Population forecast fiscal year 2010

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Garland R. Hunt, Esq. Commissioner

Population Forecast June 2010

Table of Contents

Summary

2

Introduction and Methodology

4

Superior Court

5

Designated Felon

7

Regular Commitment

9

Short Term Program (STP)

11

Probation

13

Diversion

14

Intake

15

Regional Youth Detention Centers 17

Youth Development Campuses

18

Regional Analysis

19

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice Population Forecast 2010

Jeff Minor, Deputy Commissioner Doug Engle, Chief Information Officer Planning Research and Program Evaluation
Josh Cargile, Programmer Analyst Wycherley Gumbs, Operations Analyst Sheila Hunter, Director
1

Summary

The Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) uses population forecasting to manage re- sources to meet the needs of future juvenile populations . The agency serves juvenile offend- ers in a variety of ways, including community supervision and secure confinement. Estima- tions of the size and needs of the youth population allows DJJ to prepare sufficient staffing lev- els and prepare for adequate facility bed space.

Graph 1: Georgia "at-risk" youth population by year

As much as possible, the future DJJ

1,200,000

youth population is estimated

1,150,000 1,100,000

through consideration of DJJ policies and estimations of judicial adjudica- tions. Georgia's 10 to 17 year old ju-

1,050,000

venile population, or DJJ's "at-risk"

1,000,000
950,000 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

population, will increase six percent between 2010 and 2015. But general population shifts are often a minor

point since the general population

trends are greatly offset or magnified by judicial decisions and DJJ policies and practices.

Legal Status Trends

In the last five years, there has been a decrease in DJJ's entry-level populations but an in- crease in more-serious commitment populations.

Looking forward, the
Graph 2: Cumulative DJJ average daily population by legal status and fiscal year

designated felon population should

22,000 20,000

increase and then 18,000

level off while in-

16,000

Intake

take, probation and regular commit- ments populations may drift lower. The STP population looks temporarily stable, but is often

14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000
-

Diversion
Probation
Short Term Program (STP) Regular Commitment Designated Felon Superior Court (less than 100)

vulnerable to policy

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

2

Summary
changes. The diversion population is highly dependant on funding, so, assuming stable fund- ing, this population forecast is mostly flat. The superior court population looks to be increas- ing, but the trend may quickly change due to its small population.

In April 2010, Georgia Legislature passes the House Bill 1104. This bill created the Secure Pro- bation Sanctions Program. This newly defined legal status will impact the RYDC and YDC popu- lations. Unfortunately, due to the timing of this change, this population forecast does not ac- count for the impacts of HB1104 .

Placement Trends

Graph 3: Cumulative DJJ average daily population by placement and fiscal year

22,000
The placement of youth is 20,000 very dependant on facility 18,000

capacities and alternate placement budgets. The remainder, and majority, of the DJJ population re-

16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000

In FY09 Community = 83%

sides in the community. Demographic Trends DJJ serves a very dispro- portionate racial and eth-

6,000

4,000 2,000
-

Residential Placement = 5% RYDC = 7% YDC = 5%

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

nic population. Disproportionate minority contact is a challenge in both juvenile and adult

corrections nationwide. Georgia's population is approximately 65 percent white, 30 percent black and 7 percent Latino1. But DJJ's youth population is about 60 percent black or African

American. This disproportionate contact with black and African American youth is persistent

through the agency but is magnified at deeper levels of commitment.

More detailed analysis of legal status, race, ethnicity, gender, and placement trends are avail- able in the next pages.

This population forecast was assembled with concern for detail in order to assist DJJ in manag- ing resources. However, a population forecast is always vulnerable to unforeseen policies, practices and migrations. Population forecasts stem from mathematical models and estima- tions of future events. Errors inherent in population forecasts must be anticipated by users tooled with experience and skill.
1 U.S. Census Quickfacts: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/13000.html

