Three primary categories of youth are found in literature that addresses at-risk or high-risk youth:

	Those at whom primary delinquency prevention programs are targeted: that is, those who have not committed illegal acts but who have risk factors associated with the potential for delinquent behaviors.
	Those on whom secondary prevention efforts are focused: that is, those who are at risk of delinquent behaviors (e.g., because of drug and alcohol abuse, parental abuse and neglect, school misconduct, and negative peer group associations) and who may have come in contact with the juvenile justice system as nonoffenders (e.g., as victims of child abuse or neglect) or as status offenders.
	Those who have committed delinquent acts and on whom intervention programs are focused to interrupt the progression of delinquent behaviors and prevent recidivism.

The proceedings of the Task Force were focused on “court-involved youth,” those who have committed status offenses or delinquent acts. Delinquent acts typically fall into three categories: crimes against persons, crimes against property, and crimes related to substance abuse.

Status offenses may include behaviors such as running away from home, truancy, ungovernability, curfew violations, and underage drinking. Sometimes youth charged with this category of offense are placed under juvenile supervision until the situation is resolved; however, most cases are treated as child welfare cases.

Important characteristics vary within the population of court-involved youth. These factors include:

	Age at onset of delinquent behaviors.
	Number of offenses.
	Severity of offense.
	Penetration in the system (previous levels of involvement with the juvenile justice system, e.g., diversion, home supervision, community corrections, or residential placement).
	Recidivism.

The level of severity of the delinquent behavior dictates which court-mandated sanctions (involving placement, supervision, and restitution) are applied and where jurisdictional control (i.e., local, State, confined facility, or community corrections) is placed. The number of previous offenses is typically considered, especially for youth whose offenses continue or worsen.

Profile Information

More than 2.8 million arrests of persons under the age of 18 were made in 1997, representing about 9.3 percent of the U.S. population between the ages of 10 and 17.¹ An estimated 2.6 million arrests of persons under the age of 18 were made in 1998.² The data provided below summarize statistics associated with these court-involved youth:

	One in twenty arrests of juveniles in 1997 was for a violent crime of aggravated assault, robbery, forcible rape, or murder. One in eleven arrests of juveniles involved youth under the age of 13. Sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds accounted for 48 percent of the arrests. Caucasians represented 71 percent of all juvenile arrests. African American youth represented 26 percent of all juvenile arrests.
	In 1998, Caucasians represented 55 percent, and African Americans 42 percent, of juvenile arrests for violent crimes. One in seven arrests was for an alcohol or drug offense (i.e., drug abuse violation, driving under the influence, liquor law violation, or drunkenness). In 1998, African American youth were involved in a disproportionate number of arrests for murder (49 percent), forcible rape (39 percent), robbery (54 percent), aggravated assault (37 percent), burglary (24 percent), larceny-theft (26 percent), motor vehicle theft (36 percent), weapons (32 percent), drug abuse violations (32 percent), and curfew and loitering (27 percent). Caucasian youth accounted for 70 percent, and African American youth 27 percent, of property crime arrests.
	Fifty-eight percent of those in formally processed delinquency cases were adjudicated delinquent in 1996.

African American youth constitute a relatively high proportion of court-involved youth, compared with their proportion of the total youth population. This circumstance pervades the juvenile justice system at all levels, resulting in higher confinement rates for African Americans than for other youth. This imbalance is critical to discussions regarding labor market attachment, especially given the continued high unemployment rate of young African American males. The imbalance also has implications for program development. Culturally sensitive programming must be a primary consideration for program developers.

Offenders who begin their illegal activity early and remain active for an extended period are more likely to enter the adult (criminal) justice system than youth whose delinquent behavior is limited to a few incidents. The risk and public safety factors that are associated with repeat offenders, especially repeat violent offenders, also affect the extent to which court-involved youth may participate in the workforce.

