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