Unbalanced Youth Justice

The Burns Institute is in pursuit of an equitable and excellent youth justice system. A system used sparingly and appropriately.  We know that our current youth justice system is not equitable, excellent, or used sparingly and appropriately. More than 47,000 youth were incarcerated on any given night in 2015, most (73 percent) for non-violent offenses. The majority (69 percent) of those incarcerated were youth of color.  Learn more »

Use the tools below to explore this issue »

One-day count

Data in this section show how many youth are detained, committed, or otherwise sleeping somewhere other than their homes per orders of the court on "any given day" in select years. Data is available for the nation and on a state-by-state basis, and are based upon one-day counts of youth in residential placement facilities conducted in 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2013, and 2015. Learn more »

Show table and download this data

Click column headers to sort Download

Year White Black Latino Native American Asian Other All youth of color All youth

Annual decision points

This section includes data at nine key juvenile justice annual decision points. Data are available at the county and state-level, but only for counties that report. This section allows you to view the data from many different angles and all of the data is broken down by race and ethnicity. Learn more »

Year

Data not available for every year. (Why?)

Available years are those for which states have submitted data to OJJDP. States do not submit data on an annual basis.

Case flow diagram

Click on a decision-making point to see the data for that point. Click additional decision-making points to the graph to compare.

  1. Youth population

  • 1Comparison of arrest to population is rate per 1,000 youth. All other annual decision points are rate per 100 youth at the prior decision-making point.
  • 2Due to differences in how states define arrests and referrals to court, some states may have more referrals to court than arrests.
Show table and download this data

Click column headers to sort Download

Decision White Black Latino American Indian or Alaskan Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander Asian Other All youth of color All youth

0 of 8 counties (Why?)

Originally, states were only required to examine three counties: those with the greatest proportions of minority youth within their juvenile population, as well as those that contained the greatest numbers of minority youth. Only recently has OJJDP required that states track DMC data for all potential DMC reduction sites on a regular basis (at least every 3 years). If a county is not a DMC reduction site, data may not be available.

Detention statute

Juvenile courts may hold delinquents in a secure detention facility if the court believes it is in the best interest of the community or the child. After arrest a youth is often brought to the local juvenile detention facility by law enforcement. Juvenile probation officers or detention workers review the case and decide if the juvenile should be held pending a hearing by a judge.

Jurisdiction ages

0-18
Extended Age of Delinquency Jurisdiction: 20

Standard for detention

(d) The court or detention supervisor may turn such child over to a youth service program created for such purpose, if such course is practicable, or such child may be detained pending a hearing which shall be held on the business day next following his arrest. No child shall be detained after such hearing or held in detention pursuant to a court order unless it appears from the available facts that there is probable cause to believe that the child has committed the acts alleged and that there is

(1) a strong probability that the child will run away prior to court hearing or disposition,

(2) a strong probability that the child will commit or attempt to commit other offenses injurious to him or to the community before court disposition,

(3) probable cause to believe that the child's continued residence in his home pending disposition will not safeguard the best interests of the child or the community because of the serious and dangerous nature of the act or acts he is alleged to have committed,

(4) a need to hold the child for another jurisdiction or

(5) a need to hold the child to assure his appearance before the court, in view of his previous failure to respond to the court process.

Such probable cause may be shown by sworn affidavit in lieu of testimony. No child shall be released from detention who is alleged to have committed a serious juvenile offense except by order of a judge of the Superior Court. In no case shall a child be confined in a community correctional center or lockup, or in any place where adults are or may be confined, except in the case of a nursing infant; nor shall any child at any time be held in solitary confinement. When a female child is held in custody, she shall, as far as possible, be in the charge of a woman attendant.

Detention hearing timeline

The next business day following arrest.

Contact

Please email Anna Wong with any updates to contact information for your DMC coordinator, JJS coordinator, or DMC subcommittee chair.

