Programming, Staffing And Managing the Violent Juvenile Offender.

March 7, 2001 -- Caucasian eighth-grader Elizabeth Catherine Bush of Williamsport, Pa., was arrested and held in custody after allegedly shooting her classmate in the shoulder.

March 13, 2001 -- At the request of Florida's Department of Corrections, the Department of Juvenile Justice agreed to accept and place 14-year-old African-American Lionel Tate in a maximum-security juvenile facility. Tate was sentenced to life Imprisonment for the murder of a 6-year-old girl.

March 26, 2001 -- A judge postponed the arraignment of 15-year-old Caucasian Charles "Andy" Williams, charged with killing two students and injuring 13 others in a suburban San Diego high school, to give his attorneys time to challenge a California law requiring youths to be tried as adults.

From California, to a small town in Pennsylvania, to Florida, the media is obsessed with the seemingly mindless, heartless and emotionless violent acts of juveniles -- male or female, white or black -- who, one would surmise, at a minimum, lack spiritual guidance and respect for human life. A review of the media coverage of these juveniles and violent events reveals that all reports and stories focus on one or more of the following:

* Why some children snap and who is to blame;

* Should youths who commit violent crimes be tried and sentenced as adults?;

* The prevalence of ethnic minority children in the criminal justice system; and

* The long-lasting effect violent acts have on victims.

Those issues certainly are important and debates may improve policies or systemwide developments. However, there are few discussions about another important consequence of violent juvenile crime and sentencing -- how to manage violent juvenile offenders once they have been committed or sentenced to a residential or correctional facility.

Growing Concern

Discussions about the issues corrections professionals face in juvenile or adult systems typically are absent from media reports. Journalists rarely demonstrate an interest in or an understanding of the challenges corrections personnel deal with every day. Regardless of the correctional setting, whether it is a juvenile correctional facility or an adult prison that houses young violent offenders, correctional staff, administrators and policy-makers nationwide struggle to find ways to best manage this difficult population.

From 1986 to 1995, violent personal offenses handled by U.S. juvenile courts increased 98 percent, according to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The good news is that most states have been experiencing a decline in such offenses in recent years. The bad news is that the numbers still are significantly higher than earlier decades, and the number of juvenile arrests for violent index crimes still is 43 percent above 1986 figures. The Josephson Institute of Ethics conducted a national survey last year of 15,000 teens. The study found that one out of five high school boys carried a weapon to school, one out of three high school students are afraid at school, 27 percent of middle school students and 31 percent of high school students say they think it is OK to hit or threaten someone, and 70 percent have hit someone at least once in the past year. These statistics, along with the fact that the at-risk youth population is expected to continue to increase this decade, prove it is essential to address management strategies for violent juvenile offenders.

Assessments

A review of existing literature suggests there is not one significant cause for violent juvenile offenders and that until someone discovers a magic pill, any attempt to treat such offenders should be multidimensional and individualized to increase the potential for success, however it may be measured. Dr. Hans Steiner, professor of child psychiatry and child development at Stanford University Medical Center, in Palo Alto, Calif., and an advocate for improving research in this area, says, "When you call someone a violent offender, you are talking about an extremely heterogeneous group of people."

There is little argument among treatment experts that a comprehensive approach will consider all four dimensions of young people -- biological, psychological, social/emotional and spiritual. This asks the question: How do corrections professionals get to know offenders? A sequential diagnostic/assessment system that identifies variables unique to each offender and then accurately tracks treatment progress is the best way to get to know juvenile offenders and prescribe appropriate changes to subsequent treatment and sanctions. Each assessment should not be treated as an isolated event, but as information to be connected with previous knowledge and assessments so that decisions in managing violent juvenile offenders are well-informed. That approach allows corrections professionals to adjust the intensity of treatment, the level of security and the severity of sanctions with full knowledge of each individual's history and changing condition. Unfortunately, many factors often limit corrections professionals' abi lities to be that comprehensive, including use of outdated or inappropriate instruments, lack of staff training on the application and use of assessment tools, real or perceived costs associated with a systematic approach, and the failure of some administrators and policy-makers to recognize the value of quality screening, assessment and diagnosis.

