To increase the amount of juvenile justice data the counties make available to the public, the board should work with counties on how best to report these data.
The JJDWG membership included broad representation of counties and disciplines. In addition, the organization of Chief Probation Officers of California was consulted regarding the impact to counties of the recommendations of the JJDWG. The enactment of AB 1998 increases the amount of juvenile justice data counties make available to the public, to include at a minimum: countywide arrests, diversions, petitions filed, petitions sustained, placements, incarcerations, subsequent petitions and probation violations.
Assembly Bill 1468 (Ch. 26, Stats. 2014) established the Juvenile Justice Data Working Group (JJDWG) within the board and it was to recommend options for coordinating and modernizing the juvenile justice data systems and reports that are developed and maintained by state and county agencies. Its January 2016 report to the Legislature, titled Rebuilding California's Juvenile Justice Data System: Recommendations to Improve Data Collection, Performance Measures and Outcomes for California Youth, was based on research as well as input from a survey of county probation officers. Therefore, we consider our recommendation to be fully implemented.
The JJDWG membership included broad representation of counties and disciplines. In addition, the Chief Probation Officers of California was consulted regarding the impact to counties of the recommendations of the JJDWG. Given the recommendations of the JJDWG, and considering the input from counties, it is quite possible the outcome reporting requirements will change in a way that will increase the amount of juvenile justice data counties make available to the public. Therefore, we anticipate this recommendation will be fully implemented by the end of the current legislation session.
In establishing the new JJDWG, the Legislature mandated broad representation from the membership. The working group will begin meeting in October and is charged with analyzing the capacities and limitations of the data systems and networks used to collect and report state and local juvenile caseload and outcome data. As such, we expect the work of the JJDWG to inform our consideration of changes to county reporting of juvenile justice data.
Please refer to our one-year response.
Please refer to the one-year response assessment.
In establishing the new JJSC, broad county representation was a high priority and the final, approved membership reflects that. The JJSC began meeting in April and has begun to review the data collection and reporting requirements for YOBG. We expect the work of the JJSC will inform our assessment of changes to county reporting of juvenile justice data.
The BSCC indicated that the JJSC will review and revise the data collection and reporting requirements for YOBG. The work of the JJSC will subsequently inform the BSCC's assessment of changes to the juvenile justice data that counties report.
The BSCC stated that it would provide additional information relating to the JJSC, including whether the JJCS has begun to revise data collection and reporting requirements, with its 1-year response.
The board did not address this recommendation in its response. (See 2013-406, p. 231)
Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.