DMC coordinator

Valerie LaMotte
Office of Policy and Management
450 Capitol Avenue
MS #52 CJP
Hartford, CT 06106-1379
Phone: 860-418-6316
Fax: 860-418-6496
valerie.lamotte@ct.gov

Website

JJS coordinator

Valerie LaMotte
Office of Policy and Management
450 Capitol Avenue
MS #52 CJP
Hartford, CT 06106-1379
Phone: 860-418-6316
Fax: 860-418-6496
valerie.lamotte@ct.gov

DMC subcommittee chair

State unwilling to provide information

Reform efforts

States that wish to post their most recent three-year plans or share other relevant publications about their reform work should contact Anna Wong. We would be happy to link to relevant documents and information.

DMC reform efforts

2009 DMC study recommends more frequent data collection & reporting, making judge's order a requirement for detention admission

2011: H.B. 6634/Public Act 11-154 Required to prepare report on plans to address DMC: Commissioner of Children and Families, Commissioner of Public Safety, Chief State's Attorney, Chief Public Defender, Chief Court Administrator, and Police Officer Standards and Training Council

State plan

There is no link available to the current State Plan

State Advisory Group (SAG)

The purpose of the Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee (JJAC) is to prevent delinquency and improve Connecticut's juvenile justice system. It was established in accordance with the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) of 1974 as amended, and it is responsible for oversight of federal juvenile justice funding to Connecticut.

The JJAC is a Governor-appointed committee of volunteers charged with advising the Governor and the Office of Policy and Management on juvenile justice and delinquency prevention issues. The functions of the JJAC are as follows:

  1. Develop and approve Connecticut's juvenile justice plan.
  2. Submit to the Governor and the legislature, at least annually, recommendations with respect to matters related to juvenile justice in Connecticut.
  3. Make final funding decisions on all grant applications for federal juvenile justice funding submitted to the Office of Policy and Management.
  4. Contact and seek regular input from juveniles currently under the jurisdiction of the juvenile justice system.
  5. Complete other related duties as initiated by the JJAC or as requested by the Under Secretary of the Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division, Office of Policy and Management.

SAG chair

Anthony J. Salius
34 Silano Drive
Harwinton, CT 06791
Phone: 860-485-0339
ajsalius@snet.net
Website

Organizational structure

Connecticut's state advisory group under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) is the Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee (JJAC) to the Office of Policy and Management. The JJAC is advisory to and staffed by the Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division within the Office of Policy and Management. JJAC members are appointed by the Governor and include public officials, youth workers, private citizens and young people as required by the JJDPA. Members provide a diverse wealth of personal and professional expertise to JJAC projects and activities. They are united in the common desire to help Connecticut's youth.

Committees

The current JJAC subcommittees are:

  • Executive Subcommittee
  • Subcommittee on Delinquency Prevention
  • Connecticut Consortium on School Attendance
  • Subcommittee on Disproportionate Minority Contact
  • Subcommittee on Police Training
  • Subcommittee on Combating Underage Drinking
  • Subcommittee on Juvenile Accountability Block Grants (JABG)
  • Police/Juvenile Task Group
  • Residential Incident Reporting Task Group

Membership

  1. Tim Salius, Chairperson
  2. Catherine LeVasseur
  3. Glenda Armstrong
  4. Tonya Lewis
  5. Albert Barrueco, Esq.
  6. Ebony McDaniel
  7. Richard Barton
  8. Det. Patrick Mickens, Sr.
  9. Donna Cathey
  10. Jeffrey Meuller, Esq.
  11. Gregg Cogswell
  12. George Oleyer, Esq.
  13. Henry Crawford
  14. Julie Penry
  15. The Hon. Eileen Daily
  16. Peggy Perillie
  17. The Hon. John Danaher
  18. Christine Rapillo, Esq.
  19. Magdamaris Figueroa
  20. Bridget Reilly
  21. Danielle Forko
  22. Norma Schatz
  23. The Hon. Janice Giegler
  24. Amanda Young
  25. The Hon. Susan Hamilton
  26. The Hon. Debra Lee Hovey
  27. Kevin Kane, Esq.
  28. The Hon. Christine Keller
  29. Gladys Labas

About the data

Our website is populated by data provided to us by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). Continue reading for details about the One-day count and Annual decision points data.

Download

Complete downloads of the data are available in several formats:

Download the data »

Each table of data is also available for download. Click Show table below any table to download just the data shown.