Characteristics of Court-Involved Youth Some of the characteristics typically associated with court-involved youth include the following: Lack of a stable family environment. Lack of a family support system or poor family relationships. Abusive family relationships, including sexual abuse. Lack of attachment to school and community. Poor school performance (e.g., low grade point average, history of being retained, basic skills at least two grade levels below expected grade level, history of truancy, and persistent tardiness). Poverty. Early parenthood. Negative peer group influences, including gang-related behaviors. Early experimentation with illegal substances (e.g., alcohol and drugs). Persistent alcohol and drug abuse. Involvement with the drug culture. Behavioral disorders (e.g., antisocial or asocial behaviors and lack of self-control). Absence of positive adult role models. Limited social skills. Mental health issues. Poor self-esteem/underdeveloped sense of self-worth. Delayed developmental stages. Health issues, including those related to sexual activity. Poor communication skills.

Factors Affecting Offender Status

If a court-involved youth is charged with a subsequent violation of the law, he or she is considered a recidivist. However, a youth may be given increased sanctions or returned to a more secure environment even without committing another crime if he or she has violated the terms of a consent decree, probation, or parole. Some examples of these violations include failure to appear for an appointment with the probation or parole officer, find employment, reenroll in school, or comply with treatment requirements (e.g., mental health or substance abuse counseling); chronic truancy; and/or reinvolvement in gang-related or substance abuse behaviors. In some instances these youth are placed under house arrest or may be returned to a commitment facility.

In other instances, a youth may be charged with an offense that was committed prior to the current one, and this circumstance may result in a change in supervisory status of the youth. A new charge and its subsequent disposition may have significant influence on the development of consistent treatment plans and can reduce the likelihood of youth benefiting from or participating in education or vocational preparation programs.

Adding to the complicated nature of charges and jurisdictional control are family circumstances and community support systems. An evaluation of these factors often enters into placement decisions. Court-involved youth may be placed on probation, assigned to a community corrections program, committed to a secure residential correctional facility, and subsequently put in aftercare. Depending on the course of action taken and the State in which it is taken, youth and their families may find themselves embroiled in the complexities of multiple systems, spanning executive and judiciary branches, county and State levels of government, and juvenile justice, education, and child welfare agencies. The complexity and fragmentation of these systems tend to work against the collaboration and coordination among multiple agencies that are essential to consistent, efficient, and effective interventions, such as those addressing employment and education.

Issues Centered on Age

Age is another factor in working with court-involved youth. Legally, the age at which the youth commits a particular crime can determine whether the youth falls under the jurisdiction of the juvenile justice system or the adult (criminal) justice system. The upper age limit of juvenile court jurisdiction in delinquency matters is defined by State statute. In most States, the upper limit is 17. However, in 8 States, the upper limit is 16, and in 3 States, it is 15. Further, many States have provisions to treat youth as if they were adults for specific violent crimes. For example, in Vermont, youth as young as 10 can be processed through the adult (criminal) justice system; in Montana, the age limit is 12, and in Georgia, Illinois, Mississippi, and North Carolina, the age limit is 13.

The classification “youthful offender” often refers to youth ages 18 to 25, who may be separated from older adults in a correctional facility, but who fall under the jurisdiction of the adult (criminal) justice system. In some States (e.g., California), a youth may be retained in a youth facility beyond his or her 18th birthday, until the expiration of the sentence or until the youth reaches the age of 24. In other instances, youth may be administratively transferred from a youth facility to an adult facility at the age of 18.

The age range of youth in juvenile facilities presents challenges for designers of workforce preparation programs, especially as age relates to labor market involvement, program services, and systems collaboration. Youth between the ages of 10 and 13 require significantly different sets of treatment and skills programming than those between the ages of 16 and 17, regardless of the nature of the delinquent acts for which the youth are confined.

Programming is further complicated by the varied age limits for services within the education, workforce development, and social service systems. Most public school K–12 education systems are mandated to provide services until an individual attains a high school diploma or until the individual reaches his or her 21st birthday. Individuals are considered eligible for enrollment in Workforce Investment Act (WIA) youth services until they reach the age of 22. Further information about WIA, which was to be fully implemented in all States by July 1, 2000, is provided in the chapter “Overview of the Workforce Development System.” Contact information is provided in appendix D. Many social service programs, including those funded through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, use age 24 as the upper limit for eligibility for youth services.

The implications of age disparities among the various systems and programs that affect court-involved youth are discussed in later chapters of this Report.