|
Page
3/3 | Back To Page 1 | Back
To Page 2
ATTACHMENT 3
GENDER SPECIFIC PROGRAMMING,
COUNTY, AND STATE ARREST
COMPARISONS
ATTACHMENT 3-1
GENDER SPECIFIC PROGRAMMING
What is it?
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) defines
gender-specific services as those that are designed to meet the unique
needs of female offenders; that value the female perspective; that celebrate
and honor the female experience; that respect and take into account
female development; that empower girls and young women to reach their
full human potential; and that work to change established attitudes
that prevent or discourage girls and young women from reaching their
potential.
Guiding Principles
- Equality does not mean sameness; equality must be defined
in terms of providing opportunities that are relevant to each gender,
not simply allowing women access to services traditionally reserved
for men. Needed services may be different.
- Treatment based on theory of female development; gender-specific
programs are not simply "female only" programs that were originally
designed for males, but rather programs that acknowledge and address
the unique needs and issues related to women's/girls' psychological
development.
- Female role models: girls and women can benefit from positive
female role models and mentors who exemplify survival and growth.
Staff composition in terms of gender, race/ethnicity and sexual orientation
is critical.
Why is it necessary?
- Research on adolescent female development suggests that girls develop
self-esteem differently, learn differently, value different things,
process information differently and respond differently to people
and situations than boys.
- Female identity is developed in relationship to others whereas
boys develop their identity in relation to the world. Connectedness
to relationships is a critical issue in the foundation of female identity
and is a key rehabilitation treatment issue.
- Social theories of crime were developed to explain criminality
in men. Individual and pathological theories were used to explain
female criminality.
- Conformity to sex stereotypes and traditional gender roles is expected.
Females who deviate and behave in "Adventurous, Aggressive or Outspoken"
manners are viewed as "at-risk" or "in trouble". Men who exhibit similar
behaviors are viewed as "normal".
- Criminal justice programs based on the male experience often neglect
unique female needs. Effective female treatment will result from a
theoretical approach that is gender sensitive.
- Girls confront problems that tend to be gender unique such as sexual
abuse, sexual assault, domestic violence, adolescent pregnancy and
single parenthood.
ATTACHMENT 3-2
San Diego County Juvenile Arrests
By Gender
|
MALE AND FEMALE
|
| Crime
Category |
1986
|
1996
|
% Increase
|
| Violent
Felonies |
692
|
1564
|
126%
|
| Felonies |
4730
|
6022
|
27%
|
| Misdemeanors |
8977
|
9787
|
9%
|
| Status
Offenses |
2839
|
3834
|
35%
|
|
FEMALE
|
| Crime
Category |
1986
|
1996
|
% Increase
|
| Violent
Felonies |
59
|
222
|
276%
|
| Felonies |
538
|
979
|
82%
|
| Misdemeanors |
1991
|
2583
|
30%
|
| Status
Offenses |
1106
|
1390
|
26%
|
|
MALE
|
|
Crime Category
|
1986
|
1996
|
% Increase
|
| Violent
Felonies |
633
|
1342
|
112%
|
| Felonies |
4192
|
5043
|
20%
|
| Misdemeanors |
6986
|
7204
|
3%
|
| Status
Offenses |
1733
|
2444
|
41%
|
ATTACHMENT 3-3
California Juvenile Arrests
By Gender
|
MALE AND FEMALE
|
|
Crime Category
|
1986
|
1995
|
% Increase
|
| Violent
Felonies |
12560
|
22408
|
78 %
|
| Felonies |
76192
|
85052
|
12 %
|
| Misdemeanors |
134411
|
138501
|
3 %
|
| Status
Offenses |
25277
|
31645
|
25 %
|
|
FEMALE
|
|
Crime Category
|
1986
|
1995
|
% Increase
|
| Violent
Felonies |
1245
|
2759
|
122 %
|
| Felonies |
8671
|
11518
|
33 %
|
| Misdemeanors |
30484
|
34997
|
15 %
|
| Status
Offenses |
11319
|
12218
|
8 %
|
|
MALE
|
|
Crime Category
|
1986
|
1995
|
% Increase
|
| Violent
Felonies |
11315
|
19649
|
74 %
|
| Felonies |
67521
|
73534
|
9 %
|
| Misdemeanors |
103927
|
103504
|
(.4 % Decrease)
|
| Status
Offenses |
13958
|
19427
|
39 %
|
ATTACHMENT 4
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
REPORT CARD
ATTACHMENT 4
REPORT CARD INDICATORS FOR CHILDREN & FAMILIES
IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
ECONOMIC
CalWORKS aid recipient rate
Percent of CalWORKS participants working or involved in work-related
activities
Food Stamp recipient rate
Number of people in families with children in shelters (on average
at any point in time)
Rate of children living in poverty (under 18)
Unemployment rate
HEALTH
Infant mortality rate
Percent of low birth weight babies
Teen birth rate (15 17)
Number of youth suicides
Rate of hospitalization of children and youth for mental illness
Percent of youth that reported they had 5 or more drinks in a row on
one or more days in the last 30 days
Percent of youth that reported they smoked marijuana on one or more
days in the last 30 days
Percent of youth that reported they smoked tobacco on one or more days
in the last 30 days
ACCESS TO SERVICES
Percent of eligible children in subsidized child care (of those who
requested it)
Average waiting time for outpatient alcohol and drug treatment services
(publicly funded)
Average waiting time for non-emergency outpatient mental health services
for children and youth (publicly funded)
Immunization coverage rate of two-year olds
Percent of insured children by type of coverage
SAFETY
Juvenile Crime: Rate of petitions filed in juvenile court
Homicide of youths by age
Rate of children living in out-of-home placement as a result of child
abuse/neglect
Rate of domestic violence incidents (law enforcement responded)
Unintentional injury mortality rate of youth
Number of alcohol-related motor vehicle crash fatalities (under 18)
EDUCATION
High school dropout rate
School attendance rate (K-12)
Percent of CalWORKS school-aged children that regularly attends school
School suspension/expulsion rate (K-12)
ATTACHMENT 5
SAN DIEGO REGIONAL
RISK & RESILIENCY
* CHECKUP
DATE
|
SAN
DIEGO COUNTY COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT TEAMS
RISK & RESILIENCY /
CHECKUP
|
ID NUMBER |
| YOUTH
NAME (L/F/M) |
|
NICKNAME
|
GENDER |
AGE |
DOB |
HOME
PHONE
|
|
RESIDENCE (STREET)
|
|
CITY
|
|
ZIP
|
Alt. Phone (specify)
|
| SCHOOL
|
|
|
GRADE
|
ETHNICITY |
|
PRIMARY
|
LANGUAGE |
INTERPRETER
DESIRABLE
9
Youth 9Caregiver
9N/A
|
| What
has already been
done for youth/family?
|
|
|
|
Referral Source
Name
|
Screened
by (if different):
Agency Phone
|
Parent/Guardian
Name
|
Phone
|
|
RESILIENCY FACTORS
|
| If your
selection is not absolutely affirmative, use an arrow pointing
in the EXAMPLE: YES SOMEWHAT NO UNK
direction you would lean to
if given another choice. See example at right. 92
:1
º
90
90
|
| REQUIRED
YES SOMEWHAT NO UNK |
|
(OPTIONAL) YES
SOMEWHAT NO UNK
|
| FAMILY
1 Communicates with family
o o o o
2 Constructive use of time
at home o o o o
|
|
13 Family Activities
o o o o
14 Family Support o o o o
15 Unconditional regard from
a parent o o o o
|
| PEER
3 Positive peer relations
o o o o
4 Has at least one person
to confide in o o o o
|
|
16 Values fairness o o o o
17 Able to make friends o o o o
18 Able to communicate disagreements
o o o o
|
| INDIVIDUAL
5 Values Honesty/Integrity
o o o o
6 Self control o o o o
|
|
19 Self efficacy in pro-social
roles o o o o
20 Problem-solving skills
o o o o
21 Plans, Organizes &
Completes Tasks o o o o
|
| EDUCATION
7 School engagement/bonds
o o o o
8 Attachments w/academic achiever
o o o o
|
|
22 Positive Interactions with
teachers o o o o
23 Educational aspirations
o o o o
24 Caring/Supportive school
climate o o o o
|
| DELINQUENCY
9 Support/Reinforcement in
community o o o o
10 Pro-social adult relations
o o o o
|
|
25 Extensive structured activities
o o o o
26 Participates in Faith Community
o o o o
27 Involved in community organization
o o o o
|
| SUBSTANCE
11 Parents model healthy moderation
o o o o
12 Effectively manages peer
pressure o o o o
|
|
28 Is free of distressing
habits o o o o
29 Manages stress well o o o o
30 Has positive self-concept
o o o o
|
|
12 ITEM RESILIENCY FACTOR
SCORE
|
|
|
TOTAL RESILIENCY FACTOR SCORE
|
|
PLEASE NOTE ANY SPECIAL CULTURAL,
HEALTH-RELATED, UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OR COMMENTS:
| RISK FACTORS
Complete the most applicable
box. If your selection is not absolutely affirmative, use an
EXAMPLE: YES SOMEWHAT NO UNK
arrow pointing in the direction
you would lean to if given another choice. See example at right.