Specialized Treatment

Depending on the size, complexity and diversity of correctional jurisdictions, if, as a result of assessments, there is a sufficient number of violent juvenile offenders to manage, specialized program units with reduced staff-to-offender ratios are the preferred program approach. Frequent face-to-face contact between staff and offenders should be an important component of programs or facilities designed for violent juvenile offenders. Critical attention to staff selection for specialized units, programs and facilities that manage violent juvenile offenders can- not be underestimated, particularly when assessments suggest the existence of significant biological impairments among juvenile offenders. "Some individuals may have an organic impairment that contributes to their violent offending," says Dr. William Davidson, staff psychiatrist for the Virginia and Washington, D.C., departments of correction.

Correctional staff in such programs must have a high tolerance for frustration, exhibit emotional stability and present a calm demeanor. Staff should receive special training and be knowledgeable in all aspects of domestic violence, since it is a common occurrence in violent juvenile offender histories.

Scientific knowledge about the potential biological causes and other causes of violence are increasing rapidly. Yet tremendous gaps requiring more research still exist. The treatment implications of scientific advancements are enormous for corrections. Maternal exposure to toxic substances, poor prenatal nutrition and extreme stress during pregnancy can have a damaging influence on the developing brain. Davidson believes that, "A deadly triad of increased noradrenaline, decreased serotonin and increased testosterone results in chronic, uncontrolled violence."

Forensic psychiatrist Dr. Albert Globus suggests that abnormal temporal lobe functioning is involved in violent offending and has found statistically significant differences in temporal lobe activity between violent and nonviolent research subjects. Many treatment professionals see the use of psychotropic drug treatments, though highly controversial, as promising. Steiner has reported on the effective use of anti-kindling/anti-seizure medications to combat "short-fuse syndrome."

Treatment Targets

A comprehensive approach to treatment establishes goals for treatment interventions with the understanding that many factors may contribute to violent offending. John Platt, a juvenile justice consultant and former youth correctional administrator in Illinois suggests 10 targets for treatment in:

* Change anti-social attitudes;

* Change anti-social emotions;

* Increase self-control, self-management and problem-solving skills;

* Replace aggression, lying and stealing "skills" with pro-social alternatives;

* Remove chemical dependencies and substance abuse;

* Shift costs and rewards so that noncriminal activities are viewed as more rewarding than criminal activities;

* Ensure offenders can recognize situations that promote criminal behavior and have a plan for dealing with those situations;

* Reduce anti-social peer associations;

* Promote family affection and communication; and

* Promote identification and association with noncriminal role models.

Recidivism studies conducted by the Family Services Research Center of the Medical University of South Carolina support goals for treatment interventions and the multitargeted approach.

Educational efforts within specialized program units that teach offenders parenting skills, and attempt to reduce domestic violence and other behaviors that lead to childhood trauma, may reduce intergenerational transmission of violent offending. Many correctional administrators report on other programs that have made a positive impact on violent juvenile offenders -- including program on anger management, conflict resolution training, gang awareness and the impact of crime on victims -- pioneered in the California Youth Authority and being used in facilities nationwide.

Reality of Transition

With the relatively rare exception of offenders who are sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole or release, violent juvenile offenders eventually re-enter their communities.Case management and community corrections supervision takes over responsibility for successful reintegration into a society and, according to Platt, "... is a very strong protective mechanism against future violent acts."

Program components to enhance violent offender transition to the community should include continuation of targeted treatment interventions, intense supervision to ensure maximum compliance with aftercare/ parole/conditional release requirements, gradual reduction of structure with an opportunity for increased responsibility and self-control, services consistent with individualized case planning, activities to develop competencies and skills, and opportunities for offenders to recognize obligations to victims and to repay their debts to society.

Competent Staff

The key to any effective treatment program for violent juvenile offenders is competent staff. Clearly certain personality types are preferred over others in managing such difficult offenders. But once staff has been selected, retaining, training, developing, testing and evaluating them on an ongoing basis is of equal or even greater importance.

