Juvenile Justice Workgroup

March 12, 2021
Brenda Grealish
Executive Officer, CCJBH
Office of the Secretary, Kathleen Allison, Secretary
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)

Agenda

1:00 PM	Welcome & Introductions
1:10 PM	California Health and human Service Agency’s Office of Youth and Community Restoration (OYCR)
1:25 PM	Division of Juvenile Justice, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
1:45 PM	Public Comment on Agenda Items II & III
1:50 PM	Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC)
2:10 PM	CCJBH’s Juvenile Justice Request for Proposal RFP Update

2:25 PM	Public Comment on Agenda Items IV &V
2:30 PM	Chief Probation Officers Of California (CPOC)
2:45 PM	Q&A with Council member Advisors    *Public Comment on Agenda Item VI*
2:55 PM	Next Steps
3:00 PM	Adjourn

** Workgroup is being recorded **
-> Use the “raise hand” feature to make a comment
-> You will be placed in line to comment in the order in which requests are received by the host.
-> When it is your turn to comment, the meeting host will unmute your line and announce your name.
-> Members of the public should be prepared to complete their comments within 3 minutes or less if a different time allotment is needed and announced by the Executive Officer.
Email:
CCJBH@cdcr.ca.gov

Child Welfare Council Office of Youth and Community Restoration (OYCR) Update
March 12, 2021
California Health and Human Services Agency
Person Centered. Data Driven.

Background and Status Updates
Stephanie Welch, MSW, Deputy Secretary of Behavioral Health
Heather Bowlds, Psy. D, Director (A), Division of Juvenile Justice
California Health and Human Services Agency
Person Centered. Data Driven.

Background: The Office of Youth and Community Restoration (OYCR) 
SB 823 repealed previous provisions that would have created the Department of Youth and Community Restoration and the provisions that would have transferred the responsibilities of the Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) to CHHS.
The statute established the OYCR within CHHS, effective July 1, 2021.
Establishing the OYCR at CHHS better aligns with research and best practices that focus on rehabilitation and support the delivery of trauma-informed and developmentally appropriate services to youth and young adults in juvenile justice system.

Background: The Office of Youth and Community Restoration (OYCR)
SB 823 directed the Children Welfare Council (CWC) to establish a committee to advise and provide recommendations to the OYCR.
In December 2020 the CWC established the OYCR committee
OYCR committee will advise on the policies, programs and approaches that improve youth outcomes, reduce youth detention, and reduce recidivism.
The OYCR will providing staffing support to this CWC committee.

Background: The Office of Youth and Community Restoration (OYCR)
The statute outlines the responsibilities of the OYCR:
• Promote trauma responsive, culturally informed service
• Identify and disseminate best practices and assess efficacy of programs
• Reviewing local Juvenile Justice Realignment Grants to ensure they contain all necessary elements and if not we will offer TA to support plan improvements
• Develop policy recommendations to improve outcomes and integrate programs and services to support delinquent youth
• Establish and operate Ombudsperson roles and functions

Status: The Office of Youth and Community Restoration (OYCR)
CHHS submitted a Budget Change Proposal requesting resources for staff and contract services to fulfill the duties outlined in statute:
• Executive Leadership and Legal Counsel
• County Coordination Unit
• Policy, Research & Operations Unit
• Administrative Support
• Contract Funds to Procure Subject Matter Expertise

Division of Juvenile Justice, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Dr. Heather Bowlds, Director

Updates from DJJ

● Governor Newsom’s 2020-21 State Budget transfers responsibility for managing all youthful offenders from the State to local jurisdictions.

● Under Budget Trailer Bill SB823, intake of new juvenile offenders will stop July 1, 2021.

● Throughout this process, known as Realignment, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) is committed to supporting our staff and continuing to serve the youth under our care by providing programs for successful reentry into the community.

● SB 823 has repealed previous legislation moving the DJJ into the California Health and Human Services Agency (CHHS) as the Department of Youth and Community Restoration (YCR).

● The Governor’s 2021-22 Budget proposes further amending SB 823 to set a defined closure date of June 30, 2023 for all DJJ facilities.

Broad Brush: Three things happening at once

• Move towards closure of DJJ and shift responsibility to counties
• Office of Youth and Community Restoration (OYCR) opens
• Counties develop plan

* PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS II & III*

Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC)
John Prince, Deputy Director
Beth Gong, Field Representative

SB 823 Summary of Findings and RFA Process

County Intentions for housing youth who can no longer be committed to DJJ

SB823 RFA Award Intentions
• $4,000,000 For Regional Hub Projects
• Up to four Regional Hubs which include at least one project that addresses each of the following
out-of-county placement needs
• Female
• Sex Offender
• Seriously Mentally Ill
• $5,120,000 Remaining Funding Divided
• Approx. $88,000 for all 58 Counties to address local infrastructure needs
•(may be adjusted if counties do not wish to apply for funding)

SB823 RFA Award Timeline
• April 8th BSCC Board Meeting – Approval of RFA and Authorize Release to Public
• May 7th – RFA Proposals Due to BSCC
• June 10th BSCC Board Meeting – Approval of RFA Award Recommendations
• June 10th 2021 – June 1st 2024 – Grant Period

CCJBH’s Juvenile Justice Request for Proposal (RFP) Update
Brenda Grealish, Executive Officer

CCJBH’s Juvenile Justice Request for Proposal (RFP) Update

Through the Juvenile Justice Workgroup, CCJBH will focus on SB 823 DJJ Realignment, particularly with regard to securing a contractor for the Juvenile Justice Evidence-Based Practices Toolkit/Compendium. Workgroup participants will review and provide feedback on deliverables throughout the year, and share this information at Full Council meetings.

CCJBH’s Juvenile Justice Request for Proposal (RFP) Update (cont’d.)

Purpose of the Toolkit:
To provide a compilation of information related to best practices and evidence-based programs that have been shown to be effective in serving youth involved in the criminal justice system who have serious behavioral health needs.
Who will it serve:
The compendium/toolkit will serve as a key resource for county probation/child welfare and behavioral health departments.

CCJBH’s Juvenile Justice Request for Proposal (RFP) Update (cont’d.)