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

3

Introduction and Methodology
The DJJ population forecast uses methodology described by Jeffrey Butts and William Adams in the publication titled, "Anticipating Space needs In Juvenile Detention and Correctional Fa- cilities."2 This methodology begins with basic population modeling and then considers known agency or jurisdiction policies that influence population changes. This methodology requires the researcher to interpret past population trends in light of past policy decisions and then apply knowledge of future policy decisions to future population trends.
The basic premise of the forecasting model is that the Average Daily Population (ADP) can be estimated by estimating the number of initiating youth supervision events (starts) and the av- erage length of youth supervision (LOS). Changes in the number of starts and the length of stay will be evaluated in light of current and future policies and pressures.
The Georgia at-risk youth population serves as the base population for estimating the number of starts. This population was derived from the US census population estimations by age. For secondary verification, these estimates were compared against the Georgia OPB population projection provided by the Carl Vinson Institute of Government at the University of Georgia.
The population forecast is framed according to legal status and placement. DJJ supervises youth during intake processes, diversion efforts, probation, and several types of commitment. Likewise, DJJ supervises youth in various locations such as in the community, in short-term de- tention facilities (Regional Youth Detention Centers--RYDCs), in long-term detention facilities (Youth Development Campuses--YDCs) and in a variety of residential placements. The judi- cial and correctional policies and practices that determine parameters of youth supervision strongly impact the population sizes in the various legal statuses and placements.
Other characteristics that are taken into consideration are gender, race, ethnicity, recidivism risks and regional trends.
Please note that due to rounding errors, not all population groupings will add up to 100 per- cent.

2 Butts, Jeffrey and Adams, William, "Anticipating Space Needs in Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facilities", Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Juvenile Justice Bulletin, US Department of Justice, March 2001.

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

4

Superior Court Population

Superior Court youth have been tried and convicted for adult crimes but are still under the age

of 17. They are supervised by DJJ until they legally become adults. The size of the Superior

court population is largely determined by youth behavior and judicial proceedings. From fis-

cal year 2004 to fiscal year 2009, the average daily population grew 25 percent.

Table 1. Superior Court population trends
Fiscal Legal LOS ADP
Year Starts (days) FY4 90 231 55 FY5 102 187 50 FY6 87 244 54 FY7 133 192 68 FY8 114 217 66 FY9 171 146 69 FY10 124 178 61 FY11 156 174 73 FY12 164 170 76 FY13 173 167 78 FY14 181 163 81 FY15 191 159 83

Graph 4. Superior Court average daily population projection by fiscal year
90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Graph 4 shows the population projections for Superior Court youth reflecting a conservative

continuation of the observed growth trend. Under these circumstances, the Superior Court

population will be above 80 youth by fiscal year 2015.

There are no signs that the steady growth of the superior court population will subside.

FY2009 had the largest number of new superior court commitments in recent history.

Unfortunately, the growth of Graph 5: Number of unique youth committed to superior court by fiscal year.

the superior court popula- 180
160
tion has been disproportion-
140
ately black and male. During 120

this time of growth, the

100

white demographic shrunk. 80

See graph 6.

60

40

20

0

FY4

FY5

FY6

FY7

FY8

FY9

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

5

Superior Court Population

Graph 6: Cumulative Superior Court ADP by gender

Graph 7: Cumulative Superior Court ADP by Race/Ethnicity

90

90

80

Female

80

Other

70

70

Hispanic

60

60

50

50

40

Male

40

Black

30

30

20

20

10

10

0

0

White

FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

In addition to the overall growth in the population, the placement trends saw increasing placement starts and decreasing LOS. This trend may be attributed to the in- creased coordination between DJJ and the courts to bring youth before the courts for case review. These types of

Table 2: Superior Court ADP by placement

Fiscal Comm Resid RYDC YDC Year unity Place

FY04 9

1 12 33

FY5

6

1 10 33

FY6

10 0

8 36

movements decrease the LOS for each placement but in- FY7 18 0 10 40

crease the number of placements. Another trend evident FY8

24

0

8 34

in the data is the implementation of SB135. Since 2006, FY9

20

0

13 36

FY10 21 0 11 39

DJJ and the courts quickly move youth out of the RYDCs FY11 22 0 12 40

after their adjudication and into their permanent place- FY12 22 0 12 42

ments.

FY13 22 0 12 43

FY14 22 0 13 45
The growth of the superior court population mostly af- FY15 23 0 13 47

fects the YDC placement

Graph 8: Superior Court average daily population by placement

population. The community Superior Court population 90

Superior Court Total

YDC

RYDC

Community

may also grow. This popula- 80

tion includes youth that have 70

turned 17 and are in the

60

adult prison system but are 50

40
still being supervised by ju-
30
venile corrections officers for
20

offenses still under juvenile 10

corrections jurisdiction.

