve community service by cleaning up vandalism and the town in general. I am not saying that truancy should be ignored, but it would have made more sense to fund both programs equally. Family Solutions should not have to loose funding...we have gained alot from that class and I am sure that most of the parents that have been in the class feel the same way. The kids are not thrilled to be there, but I think that is the point, to make them uncomfortable and have to face up to their crimes no matter how minor the offense was so that they will make better decisions in the future. Most of these kids realize that this class is a one time chance to straighten up and follow the rules and that if they offend again they will be looking at tougher punishment. And the parents are not likely to let them forget that lesson too soon if ever, it is an inconvenience to miss work, pay the $50 for the diversion (esp. for those who are already living on a shoestring budget), and it is embarassing for both the parents and the kids. I think a little humiliation can go a long way towards setting a kid straight, and motivating parents to keep them there.
January 23, 2009 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pollyanna (anonymous) says...
WOW. What a poor decision to not grant any funding to the Family Solutions program. At the heart of prevention is getting families early..at the start or indication of problems. I would like to see a public listing of everyone on the Community Corrections Advisory Board. I think people may be surprised that it is heavy with employees or people directly associated with the truancy program. It is a real disservice to this community if the Family Solutions Program is eliminated. Dig deeper, Gazette!
January 23, 2009 at 11:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
I found this online after reading Pollyanna's post. I thought surely they wouldn't leave such an important decision up to people who may have affiliation with either side. Come to find out, the people pushing the Truancy Program happen to actually be Corrections Officers. Community Corrections Officers presenting to the Community Corrections Board. Hmmmmm........
It would be interesting to see the make-up of the board. I know for a fact that the Mental Health Center is a totally different agency.
http://www.emporiagazette.com/news/20...
I also found this:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/news/20...
50% recidivism rate down to 9.72% recidivism? Yeah, that's a place to cut corners. Wow.
January 23, 2009 at 1:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
familyfirst (anonymous) says...
I have experienced the wrath of the truancy officers. I have to say it was very unpleasant. I have children in lower grades and enjoy taking them out of town to experience the world and not just Emporia, Ks. I was visited by Joan Olson (corrections officer) who in my opinion thinks she has something to prove to everyone... My children never fall behind in school and I have not heard of the school itself having any problems with me taking the kids out for the day to enjoy life a little. The truancy program has access to all of your children's records on power-school. When Joan decided to show up at my house to discuss with me why my children had missed school, I don't believe she had even contacted the school to check the circumstances. She just saw a certain # of days in the absence column and over she came like a bull ready to charge. So my issue is, if parents want to educate their children a little outside the classroom and are responsible and the grades are not suffering... does that constitute my tax dollars going to this program so they can toodle over to my house and bother me over something I chose, that was in the best interest of my children. It looks like a major power trip is going on over at that office and a lot of money will be wasted while they go "talk" to parents that are doing a great job and are extremely interested and pro-active in their child's education. The reason I am so upset about this, is that it not only happened to me, but to several other responsible families that decided to take their children out of school for a family vacation etc. If it was just me, then fine.... but she is obviously spending many hours (tax money) visiting the wrong people. If we excuse our children from school (and their grades stay up) and we know where they are and what they are doing ie.learning outside the textbook, don't tell me they are truant!!! Don't get me wrong, if a child doesn't show up for school and the parent is unaware, by all means give me a call, come to my house, call the stinkin police immediately, but don't waist my time and money coming to my house to tell me what I already called and told the school!!!!!! It's a sad day when all of your parental rights are stripped away. Sorry to ramble, but to the second part of this issue, without the other agency that actually works with the families who have children that are truly truant what good are we doing for the children. I don't know a single family out there that would benefit from being bullied at their front door by someone just out to say haha I caught you. We need people to work with families, that actually care about them and want to help them, so kids want to stay in school and do better so they don't become one of the statistics. I don't believe in being out right defiant, but after the visit I received from Joan, all I wanted to do was to keep my kids home from school the next day, for no reason at all.
January 23, 2009 at 1:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Itiswhatitis (anonymous) says...
FYI to the above bloggers, The Community Corrections Board is made up of various community members. Only one is an employee of Community Corrections and he refrained from voting. Secondly, to the post by lurker75 the offenses you refer to have nothing to do with being "high risk". The kids that go through the family solutions program are on diversion and are FIRST time offenders. Repeat offenders are the "high risk" offenders. Therefore the Family Solutions Program is targeting "Low Risk" offenders. The Family Solutions program is an excellent program and Jennifer Williams does a very good job. Thirdly, to the post by familyfirst, You have 2 1/2 months in the summer, 2 weeks over Christmas, and a week in March to take your kids to explore the country. It is funny to me that you can be so defensive and negative towards such a good program if you haven't done anything wrong. It is obvious by what you put in your blog that you are ignorant to the system!