The toolkit will support counties in:
✓ Identifying and understanding the heterogeneous composition and needs of the DJJ transition youth population, including those with behavioral health needs (i.e., any mental illness, serious emotional disturbance, and/or substance use disorders), noting any similarities of needs across counties where potential partnership may serve counties and youth well.
✓ Strengthening and sustaining cross-system partnerships to promote collaboration among those most cognizant and well- informed of the unique needs of this population, and those best situated to promote continuity of services and foster sustained relationships with family and ties to the community.
✓ Screening and assessing youth behavioral, behavioral health (including trauma) and criminogenic needs.
✓ Utilizing a multi-tier systems of support (MTSS) to improve outcomes for juvenile justice involved based on screenings and evidence-based practices through a Tier 3 system.
✓ Identifying best practices and evidence-based practices to serving the realigned population, including sub-populations, to include identifying regions best positioned to address certain youth needs to ensure positive and sustained treatment outcomes.
✓ Leveraging existing data, or collecting new data, to establish baselines and track process, treatment and program outcomes.
✓ Identifying funding streams that may be used for planning, implementation and ongoing monitoring/quality improvement.

CCJBH Juvenile Justice Toolkit RFP Tentative Timeline
CCJBH Submit SOW to AMS	3/18/2021
AMS to Submit RFP to CCJBH for Edits	3/30/2021
CCJBH to AMS for Final Draft	4/7/2021
JJ Toolkit Approved by CDCR Legal	4/15/2021
RFP Available to Prospective Bidders	4/20/2021
Final Date for Proposal Submission	4/30/2021
Evaluations of Proposals	5/10/2021
Notice of Intent to Award Contract	5/17/2021
Proposed Award Contract Date	5/30/2021
DGS/OLS Approval	6/15/2021
Contract Proposed Start Date	7/1/2021

* PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS IV & V*

Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC)
Brian Richart, Chief Probation Officer
El Dorado County

SB 823: How are County Probation Departments Preparing for Implementation
MARCH 2021

Principles and Considerations for Local Implementation
 Counties have collective interest in ensuring youth have access to high quality programming to meet their needs
 Leading Values:
o Consistency and fidelity across all programs in each county operating a secure treatment facility
o Avoid net widening
o Prevent increase in adult commitments
 Goal: Develop improved replacement in juvenile justice service continuum
 Intended Outcomes: Instill confidence in youth, families, justice-system partners, other stakeholders that meaningful, effective services exist

DJJ Demographics
FY 18/19 686 youth

DJJ POPULATION: GENDER (2019)
Male 96%
Female 4%
DJJ POPULATION: AGED (2019)
Under 17 19%
18-21 74%
22 or older7%
Female 4%

Average length of stay
Average Length of Stay for All Youth Released in 2019:
28 months
Range:
21 – 48 Mos.

Releases: Average Length of Stay

Offense Group	Length of Stay (Releases 2016-2019)	Average Length of Stay (2019)
Aggravated Assault	9-42 months	22 months
Arson	21-27 months	21 months
Assault w/ Intent to Murder	11-48 months	42 months
Burglary 1st Degree	14 – 45 months	39 months
Carjacking	8-43 months	30 months
Extortion/Kidnapping	20-47 months	41 months
Manslaughter (inc vehicular)		42 months
Murder 1st Degree		48 months
Murder 2nd Degree		30 months
Rape (Forcible)		44 months
Robbery (Enhanced)	3 – 42 months	25 months
Robbery (Other)	8-46 months	25 months
Sex Offenses (Other)	6-45 months	31 months

specialized POPULATIONS

DJJ Admissions Statewide

SPECIALIZED POPULATION	18/19 ADP	2018 INTAKE	2019 INTAKE
SEXUAL BEHAVIOR TREATMENT	88	35	27
YOUNG WOMEN	27	14	13

DJJ Education Services Statewide

EDUCATION FY 2018/19

ENROLLED HIGH SCHOOL	288	42%
ENROLLED VOCATIONAL PROGRAM	430	63%
ENROLLED COLLEGE	190	28%

LOCAL JUVENILE JUSTICE CONTINUUM

We want to create a seamless continuum, but we don’t want the realigned population to absorb all of the resources available to the rest of the continuum.—nor do we want the scope of this population to grow.

Realigned DJJ Population (1% of juvenile justice pop)

This population tends to be older and has longer lengths of stay.

County Planning
TWO TYPES OF SECURE TREATMENT FACILITIES TO SERVE YOUTH
GENERAL

◆ Operate non-specialized secure treatment facilities for youth with high needs (who otherwise would have been ordered to DJJ) to include, but not be limited to, following core components:
◆ Education
◆ Vocational
◆ Mental health (non-specialized, non-acute)
◆ Medical and Dental
◆ Family Engagement
◆ Reentry/aftercare planning

SPECIALIZED
◆ Provide all the programs and services as “general” service facilities but have additional programming specializing in three areas:
◆ Serving youth ordered due to a sex offense(s)
◆ Serving female youth

Counties Fall Into Three Categories:
PARTNER – Contract with Host counties for youth ordered into secure treatment disposition
HOST – Serve youth from own AND other counties
INDEPENDENT – Serve own youth only

Implementation considerations

◆ Remove or mitigate barriers presented by county borders for the deepest end of the juvenile justice continuum
◆ Incentivize collaboration to provide similar level of service delivery backed by research
◆ Avoid establishing too few or too many individual county programs
◆ Equalize access for all youth previously sent to DJJ, regardless of jurisdiction
◆ Support program capacity availability to replace the loss of the state level piece of the continuum

Q&A WITH COUNCIL MEMBER ADVISORS
*** PUBLIC COMMENT ***

NEXT STEPS

NEXT COUNCIL MEETING:
April 30, 2021 2:00-4:30PM
NEXT JUVENILE JUSTICE WORKGROUP MEETING
Friday, June 11, 2021 1:00-3:00PM
ADJOURN

Download the printable version of this presentation (PDF)

CCJBH Juvenile Justice Workgroup Meeting #3
Friday, November 20, 2020
10:00 AM – 12:00 PM
Zoom Webinar

Workgroup Purpose: The purpose of the Council on Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health (CCJBH)
Juvenile Justice Workgroup Meeting #3 is to discuss the final recommendations included in the CCJBH
2020 Annual Legislative Report and identify the Juvenile Justice Workgroup priorities for 2021.