0

Superior Court YDC

FY04 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

6

Designated Felon Populations

A Designated Felon (DF) refers to a youth who has been placed in DJJ custody for a maximum of five years.

In fiscal year 2006, there was a 16 percent jump in the number of youth with new designated

felon commitments. This caused the average daily population to grow by about 160 youth

each year. Since then, the number of youth starting new DF commitments has leveled off.

With the number of new DF commitments leveling off and the length of stay is reaching its

maximum lengths, the increase in the DF daily population should also begin leveling off. How-

ever, the growth has been so significant that by fiscal year 2011, the DF daily population is ex-

pected to be over 2000 youth.

Table 3: DF population trends
Fiscal Legal LOS Year Starts (days) ADP

Graph 9: Designated Felon average daily population projection by fiscal year 2500

FY4 464 1030 1021 2000

FY5 453 1178 1113

FY6 525 1530 1274 1500 FY7 535 1524 1507

FY8 606 1502 1666 FY9 550 1485 1826 1000

FY10 608 1504 1972

FY11 586 1504 2067 500

FY12 591 1504 2146

FY13 597 1504 2214 FY14 604 1504 2273 FY15 613 1504 2327

0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

The Designated felon population is predominately male and black. While the number of males

and females with new commitments grew at comparable rates, the length of stay for females

declined slightly and the LOS for males grew. The number of blacks committed to DF is dis-

Graph 10: Cumulative Designated Felon ADP by gender

2500

2000

Female

Graph 11: Cumulative Designated Felon ADP by race/ethnicity

2500

Other

2000

Hispanic

1500

1500 Black

1000

Male

1000

500 0 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

500 White
0
FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

7

Designated Felon Populations

proportionate and the gap is growing. The LOS for whites and Hispanics grew, but only to lev- els that were commensurate with the consistent LOS for blacks.
The Designated Felon population has grown most significantly in the community. DF youth are generally supervised in the community for over three years after they serve time in the YDC. This means that while the YDC population has begun to level off, the community popula- tion won't level off for several more years.

Table 4: DF average daily population projections by placement
Fiscal Comm Resid RYDC YDC
Year unity Place FY4 374 20 73 556 FY5 394 19 85 617 FY6 489 16 63 709 FY7 658 21 63 768 FY8 779 19 77 793 FY9 904 24 87 814 FY10 1019 26 82 804 FY11 1114 28 83 814 FY12 1192 29 84 823 FY13 1261 29 85 832 FY14 1305 29 86 841 FY15 1338 30 87 852

Graph 12: Designated Felon ADP projection by placement and year

1600

DF-Community

DF-Res Place

DF-RYDC

DF-YDC

1400

1200

1000

800 YDC
600 Community
400

200

RYDC

0

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

In 2005, over one-third of the DF Graph 13: Cumulative DF ADP projection by CRN risk level and fiscal year population were youth with a low 2500 risk for recidivating. Since then,

the population of youth with me- 2000

High

dium and high risk-levels have 1500
grown and the population of
youth with low risk-levels has re- 1000

Medium

mained constant. In fiscal year 2009, the DF population was 25 percent low risk, 53 percent me- dium risk and 28 percent high

500
Low
0 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

risk.

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

8

Regular Commitment Populations

The regular commitment population experienced a lot of change over the last five years. The number of youth starting new commitments has decreased but the average placement length- of-stay has increased. The community LOS has especially grown. The net result is a gradually decreasing regular commitment population that is primarily served in the community.

Table 5: Regular Commitment population trends

Graph 14: Regular Commitment average daily population projection by fiscal year

Fiscal Legal LOS ADP
Year Starts (days) FY4 2475 428 2814 FY5 2303 399 2803 FY6 2387 447 2680 FY7 2247 424 2726 FY8 2093 451 2634 FY9 1984 483 2665 FY10 1760 470 2450 FY11 1840 474 2417 FY12 1801 478 2384 FY13 1763 481 2353 FY14 1725 485 2320 FY15 1694 489 2292

3000 2500 2000 1500 1000
500 0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

While less disproportionate than the superior court or designated felon commitment popula- tion, the regular commitment population is mostly black and male.