Dealing with the increasing numbers of violent juvenile offenders in juvenile and adult facilities requires a new set of skills for staff, even for those who, up until now, have been extremely effective in dealing with other nonviolent juvenile offenders. A new training paradigm is needed to address curriculum development, competency testing and training evaluation. This shift in thinking should begin with a thorough review of the training methods and curriculum, and an occupational analysis to determine the actual tasks and skills associated with each job in an effective program that manages violent offenders. Involving individuals from all organizational levels will engage everyone in quality assurance and it will allow a wide variety of experienced perspectives to be taken into account. Such insights will improve training curriculum.

There is a growing realization that even with significant advancements in correctional training academies in some states and improved use of technologies, most learning in corrections takes place outside the classroom and, by necessity and practice, probably always will. This suggests that structured on-the-job experiences are extremely important and should be linked to classroom-based instruction whenever possible. Many staff members have not been exposed to violent individuals. Training and education about the causes and treatment of violent offenders and course work in human development, criminal personality and domestic violence will help staff gain of a basic understanding and insight this population. Teaming new staff with veteran staff who are role models will make structured on-the-job experiences both real and constructive. Cross-training staff from different classifications and disciplines, who work with violent juvenile offenders, reinforces the teamwork necessary to accomplish objectives and furt her strengthens learning opportunities. It also helps everyone gain a better appreciation for the big picture.

Training efforts should not overlook the needs of veteran staff members. Existing staff in some cases may have the most difficulty adjusting to changes in the level of violence exhibited by offenders. Competency standards will help clearly define job expectations and give veteran staff the opportunity to identify their strengths and weaknesses. A system should be established that officially recognizes participants for successfully attaining new competencies.

The issue of staff safety and wellness must be addressed. Obviously a safe and secure operation is going to be more conducive to effective staff and programming. Even in the best circumstances, these specialized units or facilities can be very stressful. There is strong evidence to suggest that individuals who work with violent offenders are at risk of becoming involved in domestic violence or other inappropriate coping responses. Training efforts should help staff understand and appropriately manage job stress. This will help to promote a psychologically well-adjusted and healthy staff.

Facility Design

Just as it is important to assess and know violent juvenile offenders and review training curriculum, techniques and tasks in programs, it is equally as important to conduct comprehensive facility assessments. While the federal Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth in Sentencing program and some state funding has provided opportunities to construct new facilities with violent juvenile offenders in mind, the vast majority of facilities throughout the country still tend to be facilities built in prior decades for a much different population. That makes it necessary to assess existing facilities to manage violent offenders.

Again, assessments should involve a broad cross section of staff who work with violent offenders. While safety and security are foremost considerations, flexibility also is important. The ideal facility for the treatment and management of violent juvenile offenders would provide a range of correctional environments, from group living to individual lock-ups. The challenge is to provide facilities that respond to difficult security issues and assure the public's safety, while providing space that supports education and treatment programming. Whether constructing a new facility or unit, or retrofitting an existing structure, facility living environments that are perceived by the public, staff and offenders to be safe, stable and consistent, provide the best opportunities for violent offenders to respond favorably to in-custody treatment. Basic standards for facility security, program space, environmental factors, flexibility of space and encouraging staff and offender interaction, should be established.

Juvenile Differences

Obviously, secure perimeters and entries, and internal movement control are essential components of operating correctional facilities whether designed for juveniles or adults. However, juvenile facilities, should not merely be carbon copies of their adult counterparts. Juvenile offenders have different programmatic needs and facilities should reflect that. The American Correctional Association recognized these differences this past year, when the standards committee adopted new accreditation standards for adult prisons that house juveniles.

Substance abuse treatment, education, job training and other programs generally are designed to prepare juvenile offenders for their return to society. Design flexibility and adaptability are very important. Many corrections professionals believe that transferring violent juvenile offenders from facility to facility may be damaging and reinforce established patterns of destructive behavior. Facilities with a range of security options and living space arrangements may reduce the need for transfers and promote effective treatment. Experience also has shown that violent juvenile offenders can be very creative in their misuse and possible destruction of equipment and facilities. This suggests that consideration be given to assure that interiors are designed to be durable.

Consideration of staff also is an important design priority. Control centers and other staff areas should be designed to encourage interaction. Natural light, varied and interesting workplaces, comfortable furnishings and acoustically buffered areas all contribute to functional work space. Staff must be able to see, hear and communicate with juveniles at all times. The facility design must be perceived as useful and convenient to staff or its use will be modified, avoided or ignored.