Council Member Advisors:
Chief Mack Jenkins, Chief Probation Officer (Retired), San Diego County Probation, Council member
Council on Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health, (CCJBH)
Danitza Pantoja, Psy.D, School Psychologist, Antelope Valley Union High School (AVUH), Council
member, Council on Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health, (CCJBH)

Not Present:
Dr. Tony Hobson PhD., Behavioral Health Director, Plumas County, Council member, Council on
Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health, (CCJBH)

Panelist:
Heather Bowlds, Psy.D, Director, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)
Rosie McCool, Deputy Director, Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC)
Tanja Heitman, Chief Probation Officer, Santa Barbara County Probation Department, CPOC Deanna
Adams, Senior Analyst, Judicial Council of California
Marcus Galeste, PhD., Mental Health Services Oversite and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC)

CCJBH Staff:
Brenda Grealish, Executive Officer, Council on Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health, (CCJBH)
Sheron Wright, MPH, CCJBH Policy Analyst

Minutes

Goal: Review and finalize recommendations to the Governor’s Office and Legislature for CCJBH 2020
Annual Legislative Report of best known practices and strategies to improve outcomes for youth with
behavioral health needs, who are in the juvenile justice system.

I. Overview of the Juvenile Justice Workgroup Findings & Recommendations
Chief Mack Jenkins, Chief Probation Officer, Retired, San Diego County Probation, Council member,
Council on Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health

Mack Jenkins gave the background and stated that the plan today is to present the synthesis and highlight the findings the workgroup has made from the previous Juvenile Justice Workgroup Meetings. CCJBH gathered input and recommendations from workgroup participants and identified common themes on system issues. Mr. Jenkins stated that we went through some efforts to explain terms. We defined what was meant by “juvenile justice system” and identified stakeholders.

Discussed the two different levels of Juvenile justice systems. One system at the state level, which is CDCR, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), where youth are committed to the custody of DJJ and the other system is at the county level, monitored by county probation departments of the state. We also presented the case trajectory that a youth goes through when they enter the juvenile justice system – the case processing continuum, which was posted on CCJBH’s website.

Mr. Jenkins discussed the mission of the Council to identify, highlight, and promote both best and evidence-based practices that target improving the experience of Juvenile Justice individuals suffering from mental illness.

From those earlier workgroup discussions, figures were provided to us by the Chief Probation Officers of California. When we use the term “Youth at the local level”, we are talking about currently, statewide there are 28,000 youth under county probation supervision in 59 different juvenile probation departments in 58 counties (San Francisco has both adult and juvenile department). When we talk about youth, those that remain in the Division of Juvenile Justice today are 7561 that will eventually attrite out. Those youth committed to DJJ have higher and more sophisticated needs.

The first workgroup session provided a framework, set the stage, defined the goals and defined the purpose to start thinking in terms of what does improve outcomes. Then in the second session, we went through defining what we meant by improving the outcomes. Which includes reducing recidivism and improving other aspects to improve the juvenile justice system to achieve better outcomes. Input ranged from training on mental health and disabilities, helping youth and families to restore youth, need for residential treatment options, resources and positive youth programs.

Acknowledgement of Advisors and Panel Members

Mack Jenkins thanked the panel and participants for joining the workgroup and thanked them for their contributions through each of these webinars. He acknowledged his co-lead for this workgroup, Dr. Danitza Pantoja, Psy.D., school psychologist.

Danitza Pantoja, Psy.D, School Psychologist, AVUH, CCJBH Council member
Dr. Pantoja commented what a phenomenal job Mack Jenkins has done and thanked the workgroup, panelist and participants for joining in these three workgroup meetings. Without their feedback and information, we could not have come up with the recommendations presented today.

Mack Jenkins introduced the new Executive Officer of CCJBH, Brenda Grealish.

Brenda Grealish, Executive Officer, CCJBH expressed her appreciation and acknowledged the panel and participants for taking the time out to participate and contribute to this workgroup. She stated that she has been a council member for many years, but just joined CCJBH (in the last six weeks), as the Executive Officer. Ms. Grealish appreciated everyone taking the time to carve out, for such an important group of children and youth that we want to make sure we are caring for especially in these times.

Mack Jenkins acknowledged the contributions of Dr. Tony Hobson PhD., Behavioral Health Director, Plumas County, CCJBH Council member (who could not be present at this meeting) and other panelist and asked them to say a few words.
1 From Chat Box: Heather Bowlds Psy.D, Director, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) state DJJ total count of youth as of today is 756. Not, 700,000. (In recording, Mack Jenkins says 700,000.)

Heather Bowlds, Psy.D, Director, Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) said thank you for having me, glad to be
a part of the group.

Mack Jenkins stated that we are in Dr. Bowlds’ debt and appreciate all her help in this effort. Her input has been invaluable. He acknowledged Chief Tanya Heitman and Rosie McCool, representatives of Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC). CPOC has contributed heavily to this workgroup (who were not present at this time). We appreciated the contributions they have done. Mr. Jenkins introduced Deanna Adams, representative of Judicial Council of California and said we cannot talk about juvenile justice without the juvenile court.

Deanna Adams, Senior Analyst, Judicial Council of California said good morning everyone, I look forward to join in the conversation.

Mack Jenkins introduced Dr. Marcus Galeste from MHSOAC. He said Dr. Galeste had offered very significant information in the first session of this workgroup.

Marcus Galeste, PhD., Mental Health Services Oversite and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC) said he was not able to make it to the Workgroup #2 meeting and is looking forward to hear about what everyone has done up to this point.

Mack Jenkins requested that if he missed a point, mis-spoke or did not emphasize what he should be emphasizing, to please weigh in or jump in at that point to correct him. He gave thanks to all of participants, especially wanted to commend Brenda Grealish, Sheron Wright and CCJBH staff for the summary and synthesis of all the information presented in this series of Workgroups and suggestions made verbally and in writing.