o
x è
o o
|
|
FAMILY YES SOMEWHAT NO UNK
31 Poor relations with parent(s)
o o o o
32 Parental supervision deficiencies
o o o o
33 Chaotic Family o o o o
34 Parental Criminality/Substance
Abuse o o o o
35 Runaway o o o o
|
|
EDUCATION YES SOMEWHAT NO
UNK
46 Poor Academic Achievement
o o o o
47 Pattern of truancy past
year o o o o
48 Pattern of suspension/expelled
o o o o
49 Disruptive in classroom/school
o o o o
50 Presently not in educational
program o o o o
|
| Completed
by: |
Family
Risk Subscale Score: |
|
Completed by:
|
Education
Risk Subscale Score: |
| PEER
36 Socially Isolated o o o o
37 Very few pro-social acquaintances
o o o o
38 Has gang affiliation/association
o o o o
39 Has delinquent friends
o o o o
40 No meaningful relationship
w/any adult o o o o
|
|
DELINQUENCY
51 Prior Arrests o o o o
52 Lots of crime in neighborhood
o o o o
53 Offenses committed while
under influence o o o o
54 Assaultive or fighting
behavior o o o o
55 Delinquent Orientation
o o o o
|
| Completed
by: |
Peer
Risk Subscale Score: |
|
Completed by:
|
Delinquency
Risk Subscale Score: |
| INDIVIDUAL
41 No pro-social interests
o o o o
42 Supportive of delinquency
o o o o
43 Anger Management Issues
o o o o
44 Sensation seeking o o o o
45 Manipulative/Deceitful
o o o o
|
|
SUBSTANCE USE
56 Pattern of alcohol use
o o o o
57 Used mood-altering substance
(other than alcohol) o o o o
58 Uses substances frequently
o o o o
59 Substance use interferes
w/daily functioning o o o o
60 Early onset of substance
use (<13) o o o o
|
| Completed
by: |
Individual
Risk Subscale Score: |
|
Completed by:
|
Substance
Use Risk Subscale Score: |
| |
|
|
TOTAL
RISK FACTOR SCORE |
|
|
OTHER RISK FACTORS o
Animal Cruelty o
Health Problems o
Predatory or harassing o
Self-mutilation o
Trauma (other: Specify below)
OR CONCERNS o
Bladder Control, o
Homelessness Behavior: o
Suicidal Thinking o
Violent Impulses/Behavior
Daytime lack of o
Inappropriate Sexual o
Hate Crime o
Suicide Attempts o
OTHER:
(PLEASE CHECK ALL o
Bladder Control, Behavior o
For personal gain Victim of:
THAT MAY APPLY) Nighttime
lack of o
Loss or Grief o
Racially based o
Domestic Violence
o
Chronic Tardiness o
Parental Abuse/Neglect o
Sexually based o
Physical Abuse
o
Emotional Distress o
Peers are older/younger o
Resistant/Defiant of Authority o
Racism
o
Fire Setting o
Schoolyard Bully o
Sexual Abuse
|
COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS:
|
| SHORT
PROFILE RESILIENCY SCORE =
TOTAL PROFILE RESILIENCY SCORE =
PROTECTIVE FACTORS + RISK
FACTORS = RESILIENCY
|
San Diego County Community Assessment
Teams
Risk & Resiliency Checkup (Reference
Scores: 9/98)
NAME: Scored by:
Agency: Date Administered:
SHORT PROFILE SCORES
| |
score
|
10% |
20% |
30% |
40% |
50% |
60% |
70% |
80% |
90% |
100% |
| 12 Item Resiliency Factor |
|
5
|
8 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
15 |
17 |
18 |
21 |
|
|
1 Risk Factor Subscale
|
|
|
|
|
-2
|
|
-3
|
-4 |
-5 |
-7 |
|
Circle Risk Factor Subscale Used:
Family Peer Individual Education Delinquency Substances
FULL PROFILE SCORES
| |
score
|
10% |
20% |
30% |
40% |
50% |
60% |
70% |
80% |
90% |
100% |
| Total Resiliency Factor |
|
17
|
21 |
23 |
26 |
32 |
37 |
39 |
42 |
48 |
|
|
Total Risk Factor
|
|
0
|
-4 |
-10 |
-13 |
-17 |
-21 |
-25 |
-28 |
-33 |
|
SCORES BY SUBSCALE (combined
Resiliency and Risk Factors)
| |
score
|
10% |
20% |
30% |
40% |
50% |
60% |
70% |
80% |
90% |
100% |
| FAMILY |
|
-3
|
-1 |
? |
2 |
3 |
4 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
|
|
PEER
|
|
-3
|
-2 |