Graph 15 : Cumulative Regular Commitment ADP by gender

3000

2500

2000

Female

1500

1000

Male

500

0 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Graph 16: Cumulative Regular Commitment ADP by race/
ethnicity
3000

2500

2000

Hispanic Other

1500

1000

Black

500
White
0
FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

9

Regular Commitment Populations

The greatest change to the regular Graph 17: Number of Regular Commitment youth starting YDC placement

commitment population has been
600
the policy decision to place few
regular commitment youth in long- 500

term secure confinement at the 400

YDC. This decision in early fiscal 300
year 2010 is essential for managing
200
the YDC population without over-

crowding. Currently, only about 100

thirty beds are available for regular 0

commitment youth in the YDC.

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Until more YDC bed space becomes available, the majority of youth previously placed in YDCs will stay longer in a RYDC. The longer RYDC stay provides time to find appropriate residential and community placements for these youth.

Table 6 : Regular Commitment ADP by place- Graph 18: Average daily population of Regular Committed youth by placement ment

Fiscal Comm Resid

1800

RYDC YDC

Year unity Place

1600

Community

FY4 1649 749 237 197 1400
FY5 1689 715 260 157
1200
FY6 1595 625 259 220 FY7 1661 650 239 196 1000
FY8 1659 613 222 158 800

Residential Placement

FY9 1711 604 226 142 600

FY10 1631 599 219 FY11 1587 606 220 FY12 1548 612 218 FY13 1507 618 216 FY14 1462 625 213

37 400

RYDC

28 200

28

0

YDC

28

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

28

FY15 1419 634 212 28

Minimal use of secure confinement to manage regular commitment youth may impact future judicial decisions. A possible trend away from regular commitments may have spill-over af- fects on other legal placement populations.

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

10

STP Populations

In 2006, the Short-Term Program (STP) length of stay was reduced from a maximum of 90 days

to a maximum of 60 days. At the end of fiscal year 2009, the STP LOS was again reduced to a

maximum of 30 days. The policy reducing STP LOS to 30-days is set to expire at the end of FY

2013. Despite the legislation, this population forecast predicts a continuation of the 30-day

LOS until FY 2015.

Table 7: STP population trends by year
Fiscal Legal LOS ADP
Year Starts (days) FY4 5609 65 1031 FY5 5316 61 907 FY6 3695 49 542 FY7 3974 48 522 FY8 4152 47 544 FY9 4110 43 506 FY10 3348 26 234 FY11 3375 26 236 FY12 3407 26 238 FY13 3442 26 240 FY14 3478 26 243 FY15 3533 26 247

Graph 19: STP average daily population by fiscal year 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Since STP was limited by a 30-day maximum LOS, the STP daily population dropped 50 per- cent. The extent of this drop is due to both the decreased length of stay and a decrease in the number of youth sentenced to STP.

Due to limited YDC bed- Graph 20: STP average daily population by placement and month

space and a reduced STP population, recent DJJ pol- 350

Resid Place

RYDC

YDC

icy places STP youth pri- 300
marily in RYDC facilities. 250
The last approximately 25 200
youth remaining in a YDC 150 represents females being
100
served at Macon YDC. If
50
the placement of female
0
STP youth is limited to

Anticipated volatility in RYDC population

RYDC facilities, we can ex-

Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 Apr-10 Jul-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Apr-11 Jul-11 Oct-11 Jan-12 Apr-12

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

11

STP Populations
pect the STP YDC population to disappear and the STP RYDC population to increase by about 25 youth--all females.
Graph 20 shows the STP population distribution in DJJ placements since January 2008. In 2009, the STP YDC population is nearly eliminated whereas the RYDC population only dropped by a few dozen youth. This lack of a population decrease reflects the RYDC absorption of all youth who would have previously served their STP sentences in a YDC.
The RYDC population tends to have the most volatility because the RYDCs accepts youth di- rectly from law enforcement officers and the courts. Compared to the YDC or residential placements, DJJ has less control in managing the size of the RYDC population. Thus, while the STP RYDC population projection is flat, RYDC population planning should take into account that the population vacillates by up to 100 youth within a year.
The racial and gender break down of STP average daily population is disproportionately male and black.