A. Juvenile Justice Workgroup Findings

Chief Mack Jenkins, Chief Probation Officer, Retired, San Diego County Probation, CCJBH Council
member

1. As of July 1, 2021, County probation departments will be responsible for a population of youth
   who would have been remanded to DJJ and their existing youth population. Chief Probation Officers
   have weighed in and expressed concern with not being financially or structurally prepared for this
   change. Realigning youth with greater and serious needs to local county detention centers will
   require planning, funding and policy development. This youths that would have gone to DJJ have
   higher needs.
2. Research estimates that youth entering the justice system each year have experienced some
   degree of trauma, yet the details of their trauma histories, mental health issues or risk factors
   are not always known. Unmet behavioral health needs can be a leading cause of justice involvement
   and recidivism. The number of youth is much lower, however, they are address as high risk. Kids
   that are medium and low risk do not remain in the system.
3. Youth of color, Crossover youth, LGBTQ youth and youth with behavioral health needs are
   disproportionately impacted in terms of youth who enter the system, by the juvenile justice system
   at all points than youth in the general population. Over 88% youth in the DJJ are youth of color.
   Compared to white youth, black youth are 5.1 times more likely to be referred to probation, 7.7
   times more likely to have a petition filed in juvenile court, 9.5 times more likely to be declared
   a “ward” of the court and 31.3 times likely to be committed to DJJ. Black and brown youth make up
   the greater youth population at DJJ and will be the most affected by the realignment to local
   systems. We know there are disparities.

Youth who are justice involved display higher rates of mental health needs than youth in general
population. Approximately 65 to 70 percent of these youth have at least one mental health disorder.
There is no current statutory requirement for probation departments to conduct mental health
screenings for youth entering the juvenile justice system. In San Diego, a program was conducted to
do mental health screenings for kids (when Mack Jenkins was Chief for San Diego County Probation).

All of the probation departments in California right now are doing some level of risk, and needs
assessment, which is not explicitly required in the Welfare Institutions Code. Following best
evidence based practices, doing risk needs assessment, has been a probation function for some time.
Youth presented on entry do have a wide variety of needs. Although the tools to screen those needs
may not be statutorily required, they are a part of the effort that is being practiced right now.
Given behavioral health needs of the kids who are in the juvenile justice system that without
effective and evidence based treatment, high risk youth are at a much greater risk for chronic
delinquency that puts them at great risk of adult criminality.

There is a difference between being declared a delinquent ward for a single delinquent act and
being a chronic delinquent.
There was a seminal study in Orange County done in the late 80s. It is a study that is replicated
around the country (done in Philadelphia) that shows between 6 -10 percent of youth become chronic
delinquents, it is called the 8% (percenters). 8% of juvenile offenders commit and are responsible
for 50 percent of repeat juvenile crimes. Those 8% have very distinct risk factors. Without
effective treatment, the youth are at greater risk of re-offending and they do continue on to adult
criminality. A significant percentage of the 28,000 youth that remain under probation supervision
will meet the 8 percent profile. The focus with those youth should be screening, assessing and
case development to address the needs.

5. There is a high prevalence of youth with behavioral health needs each year who enter the
   juvenile justice system. Without effective treatment, high risk youth remain on a path towards
   chronic, delinquency that puts them at great risk of adult criminality. The courts recognize that
   youth have been arrested and come before them are in need of treatment. Screening, assessment and
   case plan development are vital to addressing behavioral health treatment needs of youth in the
   juvenile justice system.

In addition, there is also a finding for adequate residential treatment capacity and community
based treatment programs are critical and a key part of the continuum of care and effort to improve
outcomes for youth. When we talk about evidence based practices, we are talking about the
appropriate screening assessment and case planning development and matching services to meet those
needs. The priority is not to incarcerate. It is to treat the youth in the community at every
opportunity, with the necessary type of evidence based treatments that have shown to be effective
with the population.

6. Youth, Parent and/ or Peer Partners who provide peer support are a valuable component of
   effective service delivery and provide mentorship, support that can help youth and families
   connect to needed services in ways that other service-providers cannot. Contributions from peer
   support is a critical part of moving forward.
7. The Ferrell vs Allen lawsuit required DJJ implement a “rehabilitative model” of care, which
   included the implementation of the Integrated Behavioral Treatment Model (IBTM), and treatment that
   includes physical and behavioral health services. All youth placed at DJJ are assessed using the
   Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument (YAZI) screening assessment tool. DJJ did a lot of work
   to develop the IBTM and practices (screening, assessment, etc.), which led to lessons learned and
   best practices established over time through their work. DJJ’s proven success with the YASI instrument may be considered by County probation departments for implementation to find areas targeted for
   improvement.

*PANEL MEMBERS COMMENT*
No Comment

B. Juvenile Justice Workgroup Recommendations
CCJBH recognized to improve outcomes we needed to weigh in on the DJJ transition to make this plan
successful.

1. Given the extensive needs of the youth currently served by the county probation, and the youth
   population with greater and serious needs that will be realigned to county probation as of July 1,
   2021, local probation agencies, and the youth/families they serve, would benefit from (as
   appropriate):

a. Engaging system partners in strategic planning to improve the existing local juvenile
justi33ce system and expand to address the unique needs of the transitioning DJJ population. This
includes:
• local agency partners, such as physical and behavioral health providers, child welfare,
community providers, courts, probation, education departments, regional centers, as well as youth,
family members, peers, and other youth advocates.
• The State DJJ. Note: if not currently underway, processes should be established to transfer the
records of transitioning DJJ youth to local agencies, including probation, health care (Medi-Cal
Managed Care Plans), behavioral health, child welfare and appropriate education agencies.

b. Ensuring that all youth who are involved in the probation system are screened and assessed
for behavioral (e.g., anger management), physical health, behavioral health (mental health and
substance use disorders), trauma (e.g., screening for Adverse Childhood Experiences), as well as
criminogenic risk and needs.

Brenda Grealish requested that Mack Jenkins distinguish between behavioral and behavior health, as
there has been confusion between criminal justice system and the behavioral health system
difference.

Mack Jenkins There is a difference between behavior health and behavior. Behavior health refers to
a substance use disorder. This is how it is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). We used to say addiction, but now it is a mental
illness diagnosis. Behavior involves things the youths do. Behavior refers to things the youths do
like anger management.