January 27, 2009 at 1:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
native_emporia (anonymous) says...
All I can say is I am disappointed in this decision. We need a more diverse group of programs rather then putting all the funds in one place. This program has already been in place for so long and has not really proven to be successful. I had higher expectations of community corrections being ran under Mr. Sullivan; however, it seems to still be moving in the same direction that Mr. Marsh started it in. Very unfortunate
I would also like to state that it is evident that Mr. Sullivan has failed to get his employees "better then the rest" attitudes under control by the looks of Itiswhatitis's blog. The attack on familyfirst was uncalled for. Just an FYI to Itiswhatitis, not all parents are like the ones you typically deal with and you DO NOT have all the correct answers to parenting. If a parent wants to pull their child out of school for an outing that they feel is in their best interest there is NOTHING wrong with that. You need to drop the "big brother" attitudes. I don't believe it is familyfirst tha is ignorant of the system, but rather Itiswhatitis that is ignorant of parents rights!
January 27, 2009 at 2:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pollyanna (anonymous) says...
Am I cuckoo for cocoa puffs or should a PREVENTION program focus on catching behaviors early before they become high risk offenders?
Ultimately both programs do help the youth of our community and that is a good thing. I would just hate to see the family solutions program dissolve because all the funding went somewhere else. The testimonials from people who have gone through the program as well as the significant lower rates of recidivism proves it is a program that is working. Why try to change/break something that isn't broken??
January 27, 2009 at 3:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
Ok. Bear with me.....The High Risk offenders are the ones who are at a High Risk of repeating an offense. I think I'm fine with that. Therefore, Low Risk offenders would be the ones who have a Low Risk of repeating an offense. Pretty simple. I agree that the majority of the money should go to high risk offenders, that makes sense. But, you can't tell me that if I skip school a few more times than I should, I automatically qualify as a HIGH RISK to commit a criminal offense, more so than somebody who has actually gotten a DUI or been arrested for stealing?? If you think about that, really think about it, that just doesn't make sense. I'm positive that there is a need for the truancy program, I really do. But if supporting it means getting rid of the other one, I just don't think that's good for the community. So the kids that get diversions now, what happens? Same thing that happened to me? Believe it or not, I got into a little trouble in college. I was underage and drinking a beer in a bar. Broke the law, got caught, paid my dues. However, this is what my diversion entailed: Show up in court. Plead guilty. Meet some county attorney (I think?) Sign some papers. Send in a check. Keep my nose clean for 6 months. Nobody checked on me, nobody discussed with me my actions, nobody visited with my folks or the other members of my family, nothing. So guess what I did in 6 months? Yep. I became a repeat offender. I was just more careful. Now if I knew that if I were to get caught again I had to not only take a class, but involve my parents in the class, there is a much less chance that I would have been so bold. I sure would have thought twice about my actions. Now take my situation, and plug in stealing, or drug possession, or vandalism. What's going to happen to those kids if they go on diversion? Education is the key to recidivism. Family Solutions offered that. High Risk vs. Low Risk. You decide.
January 27, 2009 at 4:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
onehorsetown (anonymous) says...
It seems to me native_emporia must have some skeletons in the closet. A personel attack on Mr. Sullivan and his employees is completely uncalled for. Not sure why you would assume that itiswhatitis is a employee, his knowledge seems to be less than yours. So does that make you a employee? or past employee??.
January 27, 2009 at 10:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
I suggest to those who are complaining that they call Court Services, inquire when the next Community Corrections meeting is scheduled, and attend. These are open meetings. Ask questions. Learn more than this news article has offered. Learn about state cutbacks. Ask for a copy of the report by Dr. Wright. Ask to see the minutes of meetings.
Personal attacks on Mr. Sullivan and his staff are cheap shots, especially when information in this article is so limited.
January 28, 2009 at 11:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
native_emporia (anonymous) says...
onehorsetown or should I say Itiswhatitis (since both accounts were just created to make statements on this issue): I apologize that you have taken such a great offense to my opinion.
You see my generation was raised to be involved in your community. I was raised that those that take an active role in their community and politics gain the right to voice their opinions. I have put many years in and feel I have the right to my opinion. This is a small community, if you take an active position you are aware of the issues and form an opinion on what will serve the community best. I will continue to share that opinion and continue to respect other's opinions that have also played an active role.
January 28, 2009 at 3:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )