Texas, We've Still Got a Long Way to Go!

According to the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s 2011-2012 “Legislator’s Guide to the Issues”, juvenile crime in Texas has been declining for the past several years. At the same time, more than $200 million has been saved by downsizing Texas Youth Commission (TYC) state lockups and using some of the savings to increase juvenile probation instead of sending those misdemeanants to TYC. However, the report goes on to say, juvenile delinquency is still a significant problem. “Approximately 2,100 youths are incarcerated at TYC institutions with another 150 at TYC halfway houses” (Levin, 2011, p.1).

The guide makes several important recommendations for further juvenile justice reform (Levin, 2011, p.2):

• Strengthen performance measures: should be revised to emphasize results and outcomes rather than process and volume – measures should include parole recidivism rates, high school degrees, GEDs or vocational certificates obtained, volunteer hours worked, etc.
• Expand participation in the Commitment Reduction Program (CRP): the state would achieve net savings from participation in CRP while the newly participating departments would be able to expand community-based programs.
• Streamline TYC facilities: those institutions that are not being fully utilized should be consolidated to save money – some capacity should be relocated to smaller community-based group homes in urban areas (this is where most youths originate).
• Emphasize vocational training at TYC facilities: the average youth committed to TYC functions at a 5^th to 6^th grade level – despite being 16 years old.
• Increase flexibility in state funding: research shows that – except for the highest-risk, most deviant youth – non-residential programs such as therapy, victim-offender mediation, mentoring, and enrichment programs are the most cost-effective way to reduce recidivism. Therefore, counties should be given flexibility to use funds for these types of programs
• Redirect education funding for youths in detention centers from school districts to juvenile probation departments: would increase accountability for results and allow the juvenile probation departments to explore options such as forming their own charters (has been successful in Dallas) or select the district of their choice to provide educational services.

Interestingly, the first recommendation for reform, referring to strengthening performance measures and assessing quality over quantity, echoes what Daniel Mears (2000) called for (see “Juvenile Justice Reforms: Effective or Not?”) more than 10 years ago. This 2011-2012 report speaks to the fact that we still have a long way to go with juvenile justice reform in Texas.

Legislator’s Guide to the Issues: Juvenile Justice by Marc Levin, Texas Public Policy Foundation (2011). http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2011-JuvenileJustice-CEJ-ml.pdf