There is also a difference between behavior, criminogenic needs and behavioral health needs.
Criminogenic needs are actual dynamic risk factors. The term “criminogenic” comes from a body of
research. There are actually eight criminogenic needs identified by research that are tied to
recidivism. The top four criminogenic needs are:
1) delinquent or criminal thinking; 2) delinquent peers; 3) pro-criminal attitudes and 4) poor use
of leisure time.

c. Ensuring that comprehensive, individualized treatment plans are developed to address
behavioral, physical health, behavioral health and criminogenic needs, and that all relevant
agencies use integrated case planning and collaborate with the youth and their families, as
appropriate, on the identification of treatment goals, and coordinate on the provision of
treatment, as mandated by the Childand FamilyTeam of Model of Care. Criminogenic needs should be
addressed using the Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model.

d. Ensure capacity at all levels of care, including residential treatment options for
children/youth requiring intensive treatment.
e. Implementing evidence-based practices and programs, as available, and ensure that all care
provided is trauma-informed.

f. Seeking to identify and develop strategies to address disparities, with a focus on racial
justice and race- based trauma.

g. Selecting a manageable number of initial, core-system-level process and outcomes metrics to
establish a baseline and track progress in key domains over time. Additional metrics may be added
once the core metrics are well-established.

h. Leveraging model practices established by DJJ particularly for youth that would have been
remanded to DJJ that will realign to county probation departments.

i. Partnering with existing DJJ treatment providers that have established success with
treating the juvenile justice population, particularly for youth who have committed serious and/or
violent offenses.

To assist with these efforts, CCJBH shall:

2. Seek opportunities and resources to support county justice, behavioral health, education
   and regional center partners in the identification and implementation of strategies for best
   serving youth with greater behavioral health needs being realigned to county probation departments.
3. Establish a partnership with the Office of Youth Community Restoration (OYCR), and serve as
   a resource and liaison between County Behavioral Health Directors, local probation departments and
   youth & family networks.
4. Work with State and local partners (e.g., Chief Probation Officers of California, County
   Behavioral Health Directors Association of California, the Department of Health Care Services, and
   the California Health and Human Services Agency’s Office of Youth and Community Restoration) to
   develop a strategy to ensure that all youth who are involved in the juvenile justice system are
   screened for trauma by their health care provider (Managed Care Plan or Fee-for-Service provider),
   and that the results of their trauma screening are addressed in their behavioral health treatment
   plan.

Mack Jenkins said that this is so important. We want to make trauma screening a systemic process.
The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACES) inventory is a very good tool with a lot of validity how
it can predict different outcomes for individuals.

5. Better understand high-end service capacity alternatives for youth and conduct, in
   partnership with key stakeholders and providers, an assessment of residential treatment capacity
   for juveniles as an alternative to juvenile hall.

PUBLIC COMMENT*

Karen A. Vicari, Policy Director, Cal Voices and Access California: a statewide consumer health,
mental health organization and one of CCJBH contractors. Ms. Vicari complimented Mack Jenkins and
said he was amazing and has put in so much time into this. She stated, that she realized that
resources are limited and would love to see in version two next year some recommendations that are
more upstream. Let’s do screenings on all of the kids that are at risk of entering the juvenile
justice system. Let’s try to solve this problem earlier.
Ms. Vicari stated from the consumer perspective, we are all about recovery orientation. She would
like to see in recommendation C, services that are recovery oriented. She said these recommendations feel very
medical model and they feel very top down; where a recovery orientation is hope based and its
strength based and it works with the individual, to help them improve their life. Recovery
Orientation looks at the whole situation.

Ms. Vicari feels like in a lot of these cases, there is a lot of stuff going on at home. We need to
figure out what that is and we need to address that – what’s going on with the parents and what’s
going on in this person’s entire life. She feels very strongly that there should be some mention in
these recommendations about recovery oriented services.

Mack Jenkins We did speak to upstream in the first webinar. There are a lot of things that can be
done. From a research standpoint. He thanked Karen Vicari and assured that CCJBH Council is 100%
committed to supporting practices to prevent kids from ever coming into the system at all. He
requested Ms. Vicari put her recommendations into writing.

Jaime, (Last name not known. Jose Gonzalez Jr. name on screen), Self Awareness and Recovery, (SARS)
discussed how he and others have lived the traumatic experiences and have gone through traumatic
experiences that a lot of kids are going through right now. He recalled how he was in a group with
40 other individuals asked the question: “How many had been abused at home, at an early age,
specifically sexual abuse?” At least 95% of the guys in the room raised their hand. He stated that
no wonder people are in prison because it is true what they say, “hurt people, hurt people”. He
said it is a guarantee that the vast majority of under 100,000 people currently in prison, they
don’t belong in prison. They need help, prison doesn’t help anyone. All you do is sit there and
become worse. In prison, mental health conditions are magnified, being around other angry people.
They need help. People are suffering, they don’t need prison, they need help.

Mack Jenkins complimented Jaime and his group Self Awareness and Recovery, (SARS). He stated his
organization does good work.

Jaime said that we are here and we want to help.

Pam Hawkins, United Parents, Advocacy Organization, thanked the Council for the opportunity to
speak. The United Parents are parents of children with behavioral healthcare needs, which covers
child welfare juvenile justice behavioral health, and schools. She and the parents are pleased to
hear that the Council is looking toward evidenced-based practices because they want a practice that
has a likelihood of working. What they really want most for their children is a practice that has
more of a likelihood of working than one that doesn’t. She said: So often our experiences are that
our children wind up in a system, and they go months and years, with some sort of healthcare that
isn’t effective. So, evidence based practices, we believe as parents, is maybe the key to, you
know, some advocacy, where behavioral health services are going.

Ms. Hawkins did want to mention something about congregate care and about putting kids in group
care, group home type of places, as opposed to juvenile halls, which I think is better. But we know
that congregate care does not work, especially in juvenile justice, especially for those precise
needs that you’ve mentioned earlier about criminogenic needs and peers that have those same kinds
of problems. When you group kids together with criminogenic needs like that, you often don’t get
agood result.

Ms. Hawkins read a study once somebody did some research in one of the boot camps, and the kids who
left the boot camp environment, crime rose by 18%. So, we know that those kinds of environments, do
not work for justice kids, but we do know that there are some very, very fine programs that Mack
Jenkins mentioned. I’ll mention a couple more Functional Family Therapy (FFT), Multi systemic
therapy (MST) or FFT.

If you look to the Washington State Public Policy Institute, which I’m sure you’re well aware of. If you look at the data that they’ve collected and the outcomes that they’ve collected just using those two programs alone – are really kind of astounding. I would love to see that kind of data collected for California kids Why can’t
California kids get well, as well as Washington State. So I just wanted to say that as parents
with kids with behavioral health needs, we fully support you and back you all the way on the
evidence based practices.

Mack Jenkins thanked Ms. Hawkins and expressed that she was well read.