Graph 21: Cumulative STP ADP by month and gender

700

600

500

400

300

200

Female

100

Male

0

Graph 22: Cumulative STP ADP by month and race/ethnicity

700

600

500

400

300

200

Hispanic

100

Black

0

White

Feb-08 May-08 Aug-08 Nov-08 Feb-09 May-09 Aug-09 Nov-09 Feb-10 May-10 Aug-10 Nov-10 Feb-11 May-11 Aug-11 Nov-11 Feb-12 May-12 Feb-08 May-08 Aug-08 Nov-08 Feb-09 May-09 Aug-09 Nov-09 Feb-10 May-10 Aug-10 Nov-10 Feb-11 May-11 Aug-11 Nov-11 Feb-12 May-12

To illuminate recent policy changes, these graphs are measured by month rather than by year through FY2012

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

12

Probation Populations

The number of youth assigned to probation services has dropped 14 percent in five years. This has caused a decline in the average daily population served.

Youth on probation are primarily served in the community with regular supervision by a case

Table 8: Probation population
trends by year
Fiscal Legal LOS ADP
Year Starts (days)

Graph 23: Probation average daily population projection by fiscal year 8000
7000

FY4 10516 273 7482 6000

FY5 10456 252 7513 5000 FY6 9471 264 7020 FY7 9749 269 7093 4000
FY8 9462 270 7064 3000 FY9 9086 272 6878 FY10 8488 271 6441 2000

FY11 8673 271 6429 1000

FY12 8530 271 6348 FY13 8394 271 6252 FY14 8253 271 6150

0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

FY15 8150 271 6067 worker. The probation community population is now above six thou- sand while the residential placement and the RYDC populations each float

Graph 24: Probation average daily population by placement and fiscal year

Community

Resid Place

RYDC

8000

7000

6000

5000

at just over 200 youth per day.

4000

3000
The gender and racial disproportion- 2000
ate representation is less severe in 1000

the probation population than in

0

more serious placements.

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Graph 25 : Probation ADP by gender and fiscal year
8000

7000

6000

Female

5000

4000

3000

2000

Male

1000

0

FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Graph 26: Probation ADP by race/ethnicity and fiscal year
8000

7000

Other

6000

Hispanic

5000

4000

Black

3000

2000

1000

White

0

FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

13

Diversion Populations

DJJ's diversion population includes youth in the community working on restitution, informal adjustment agreements, abeyance, mediation or their custody has been given to the Georgia Division of Family and Child Services (DFACS). DJJ also serves a number of youth from inde- pendent counties with electronic monitoring, tracking and family/wrap-around services.

The number of youth served through diversion is largely dependant on budget and policy deci- sions. The number of youth placed on diversion decreased slightly in the last five years, but jumps in the average LOS in FY07 and FY08 caused significant jumps in the average daily popu- lation (ADP). The projection portrayed here assumes a static budget and consistent policies.

Table 9: Diversion population trends
Fiscal Legal LOS ADP
Year Starts (days) FY4 25425 60 4193 FY5 23201 56 3607 FY6 24371 62 4020 FY7 23981 71 4531 FY8 22650 71 4547 FY9 21427 60 3671 FY10 21870 60 3583 FY11 21908 60 3589 FY12 22112 60 3622 FY13 22343 60 3660 FY14 22575 60 3698 FY15 22928 60 3756

Graph 27: Diversion average daily population projection by fiscal year 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000
500 0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

The volatile placement practices have impacted males and females similarly. In contrast, racial

groups have been affected very differently. The FY06 and FY07 population increases was

mostly an increase in the black population. But the decrease in FY09 was experienced by both

the black and white populations.

Graph 28: Diversion ADP by gender and fiscal year
5000

Graph 29: Diversion ADP by race/ethnicity and fiscal year
5000

4000

4000

3000

Female

3000

HispanicOther

2000
Male
1000
0 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

2000

Black

1000
White
0
FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

The diversion population is primarily a community population with about 2% of the population

in residential placements and 0.2% of the population in a RYDC on an average day.