-1 |
0 |
2 |
4 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
|
|
INDIVIDUAL
|
|
-5
|
-4 |
-3 |
-1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
|
|
EDUCATION
|
|
-3
|
-2 |
-1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
7 |
|
|
DELINQUENCY
|
|
-4
|
-3 |
-1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
|
|
SUBSTANCE USE
|
|
-2
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
7 |
8 |
|
SCORES BY PROFILE (combined
Resiliency and Risk Factors)
| |
score
|
10% |
20% |
30% |
40% |
50% |
60% |
70% |
80% |
90% |
100% |
| Short Profile RESILIENCY |
|
-4
|
0 |
4 |
7 |
9 |
11 |
13 |
16 |
20 |
|
|
Full Profile RESILIENCY
|
|
-12
|
-4 |
-2 |
7 |
14 |
19 |
24 |
30 |
37 |
|
Screening Disposition:
- Refer To Community Assessment
Team
- Refer for services:
- Other:
ATTACHMENT 6
SAN DIEGO'S REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY
WORK GROUPS
|
COMMITTEE
|
MISSION
|
STRATEGIES
|
|
POLICYMAKER "BUY IN-STAY IN"
|
Ensure that elected officials,
policy makers, and community leaders support the Comprehensive Strategy. |
- Investigate, evaluate and communicate the efforts
and successes of communities to establish laws, policies, and
practices that positively impact community norms.
- Utilize structured decision making process
to allocate resources to fill identified gaps.
- In addition, the following entities have lead
responsibilities:
Probation Department, in collaboration with
Health & Human Services (Mental Health, Alcohol & Drug
Services, Social Services), County Office of Education, community
agency providers, and SANDAG Criminal Justice Research Division:
Implement and evaluate the Breaking Cycles Demonstration Project
during the period July 1, 1996, through June 30, 2000.
Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, Heartbeat,
and Comprehensive Strategy Team: Systemwide, balanced approach
to funding. Common definitions of geographic boundaries/service
delivery areas among all the public and nonprofit service
delivery systems.
Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, Partners
for Success: Evaluate traditional roles of law enforcement
providers and determine more effective training in prevention-focused,
community-based, family-oriented partnerships.
Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, Agency
Directors, Program Managers, Children's Initiative, Commission
on Children, Youth & Families: Utilize resources (like
Partners for Success) to provide cross-systems training throughout
the region.
Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, Agency
Directors, Program Managers, Children's Initiative, Commission
on Children, Youth & Families: Develop formal, cooperative
interagency agreements that clearly state the relationships
between agencies, to include descriptions of and numbers of
services to be provided, criteria for determining type of
youth to be served (or referred), information that can be
shared, by and to whom and under what circumstances, etc.
County Board of Supervisors, Chief Administrative
Officer, Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, Heartbeat:
Develop a case management system that follows youth through
the various stages of the continuum. Designate the Chief PO
with responsibility and provide resources needed to coordinate
an interagency, centralized intake-case management-program
control process and Management Information System. Fund programs
and develop new resources that are relevant to desired outcomes,
and continue funding those that demonstrate effectiveness.
Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council, SANDAG Criminal
Justice Research Division, local university researchers: Continue
development of countywide outcome measures to evaluate effectiveness
of systemwide and community strategies; develop and implement evaluation
tools that match local strategies; develop ways to obtain local
community participation in program evaluation efforts. |
|
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
|
Develop and utilize a systemwide funding strategy
based on outcomes and filling identified gaps
|
- Recommend desired outcomes to policy makers.
- Adopt assessment instruments and protocols
to identify local needs, resources, priorities.
- Utilize grant resource networks and community
collaboratives to seek partners and resources to fill identified
gaps.
- Liaison with San Diego County Health and Human
Service Agency to fill prevention gaps.
- Continue to identify and educate community
on "what works".
- Collaborate with San Diego County Health and
Human Service Agency and Probation to fill gaps utilizing Children's
Investment Trust Fund and Local Juvenile Placement Trust Fund.
- Pursue resources to fund identified gaps in
the Local Action Plan and Community-Based Punishment Options
Plan, with emphasis on geographic program placement, aftercare,
and programs for girls
- Focus on providing more prevention, early intervention
(front-end) services as savings are realized by using more community-based
graduated sanction and aftercare programs.
- Obtain more local control over state and federal
funding with fewer restrictions.
|
|
INFORMATION DISSEMINATION AND ADVOCACY
|
Advocate and gain support
for the Comprehensive Strategy in all areas of the community by
engaging the community. |
- Ensure public awareness of the Comprehensive
Strategy.
- Gain support from the media, business, grass
roots entities, and others to convey the vision in as broad
a manner as possible.
- Develop appropriate and relevant means for
sharing information and engaging the community.
- Secure media and public relations expertise
for publicizing prevention and intervention strategies, engaging
community involvement, and celebrating school, neighborhood,
and community achievements.
|
|
COORDINATION: MERGING PARADES
|
Coordinate Comprehensive
Strategy efforts with all other initiatives serving youth and families.
Involve youth and families in program design and implementation. |
- Develop common language that values and validates
all input.
- Develop uniform referral protocols.
- Develop and train community planning teams
to conduct community risk assessments (Communities That Care
model).
- Develop a comprehensive assessment tool or
integrated process that can be used at different points in the
continuum from prevention through aftercare.
- Establish MOU's for cooperation, information
sharing, and use of universal risk and needs assessments between
all participants.
- Explore use of regionally or neighborhood-based
Resource Centers for one-stop service.
- Explore use of a resource clearinghouse with
a service hotline.
- Establish process that assigns responsibility
for referral follow-up and follow through.
- Substance Abuse Treatment Efforts - Adopt countywide
common definitions for AOD treatment modalities, collect profiles
on existing resources, involve offenders in design.
|
INFORMATION SHARING
|
Develop a comprehensive MIS for capturing and analyzing
risk/needs assessment data.
|
- Liaison with Regional Data Sharing Forum to
enhance communications, data sharing, and coordination among
police, schools, CBO's, probation, public and private social
service agencies.
- Develop a comprehensive MIS for capturing and
analyzing information collected in risk and needs assessments.
|
|
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, DEVELOPMENT-INCLUSIVENESS
|
Increase the number of community
members (individuals, families, schools, businesses, organizations,
service providers, etc.) engaged in efforts to mobilize and promote
crime-free, healthy communities. |
- Develop protocols for community readiness and
mobilization.
- Expand representation on Comprehensive Strategy
Team, either by adding members or charging current members with
communicating and reporting back.
- Develop formal linkages, coordinate and collaborate
with all agencies, systems in the region that provide services
to at-risk youth (i.e., CPS, Mental Health, AOD, etc.)
- Support prevention-focused strategies of Substance
Abuse Summit and Methamphetamine Strike Force.
- Use existing or sponsor forums for youth to
participate in all phases of planning and implementing full
continuum of prevention and graduated sanction services.
- Promote pictures and expectations of healthy
lifestyles that can positively impact community norms.
- Develop community-based prevention and intervention
programs that target identified at-risk youth and juvenile offenders.
|
|