Pam Hawkins stated that she worked with California Institute for Behavioral Health Solutions
(CIBHS) for about 15 years, maybe over 15 years and her sole job there was to implement evidence
based practices and functional family therapy. She has read the research of effective practices for
kids. Ms. Hawkins then offered her help to provide and needed information on evidence based
practices. She is willing to help.

Mack Jenkins said he was impressed and agree 100% with her about MST and FFT completely.

II. Juvenile Justice Toolkit Proposal
Brenda Grealish, Executive Officer, Council on Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health

Brenda thanked everyone. She stated that in terms of the Juvenile Justice Toolkit proposal,
there was a second recommendation that was looking to support the agencies at the local level with
resources to help strengthen existing systems and to prepare for the upcoming transition of DJJ
population that will remain at the local level,

The second recommendation would help find resources, which are actually available as unspent
contract funding that could be used to continue building out the infrastructure at the local level.
They are proposing the development of a Juvenile Justice Toolkit.

There is lots of information on evidence-based programming and practices, but nothing that compiles
it into a toolkit for a one stop shop, particularly that relates to California, the local system,
and how to serve these children. A link is included on the webpage under the meetings materials for
today. There is a draft of a proposal to develop a Request For Proposal (RFP) for a consultant or
consulting firm to develop a toolkit.
Purpose of the Toolkit:

To provide a compilation of information related to best practices and evidence-based programs that
have been shown to be effective in serving youth involved in the criminal justice system who have
serious behavioral health needs.

The toolkit will support counties in:
✓ Identifying and understanding the heterogeneous composition and needs of their juvenile
justice- involved youth population.
✓ Knowing and understanding the juvenile justice system agency partners, their roles and
responsibilities and potential funding opportunities available through each agency.
✓ Strengthening and sustaining cross-system partnerships to promote shared decision-making by
those most cognizant and well-informed of the unique needs of this population.
✓ Screening and assessing youth behavioral, behavioral health (including trauma) and criminogenic
needs.
✓ Identifying best practices and evidence-based practices to improve process and treatment
outcomes.

Brenda Grealish further explained the parameters of what the proposal entails and what would be
expected of the contractor. She asked for feedback from anyone by November 30th, as they will be
moving quickly on this. Working as a group this year, this toolkit is one of the recommendations
they have resources to do the work and could be the focus for this year.

PUBLIC COMMENT*

Rosie McCool, Deputy Director, Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC) said she thought the
toolkit proposal could be quite helpful if it is crafted in a meaningful way. There has definitely
been given a lot of thought into the support to assisting counties and jurisdictions in the
realignment. Since so much thought has gone into the support identified to assist the counties,
she asked about the tracking of the toolkit creation, could it be expedited and could it become
effective July 1, 2021. Ms. McCool asked how they insure the needs of these young people are met
and set up for success, looking at their wellness. Are there regional efforts that could be put
together and what would they look like? Are there opportunities for regional approaches?
Identifying obviously probation, we’re very focused always on evidence based practices in a
holistic approach and being trauma informed. We are looking to see if there is an opportunity to
maybe add in some efforts related to looking at where regional approaches, may be necessary
especially as we look at counties where there needs to be some partnering.

Brenda Grealish said that the toolkit would not be done by July 1, 2021, as a contractor would not
be brought onboard until February or March of 2021 at the soonest. The Contractor would need time
to complete the work. We would see deliverables at the end of 2021. In terms of the second piece
for regional, she asked if Ms. McCool was thinking something was needed sooner rather than later.
Something separate from the Toolkit?

Rosie McCool: stated that she is taking in all the information and appreciates that there will be
an opportunity to provide more feedback. She said that there are a lot of different moving parts
looking to coordinate, but not duplicate. Prioritize while other organizational structures are put
into place. With so many different moving parts and different groups working on different things,
she would give it more thought and send it to Brenda Grealish.

Rosie McCool With so many different moving parts and different groups working on different things
she would give it more thought and send it to Brenda Grealish.

Brenda Grealish thanked Ms. McCool, and said she though we’re all kind of digesting and trying to
figure out what’s the best thing to do in a short period of time because we didn’t even know we
were going to have something available for resources until recently. So, it is a good problem
finding out you have resources to be able to do something. Any ideas that you have that we can make
some refinement or put some specificity is welcomed.

Mack Jenkins indicated he had a question/comment. In preparing for the transition, he knows the
Probation Chiefs for each of the counties have history of DJJ commitment rates and know the
behavioral needs and needs across the counties. From an impact standpoint, CCJBH might be
interested in the number of kids that fall into this group.

Mr. Jenkins was not asking for an answer; just thought about the behavioral needs and the needs
across the whole population and he wanted to plant a seed. Mr. Jenkins was just suggesting that the
Probation Chiefs will have a sense of moving forward and what that impact will look like. That will
be of some importance.

Rosie McCool definitely agreed and assured everyone that CPOC is definitely partaking in that
analysis to really identify who are the youth that have been ordered to DJJ. They are looking at
the most recent trends, and certainly, there’s been a large effort to keep them local whenever
possible, but really working to identify, over the course of the most recent three to
re evaluating their specific needs so that they can ensure
that what they are crafting is really focused on a holistic approach. They are trying to identify
what that is, and create something that’s very specific to that and focus on that grouping of views. Being mindful, we certainly need to ensure that the youth that get ordered into these programs, that it is very
specific and that they are the intended use that are for those. This is definitely being evaluated
and analyzed as we speak. Ms. McCool agrees with Mr. Jenkins that the Probation Chiefs are
definitely doing that, as well, in coordination with CPOC.
III.
Juvenile Justice Workgroup Priorities for 2021 (Discussion)
Brenda Grealish, Executive Officer, Council on Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health
Brenda Grealish requests consideration of the Juvenile Justice Evidence-Based Practices and
Programs Compendium and Toolkit contract be the focus of the CCJBH Juvenile Justice Workgroup
discussions for 2021, with participants reviewing and providing feedback on deliverables throughout
the year, and ensuring that this information is shared at Full Council meetings.