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

14

Intake Populations

Youth begin intake when they are being held on charges, or are awaiting adjudication. DJJ processes over twenty thousand youth intakes each year. Most youth wait for their judicial process at home, however 10 to 15 percent of youth await their adjudication in the RYDC.
DJJ has experienced a decline in the number of youth starting intake procedures in the last three years. If this trend continues, the daily Intake population will be under 3000 youth in fiscal year 2012. If this trend levels off, then the daily intake population will increase slightly as a reflection of the Georgia youth population increase.

Table 10: Intake population trends by fiscal year
Fiscal Legal LOS ADP
Year Starts (days) FY4 29374 45 3601 FY5 29398 45 3633 FY6 30104 47 3845 FY7 29448 47 3754 FY8 27428 45 3451 FY9 25996 45 3212 FY10 25170 46 3144 FY11 24826 46 3101 FY12 24499 46 3060 FY13 24192 46 3022 FY14 23874 46 2982 FY15 23668 46 2956

Graph 30: Intake average daily population by fiscal year 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Graph 31: Average Intake LOS by placement and fiscal year.

One peculiar trend in the Intake popu-

Community

Resid Place

RYDC

lation is an increasing length of stay for

50

youth in the RYDC. Between FY 04

45

and FY09, the Intake RYDC LOS in-

40

creased from 13 days to 16 days.

35

30

While this change initially seems insig-

25

nificant, the impact was an additional

20

100 youth in the RYDC on an average

15

day.

10

5

Only a small percentage of youth await

0

adjudication in RYDC for longer than

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

15

Intake Populations

two weeks but those with more serious charges skew the average intake length of stay. If the RYDC average length of stay continues to increase to 17 and 18 days, the intake RYDC average daily population may grow by another 70 youth.

The intake population is disproportionately male and black. Intake population drop of the last three years was primarily a drop in the white population. This disproportionate decrease mag- nified the proportion of black youth in the intake population.

Graph 32: Cumulative Intake ADP by gender and fiscal year 5000

Graph 33: Cumulative Intake ADP by race/ethnicity and fiscal year 5000

4000

4000

3000

Female

3000

Hispanic Other

2000

Black
2000

1000 0

Male
1000
0

White

FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

16

Regional Youth Detention Centers

The projected increases in the RYDC populations for all legal status groups may push the RYDC population above capacity as soon as next year. To amplify the issue, the average num- bers projected here don't properly communicate the volatility of the RYDC daily population.
The analysis of STP RYDC placements demonstrates

Table 11: RYDC ADP by Legal Status and Year

Fiscal

Diversi Probat

Intake

STP

Year

on ion

FY4 391 8 133 307 FY5 413 6 161 322 FY6 485 9 189 214 FY7 512 10 216 222 FY8 518 9 221 230 FY9 514 7 194 219 FY10 534 7 200 186 FY11 545 7 206 218 FY12 557 7 213 220 FY13 569 7 219 222 FY14 582 7 226 224 FY15 597 7 235 226

Reg Comm
it 237 260 259 239 222 226 219 220 218 216 213 212

Desig Felon
73 85 63 63 77 87 82 83 84 85 86 87

Sup Court
12 10 8 10 8 13 11 12 12 12 13 13

Total
1161 1256 1228 1271 1285 1259 1239 1291 1310 1331 1352 1378

how the RYDC population fluctuates by 100 youth within a given year. Re- sponsible planning buffers

Graph 34: Cumulative RYDC ADP by Legal Status and Year

1400 1200

Superior Court Designated Felon

Current RYDC capacity is 1287

the average anticipated DJJ 1000 facility needs by at least 100 beds. A buffer of this 800

Regular Commitment STP

size does not eliminate

600

overcrowding, but it does

make it more manageable. 400

Probation Diversion
Intake

Also, this population pro- jection does not account for youth placed in the RYDC through the Secure Probations Sanctions Pro- gram.

200
0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia

Depart-

17

Youth Development Campuses

The YDC population has been drastically cut Table 12 : YDC ADP projection by legal status

in fiscal year 2010 due to the closure of 300 Fiscal Sup Design Reg STP Total beds at Bill Ireland YDC. The closure was a Year Court Felon Commit

response to significant agency budget cuts FY4 FY5
and was managed by nearly eliminating STP FY6 and Regular commitment youth from YDC FY7

33 556 197 600 1386 33 617 157 454 1262 36 709 220 289 1253 40 768 196 272 1275

campuses.