A discussion of facility design considerations in managing violent juvenile offenders would not be complete without mentioning parole/conditional release/aftercare office space considerations. Violent juvenile offenders are increasingly less likely to be accepted into traditional community-based programs due to public safety concerns. Their complex needs typically cannot be met with existing facilities, programs and services. A significant and important option is to lease or construct post-commitment supervision offices to accommodate multiple services for violent youths, such as educational assistance, job training and substance abuse counseling. In multiservice facilities, violent juvenile offender needs can be met while allowing for an increased level of accountability and supervision.

Technology as an Aid

The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Advisory Committee of the National Institute of Justice's Office of Science and Technology has been researching, developing and evaluating ways that technology can make correctional staff's jobs easier. But despite the enormous impact technology can have on the design and operations of correctional facilities that house violent juvenile offenders, technology cannot replace well-trained staff. It is nevertheless common for rapidly advancing technology to easily impact the ability of correctional practitioners to keep pace.

Correctional managers looking for solutions to better manage violent juvenile offenders sometimes are viewed as easy prey for aggressive vendors who are selling the latest gadgets. It is essential that correctional decision-makers establish guidelines for considering new technologies to avoid purchasing products that have limited value. Technology should be viewed as an aid and not as a replacement for competent staff. Of course this also applies to good information and tracking systems. The more comprehensive data systems are designed the greater opportunity to improve research and evaluation of violent juvenile offender programs. And better research and evaluation should ultimately lead to better treatment and increased accountability and public safety.

Conclusion

Youths like Elizabeth Bush, Lionel Tate and Andy Williams pose significant dilemmas for society, generate Newsweek and Time covers, and provide much fodder for local and national media and talk shows. While those forums and discussions flow with the ebb and tide of the latest crime of the day, thousands of dedicated corrections professionals wake up every day knowing their job is to make a difference with violent juvenile offenders. Their efforts contribute greatly to public safety and often go unheralded. The corrections industry can show its appreciation to staff best by continually improving.

To do so, it is first necessary to make managing violent juvenile offenders a priority. Then it is essential to comprehensively assess offenders, training and facilities. Agencies are encouraged to establish properly designed specialized units, programs or facilities for violent juvenile offenders with targeted treatment interventions and carefully selected competent staff. These structures should be flexible and recognize the different needs of juveniles. These same principles should apply to post-commitment supervision offices as part of violent juvenile offender transition back to the community. Finally, every effort should be made to take advantage of appropriately selected technology as a potential aid in managing violent juvenile offenders, but always with the clear understanding that competent staff is still the most valuable resource.

Frank Alarcon is deputy secretary of the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice in Tallahassee, Fla.

REFERENCES

American Psychological Association. 1997. Is youth violence just another fact of life? A briefing paper.

Armstrong, T,L. 1991. Intensive interventions with high-risk youths. Monsey, N.Y.: Criminal Justice Press.

Blanchette, K. 1996. Sex offender assessment, treatment and recidivism: A literature review. Ottawa, Ontario: Correctional Service Canada.

Blumstein, A. 1995. Violence by young people. National Institute of Justice Journal. 229.

California Youth Authority. 1998. Violent youthful offenders. Sacramento, Calif. (September).

Crime and Violence Prevention Center. 1995. Violence prevention. A vision of hope. Sacramento, Calif. (August).

Elliott, D. 1994. Youth violence: An overview. Paper presented at the Aspen Institute's Children's Policy Forum Children and Violence Conference.

Family Services Research Center. 1996. Multisystemic therapy using home-based services. Charleston, S.C.: Medical University of South Carolina. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences.

Inciardi, JA. 1996. A corrections-based continuum of effective drug abuse treatment. Paper presented at the National Institute of Research in Progress Seminar Series.

Komure, S. 1981. Follow-up evaluation of the Cambria Program for Violent Offenders. Sacramento, Calif., Department of Youth Authority.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1993. Comprehensive strategy for serious, violent and chronic juvenile offenders. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1998. Juvenile court statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,

Sekel, J.P. and J.K. Turner, 1980. Institutional violence reduction project. Sacramento, Ca. Department of the Youth Authority.