A full list of potential projects for Calendar Year 2021 for the Juvenile Justice Workgroup, can be
found on CCJBH’s website at Juvenile Justice Workgroup Potential Projects for Calendar Year 2021.
Most of these recommendations reflect recommendations made in prior CCJBH Annual Legislative
Reports. CCJBH staff looked at all past recommendations, whether completed or not. To honor all
recommendations and have them in one place. All recommendations are on the list, whether there
weren’t the resources to complete or they just weren’t prioritized.
The exception on the list is the first project, the Juvenile Justice Evidence Based Practices (EBP)
Compendium/Toolkit, which will be a new CCJBH contract.

CCJBH staff highly recommends that the Juvenile Justice Workgroup selects only one project for
Calendar Year 2021, and that the project selected be the Juvenile Justice EPB Compendium/Toolkit
project since SB 823, Juvenile Justice Realignment, will implement on July 1, 2021.

PANEL COMMENT on 2021 Juvenile Justice Workgroup Priorities*

Mack Jenkins stated as we move forward with the RFP for the toolkit, the Workgroup and CCJBH want
to make sure that they are working in collaboration and support, and not duplicating things that
CPOC may be involved with in terms of moving forward with the DJJ transition. We want to make sure
that there’s maximum conversation, as we move forward with putting the RFP out there to see that it
does work in support of whatever CPOC is involved in. Mr. Jenkins does not believe that CPOC would
necessarily be in opposition to the deliverables of the toolkit, in terms of making available these
resources.

Ultimately probation will be a key player, not the only player, a key player with these youth
staying at the local level in partnership with other stakeholders. The toolkit is just really an
effort to try and make that work and we want to make sure that we are well connected as that moves
forward.

Mr. Jenkins said as we do complete our task with this workgroup, finish our policy brief and
include in our recommendation to the governor’s office and the legislature, we want to be in a
position to see how those recommendations land. How the governor’s office and legislation
responds, that could also influence our next response and our priorities for the next year.
Certainly, we want the toolkit to be impactful. We want the recommendations to be impactful.
Depending upon what gets significant traction or what gets no traction. That might shift some of
our focus and could steer us in more in one direction than another.

Rosie McCool said that some of the things listed in the other areas may flow and come out of the
toolkit, as you look at the data, I think the other thing is always sort of looking at what can you
achieve in the timeframe that you set up for CCJBH. The toolkit itself is fairly comprehensive and
even one of the things, ,,,technical difficulties…aftercare and reentry is critical to the
continuity of the relationships that are built and the partnerships that are created and being able
to maintain those familial connections, as well as the connections to the community. The toolkit is a
very lofty goal if…technical difficulties…crafted in a way that is able to be completed in the timeframe that you’re
hoping to. The Toolkit will be informative to the work that is being done and I think would be
useful.

Mack Jenkins wanted to comment on Karen Vicari’s recommendations on focusing on prevention and
whole recovery that he thought was really insightful. One of the things that we have done is
identify best practices for strengthening families that are involved in the criminal justice
system. In this particular workgroup we’re actually talking about the juvenile justice system. The
system itself, always has to be looking holistically at the Youth who are impacted, looking at
their family and their environment, a holistic point of view. What Ms. Vicari said, needs to be
acknowledged because it was really on point. There will always be some effort of looking to
strengthening the whole family environment.

PUBLIC COMMENT*

Yvonne Evans, Education Programs Consultant, California Department of Education, I was wondering if
there was a consideration of training of staff who will be working closely with issues. I work with
the California Department of Education, with the juvenile court community schools, and I work
closely with a lot of the directors of those COEs (camps) who work with, who have the juvenile
court schools, the camps. And it’s just funny they’re kind of in a panic, a little bit it’s like,
Where’s the funding that’s going to take care of the youth as they come back into the state? They
lost a lot of numbers and now they’re going to have another group of numbers. I think there’s a
lot of things at the county office level, as far as education, they’re going to be concerned about
in regards to the training of staff, you mentioned a lot of things that need to be. I think it is
imperative that the staff know about trauma informed care about Mental Health First Aid. Not on a
professional level, but on a layman’s term level, to be aware of.

Mack Jenkins said to clarify, you are talking about the importance of training department of
education staff about the impact of trauma and just serving the youth.

Yvonne Evans said any adult or person that will be working with those youth. Whether it be,
Department of probation or whether it be the department of education or any of those areas. I know
we have the professionals and the other people who will have direct contact with the need to be
sensitive to training. Mental Health First Aid. I worked at a county, which will not be named.
Training with the adults from the public, their behavior was worse than the kids. I took down the
public school that’s a shame because what was what was very important when they were being able to
relate with students, when there’s like an old boys club and some of these probation and some of
these areas and I just want to understand.

Mack Jenkins said It was very late in his career that he was exposed to, or learned about trauma
informed care. Years ago they were not trained about trauma or its impact.

Tanja Heitman, Chief Probation Officer, Santa Barbara County Probation Department, CPOC said she
agreed with Chief Jenkins. When she began this work over 30 years ago, they knew that these kids
had been impacted by different trauma, but they didn’t understand the connection or the long-term
impact. Today, that has changed and they are very much engaged in training staff in their core
curriculum, as well as ongoing training. We conduct trauma assessments on youth, very involved
with ACE’s initiative conducting assessment as they enter the system. Ensure service providers are
well-equipped to ensure trauma informed care. The way we use incentives and sanctions is changing
based on what we know about trauma.

Matthew Macias thanked everyone for the opportunity to tell his story. He wondered about the
educational recommendation by others. He wants to keep education in the forefront, as he was made a
ward of the court at 16 and discharging at 18 and didn’t acquire the educational needs that he needed to be successful in life.
He is 29 years old, going on 30 and studying at USF Fullerton with Project Rebound. He received is
GED at High Desert Prison. Education should definitely be a priority for now for these juveniles. He
didn’t know in the beginning that education was a stepping stone out of those things. He said, I
appreciate all the other stuff and trauma informed therapy evidence based models that you guys are
looking at and I do know from my experience that education is so important. I think they’re
acquiring more data on it right now, but it’s really hard to acquire the data, when people who are
formerly incarcerated, don’t want to identify as formerly incarcerated. So therefore, we’re not
accruing the data to keep this population at the forefront. In his opinion, education is something
that should be looked at.

Mack Jenkins thanked Mr. Macias and expressed appreciation in sharing Matthew’s experience. He also
congratulated him on what he has been able to do.