FY8

34 793 158 287 1272

A decrease in the total STP population fol- FY9 FY10
lowed reduction in the sentence length FY11 from 60 to 30 days. DJJ determined that FY12

36 814 142 266 1257

39 804 37

41 921

40 814 28

28 911

42 823 28

29 921

the smaller STP population could be served FY13

43 832 28

29 932

primarily in the RYDC. Except for a handful FY14

45 841 28

29 943

of females, all STP youth serve

FY15

47 852 28

29 956

their full sentence in a RYDC.

Graph 35: Cumulative YDC ADP projection by legal status and fiscal year 1600

To further absorb the elimination 1400
of so many YDC beds, DJJ is at- 1200 tempting to place fewer regular
1000
commitment youth with high risk and high needs in secure confine- 800
ment. Essentially, there has been 600

STP Regular Commitment
Designated Felon

a shift to serve more regular com- 400

mitment youth in the community. 200

Graph 36: YDC ADP projection by gender

0

Superior Court

Male capacity will be 810

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Female capacity will be 94

1200

The result is a primarily Designated Felon

Male population is 854

1000

YDC population.

800
Gender-analysis shows that with current

600

capacity expectations, overcrowding in

400

male facilities may be a problem. This

200

will be the first time since 2004 that the

0

average annual daily population exceeds

FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 capacity.

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

18

Regional Analysis

The Georgia DJJ manages the state population primarily through the use of four regions (North -West, North-East, South-West, and South-East). The regions serve different Georgia popula- tions and exhibit different sentencing and resource usage patterns.

Table 13 and 14 provide historical and projected summaries of average daily population re- gional trends for legal status groups. Graphs 37 through 40 present the data and projections.

Table 13: Regional Legal Status ADP trends between Fiscal Years 2004 and 2009

Superior Designated Regular

Court

Felon Commit

STP Probation Diversion Intake

NW NE General SW trend up SE

approx. doubled
up 25 %

down 17 % down 60% up 10 % up 15 % down 15 % down ~40%
down 20 %

volatile

down a little flat
down 17 %

Table 14: Regional Legal Status ADP projected trends for fiscal year 2010 through 2015

Superior Designated Regular

Court

Felon Commit

STP Probation Diversion Intake

NW

NE up 10%

SW

SE

flat

up ~20% up 10 %

down 20 % up 10 %
down 27 %

up~18% up~7%

flat down 18 %
down 10%

up ~10% down 9 % down 20 %

flat

flat

projection down 22 %

Graph 37: NW ADP by Legal Status
2500

Graph 38: NE ADP by Legal Status
2500

2000

2000

1500

1500

Sup Court 1000

1000

Desig Felon

500

500

Reg Commit

STP Probation Diversion Intake

0 2500 2000

0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
Graph 39: SW ADP by Legal Status
2500
2000

FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
Graph 40: SE ADP by Legal Status

1500

1500

1000

1000

500

500

0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

0 FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10FY11FY12FY13FY14FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

19

Regional Analysis

The regional analysis of ADP by legal placements illuminates the differences in sentencing pat- terns and trends across the state. The graphs below represent the four Georgia regions man- aged in DJJ. The black line represents the state youth population proportion in that region. The colored lines represent the proportion of legal status populations served in the region.

Example: Last year the NW region repre- sented 37 percent of the state youth popu- lation. And it served 31 percent of DJJ's Pro- bation population (turquoise line).

Sup Court Desig Felon Reg Commit STP Probation Diversion Intake state population

The two northern regions generally use a smaller pro- portion of legal placements compared to the youth population proportion in their region. For probation and intake, this difference is explained by the presence of independent courts. More youth are served through independent courts in the northern regions than in the southern regions. Independent courts provide proba- tion and intake services to their county populations outside of DJJ's jurisdiction.

Graph 41: North West Region proportion of population by Legal ADP and fiscal year
45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10%
5% 0%
FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Graph 42: North East Region proportion of population by Legal ADP and fiscal year
45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10%
5% 0%
FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Graph 43: South West Region proportion of population by Legal ADP and fiscal year

Graph 44: South East Region proportion of population by Legal ADP and fiscal year

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10%
5% 0%
FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10%
5% 0%
FY4 FY5 FY6 FY7 FY8 FY9 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice

Population Forecast 2010

20