Using Data to Address Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Justice 10:30 a.m. -12:00 p.m.
ADDRESSING EQUITY IN JUSTICE SYSTEMS JULY, 2015 2
THE W. HAYWOOD BURNS INSTITUTE (BI) 3 Our Mission The Burns Institute works to eliminate racial and ethnic disparity in the youth justice system by building a communitycentered response to youthful misbehavior that is equitable and restorative. Our Approach Facilitate community and system stakeholders through a data-driven process aimed at creating community-based alternatives to secure detention. Experience in consulting with over 100 jurisdictions in 40 states nationwide to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in the youth justice system. Trained over 10,000 judges, law enforcement, executive and probation personnel.
U.S. DEMOGRAPHICS 4
COMMON CHALLENGES TO JUSTICE REFORM WORK FOCUSED ON EQUITY This is Brand New We don t have a problem, so We have trainings about race, but We collect data about racial/ethnicity, but We ve established an equity work group, but We don t know what to do next 5
KEY COMPONENTS TO REDUCING RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITIES 6
KEY LESSONS FROM YOUTH JUSTICE REDUCING RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITIES: ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS Creating a Safe Space Collaborative Structure & Community voice Purpose of Detention/Pretrial Jail Leadership Data As Tool Strategic Thinking Facilitation 7
COLLABORATIVE STRUCTURE Identify collaborative mission and purpose Identify appropriate stakeholders Involvement of Supervisors/Line Staff Community Involvement Ensure capacity to access and analyze data Ensure capacity and will to modify policy and practices based on data 8
STAKEHOLDERS 9 Community voice Elected Officials/Executive Judges Police Prosecutor/Defense Pretrial Services/Probation Sheriff
LEADERSHIP Leadership is critical Control what you can control Declare and move forward 10
COMMON CHALLENGES IN DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS IN JDAI SITES Data Reports Are Extensive But Do Not Highlight Race/Ethnicity Data Rich/ Analysis Poor Data Overload/Not Internalized by Decision-Makers
Ongoing process BI STRATEGY FOR REDUCING RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITIES 1. Identify Disparities Identify whether and to what extent racial and ethnic disparities exist 2. Identify, Analyze and Strategize around a Target Population Identify target population to focus the work. Dig deeper into target population to learn more about policy, practice, and/or procedure and other factors contributing to disparities. Strategize around how policy, practice, and/or procedure change might result in reductions in disparities. Pilot or adopt policy change 3. Measure Progress Monitor Effectiveness of Policy Change Document changes in disparities 12
THE PIMA COUNTY STORY TO REDUCE DISPARITIES 13
REFORM HISTORY PIMA COUNTY September 2003-DMC Plan May 2004 Community forum June 2004-DMC executive committee established: Key community and system representation October 2004-Casey and Burns Annual goals and objective Agency self-assessment
Percent PERCENTAGES OF IMPACTED YOUTH RELATIVE TO GENERAL POPULATION. African American and Latino Youth are over-represented. Percent of Youth in General Pop. vs. Referred to and Detained at JH 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% AfAm Youth API/Other Youth Latino Youth White Youth General Pop. Referred to JH Detained at JH Ethnicity
SNAPSHOT: PIMA COUNTY DMC AT A GLANCE QUARTER 2 2007 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 56,544 45% 1311 4,324 236 44% 56,251 1086 DMC at a Glance: Q2 2007 4,638 106 37 44 20 Population Paper Referrals 47% 39% 466 108 347 191 138 79 42 27 33% 304 196 29% 109 30% 75 Physical Referrals 50% 52% Admissions 53% L/M Scoring Discretionary Admissions White African American Latino Native American API/Other 24 Automatic Holds 51% 33% These data give a snapshot of disproportionality in Pima county. They indicate where we may want to dig deeper but do not give details that may help explain the disproportionality.
DIGGING DEEPER INTO SNAPSHOT: WHAT DO WE WANT TO TRACK TO SEE PROGRESS?
PIMA COUNTY REFERRALS BY GEOGRAPHY Copyright 2008 by the W. Haywood Burns Institute.
USES FOR DATA 19 Grant applications Reporting requirements (federal or state law) Academic studies (testing a hypothesis) To Inform and Drive Department Policy To understand your system To define and refine the problem To establish reform goals To select effective strategies To track progress 19
DIGGING DEEPER INTO SNAPSHOT: WHAT DO WE WANT TO TRACK TO SEE PROGRESS? Of all discretionary admissions to detention, 86% were for admissions of low and medium scoring youth. Of all low and medium scoring discretionary admissions, 70% were youth of color.
WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED FROM DATA There was disproportionality at every decision making point reviewed Response work with police, target alternatives, educate community Low and Medium discretionary admissions to detention are substantial (86% of all discretionary holds) Response work on probation culture and monitor closely Length of stay in detention is higher for YOC than white youth. Response--Work with tribes and establish alternatives
Pima County Juvenile Court Average Daily Population 180 160 162 175 171 140 135 127 118 120 100 80 60 95 85 80 70 65 60 40 20 0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2112
Number Daily Detention Average by Race and Ethnicity (Numbers) 175 150 125 100 75 50 0.7 15 16 79 1.3 18 17 84 1.5 17 17 82 1.4 14 14 64 0.9 11 0.2 10 13 12 69 61 0.3 7 8 49 25 0 53 54 52 40 31 32 29 2002 (n= 162) 2003 (n= 175) 2004 (n= 171) 2005 (n= 135) 2006 (n= 127) 2007 (n= 118) 2008 (n= 95) Anglos Latinos African Americans Native Americans Asian/P.I.
CONTACT INFORMATION James Bell Executive Director (415) 321-4100 Ext. 101 jbell@burnsinstitute.org Honorable Richard Elías Vice Chair, Pima County Supervisor District 5 (520) 724-8126 Richard.Elias@pima.gov 24