Angela Vazquez, MSW Policy Director, says she is the director over child welfare, mental health,
and justice for The Children’s Partnership. She wants to support the idea and conversations noted
earlier about peer support for young people and their families involved with the justice system. We
at The Children’s Partnership very much want to support the idea of peer supports for young people
and their families. The national conversation about the impact of the pandemic on youth isolation
and their mental health should have this group thinking about young people who are detained in
juvenile
facilities. The experience of being detained, removed from your family (however unstable or a
source of conflict and trauma), and placed in a new highly regulated social environment is
inherently traumatic and socially isolating. This workgroup should consider exploring innovative
ideas for promoting positive social connections with peers. Young people’s desire to develop
social connections is developmentally appropriate and necessary to heal from the high levels of
complex PTSD and trauma that is likely driving much of their behavior. Peer supports would be
vital to this work, and there is an opportunity with SB 803, a bill which requires the state to
develop a Peer Support certification process that would allow peer support to be a MediCaid funded
mental health support. This group could think about what a peer support model for justice involved
youth would look like and inform the SB 803 process.

Mack Jenkins stated that is a wonderful recommendation and asked Ms. Vazquez to submit her
statement in writing.

Jaime states that he is not a professional, however he has worked with many people in prison and he
talked about people in prison may have come from a broken home, a fatherless home. That’s trauma.
They are going out with a type of trauma or some type of behavior issue that’s going to lead them
or cause them to get into drugs and alcohol or messed up relationships. A lot of people are raised
by single parents. Talk to the kids, within two minutes you can find out what is going on in the
home. What goes on in the home causes trauma and can be spotted immediately. In my case, my mother
was murdered when I was nine years old. I went through some of that trauma. Thank God I was able to
heal. As a result of going through the process I am going through now. Trauma is really basic for a
lot of people. We don’t have to look at it as mental health or issues that go on with the mental
health department. I’m not trying to take nothing away from them. I just say they talk about
behaviors and trauma, if we could just look at the whole identify where it’s coming from. Thank you
very much.

Daniel Silva, Co-founder, President of Self Awareness and Recovery (SARS) wanted to add what Jaime
is mentioning when talking about trauma. He identified the core of trauma in his own life. Joining
a gang at 13, in and out of institutions and straight to prison when he turned 18 years old. His
life spun out of control. He experienced trauma at a young age and witnessed injury as a kid. That
is when things changed for him, for the negative.
What saved his life, he found a program named Houses of Healing created by the Lionheart
Foundation. The Executive Director of the foundation is Robin Carsarchian. She became his friend
over the years and helped him
ion of a book Houses of Healing, found an avenue to go back to childhood and find an
avenue of healing for the wounding of childhood.

Through that process he found healing, the core self, true self, the real individual that pays
taxes, helps people. That goes out and does what needs to be done to ensure he will never go back
to a cage. Recommends that young people find someone to connect with.

One of the reasons he does this work, he takes to the power source, the youth portion of Healing of
Houses. His organization goes into schools, jails, to DJJ. To help young people find balance, for
their insecurities and for their hatred. Daniel recommends that website as a resource. Daniel said,
you are on the right path. Providing programming. Don’t wait till they go to prison. Hit them at
the front.

Mack Jenkins thanked Daniel Silva for his passion.
IV. Next Steps
Brenda Grealish thanked all the workgroup participants that have tuned in today and in all the
Workgroups. Asked if they could submit feedback on Juvenile Justice Toolkit proposal by November
30, 2020 to CCJBH@cdcr.ca.gov. All materials from today are under the Meetings Link at

Mack Jenkins also thanked everyone who participated in each of the webinars and offered their
input, their personal stories and who have offered their support. He stated that this is obviously
invaluable and so much appreciated. He also thanked Sheron Wright for her dedication and work along
with the rest of the CCJBH staff and thanked the panelist for their contribution.

V. Announcements
No Announcements
PUBLIC COMMENT*

No Public Comment

CCJBH MAILBOX Angela M. Vázquez, MSW | The Children’s Partnership
Provided a written copy of her public comment made on November 20, 2020 at the Juvenile Justice
Workgroup.
We at The Children’s Partnership very much want to support the idea of peer supports for young
people and their families. The national conversation about the impact of the pandemic on youth
isolation and their mental health should have this group thinking about young people who are
detained in juvenile facilities. The experience of being detained, removed from your
family (however unstable or a source of conflict and trauma), and placed in a new highly regulated
social environment is inherently traumatic and socially isolating. This workgroup should
consider exploring innovative ideas for promoting positive social connections with peers.
Young people’s desire to develop social connections is developmentally appropriate and necessary to
heal from the high levels of complex PTSD and trauma that is likely driving much of their behavior.
Peer supports would be vital to this work, and there is an opportunity with SB 803, a bill which
requires the state to develop a Peer Support certification process that would allow peer support to be a MediCaid funded mental health support. This group could think about what a
peer support model for justice involved youth would look like and inform the SB 803 process.

Karen A. Vicari, JD Policy Director | Cal Voices and ACCESS California

Hi, Thank you again for taking my public comment today. I really love how receptive you are to
public comment, and I respect the work that you do very much! Here are my comments in written
form: Public comments to the Juvenile Justice Workgroup, agenda item 1:
My name is Karen Vicari, Policy Director for Cal Voices, a peer led statewide mental health
advocacy organization.

1) I would love to see recommendations b-f applied to all youth who are determined to be at risk of
entering the juvenile justice system, as an upstream approach to keeping them from entering the
system at all.

2) In contrast to the medical model, which looks at symptom reduction, the Recovery Model of mental
health care recognizes that recovery from a mental health condition is person-driven,
strengths-based, and based on hope, empowerment, and respect. Recovery-oriented services look at
the totality of a person’s situation, including social connections, education, housing, physical
and mental health, and more. Where the medical model involves an authority figure prescribing
treatment, the recovery model is interactive and person-based. California policies (DHCS, MHSA,
etc.) all follow the recovery model. I strongly recommend that your recommendations, including (c)
specifically mention “Recovery-Oriented Services”.
Here is a link to our National Organization’s policy on this issue, which
also has some good thoughts: https://www.mhanational.org/issues/position-statement-51-children-emotional-disorders-juvenile-justice-system

Yvonne Evans, Education Programs Consultant California Department of Education
Is there any consideration in providing staff, who will work directly with the youth, training such as Youth Mental Health First Aid, suicide prevention, Trauma informed practices, Social Emotional Learning, etc.?