Juvenile Justice Task Force

enforcement, the court, probation, schools, social service agencies, religious organizations, and businesses. Utah unfortunately only receives approximately $181,000 per year for Title V programs. She said there are very few communities who attempt to apply for these funds because of the requirements.

    Ms. Burke said another area that the task force may want to consider is how peer courts or teen courts can be involved in prevention. There are currently nine teen courts in Utah, and there is a need for the board of Juvenile Court Judges and the Legislature to review the role of these courts. She said there have been reports that some courts have been handling felony cases and others are charging community fines. She questioned if this was an appropriate role for a peer court.

4.    Youth Mentoring Programs

    Dr. Thomas Lee and Dr. Glen Jenson, Utah State University, distributed the handout "The Asset Approach" and presented an overview on The Youth and Families with Promise Program that has been funded by the Utah Board of Juvenile Justice. He said that this year, through the legislative process, additional funding has been made available to the Utah State University Extension to expand the mentoring program. He explained that the program is a two level mentoring approach with college-aged mentors working with the identified youth and retired-aged mentors working with the parents. The program is based on building assets in a youth's life. He said the protective factor and asset approach helps young people make wise decisions, choose positive paths, and grow up to be competent, caring, and responsible.

    Dr. Lee said the developmental assets are grouped into eight categories: support, empowerment, boundaries and expectations, constructive use of time, commitment to learning, positive values, social competencies, and positive identity. He indicated that a youth who spends at least four nights a week at home is much less likely to be involved in delinquent behavior. He said the accumulation of assets in young people's lives can influence their choices, but too few youth experience many of these assets. Only 25 of the 40 assets are experienced by less than half of the youth surveyed.

    Dr. Jenson continued with the presentation stressing that the asset framework includes families, schools, neighborhoods, congregations, and all organizations, institutions, and individuals in a community; everyone can play a role in building assets for youth. He explained the roles and criteria for selecting mentors in the asset development program.

    Dr. Van Vleet asked about the cost for the asset program in the counties. Dr. Jenson said it costs around $30,000 to fund a project in a given county with 40-45 youth for a school year.

    Ms. Jeanne Lund, Chair of the Utah Mentor Network, distributed handouts that explained the history, mission and goals, and membership criteria for the Utah Mentor Network mentoring program. She said the Utah Mentor Network was established in September 1994 when there was an influx of community involvement and people wanting to become involved in mentoring. Groups that were already established felt the need for criteria for screening mentors to protect the young people and their parents. She identified fourteen agencies that have mentoring programs. The mission of the Utah Mentor Network is to obtain, organize, and share resources among mentoring programs to meet the needs of mentees and mentors.

    Mr. Dalton said the problem the juvenile justice system faces is finding enough mentors that can pass the screening and will be committed to helping the youth. He suggested that the mentoring referral process work in conjunction with the site-based coordination teams in the FACT process for local interagency councils.

    Ms. Roz McGee, Utah Children, said that the mentoring network and the mentoring approach is a good example of community-based collaborative problem solving. She noted how the network created an appropriate pathway for the interested community member to get connected quickly with the mentoring service and establish a relationship with a child.

5.    Parents as Teachers

    Ms. SueCarol Robinson, State Office of Education, distributed the handouts "Parents as Teachers (PAT), A Home-School-Community Partnership that Works" and "A Missouri Success Story." She informed the task force that PAT is an early childhood parent education and family support program designed to empower parents to give their child the best possible start in life. The home-school-community partnership provides parents with information on child development from birth to age five and suggests learning opportunities that encourage language and intellectual growth and the development of physical and social skills. She explained the success Missouri has experienced with the PAT program and how school districts and parents have become involved.

    Ms. Donna Anderson, Coordinator, Parents as Teachers Program, Salt Lake City School District, distributed the handout "Family Participation Report 1997-1998." She said there are sixteen part-time people with extensive training that go into the community who have the same ethnic and cultural background as the families they serve. This program is based on research conducted on the brain development of children. During each visit the mentor focuses on a particular stage of development and teaches the parents how to appropriately stimulate the brain at that time. Mentors model behaviors for parents, building upon the strengths of the family and encouraging the nurturing of the children. The PAT program is now in San Juan County, Granite District, and the Salt Lake City School District. The program includes working with families in

homeless shelters, which has shown much success. She reported that the estimated cost per family for 12 visits per year was $440.

    Chair Haymond suggested pursuing legislation which would appropriate funding to implement the Parents as Teachers program statewide.

    Ms. Robinson suggested also preparing substantive legislation to put the program structure in statute.

6.    Compulsory Education and Educational Neglect

    Mr. Scott W. Reed, Division Chief, Child Protection Division, Office of Attorney General, said Utah's child welfare statute has become a Cadillac version of child welfare statutes since the passage of HB 265. However, when it comes to compulsory education and educational neglect statutes, Utah has a Volkswagen with a flat tire. He presented an overview of the two statutes and identified the problems with each.

    Mr. Reed reviewed Title 53A, Chapter 11, Students in Public Schools, which requires the state to prove that a child has failed to make adequate educational progress and that school personnel have done everything required to address the lack of progress. In addition, the state has to prove in juvenile court, by clear and convincing evidence, that the child is at least two or more years behind the local school age group expectation and that the child is not receiving special educational services or systematic remediation efforts designed to correct the problem. He explained that with the time line involved in adjudicating an educational neglect case it could take 22 to 32 weeks to complete the process.

    Mr. David Weiskopf, Deputy Weber County Attorney, expressed concern with the process and limitations of the statute within which attorneys have to work regarding truancy. He explained the difficulty of proving that a youth is habitually truant, that the youth's failure to be in school is in defiance of parents and school authorities, and that the parents and school have exhausted their efforts to address the truancy. Because of the difficulty in proving all three aspects of a truancy case, most attorneys will not pursue prosecution.

    Chair Haymond said there is not enough money to build the evidence package required to prove truancy and educational neglect.

    Mr. Reed concluded that only a handful of these types of cases have been brought to the Salt Lake County attorney for prosecution in the last several years. He proposed that the task force consider a comprehensive approach in dealing with these issues by developing a mechanism to immediately address truancy and give an opportunity for correction at the lowest level while involving parents as quickly as possible. The state needs to intervene under a petition

for educational neglect in juvenile court without bearing the burden of proving that a child is two years behind in school and without providing the panoply of defenses that are available to parents in the statute.

    Mr. James L. Wilson, Associate General Counsel, noted that the Education Interim Committee had reviewed these issues during the 1997 interim as part of a legislative proposal sponsored by Rep. Bordeaux, which attempted to deal with truancy at two levels: issuing truancy citations to truant students and providing penalties to adults who failed to comply with the state's compulsory education laws. The proposal was modified a number of times, but failed to pass during the 1998 General Session. Major concerns with the legislation included determining which court should have jurisdiction over both students and parents and how to deal with students who had legitimate reasons for being out of school, such as home-schooled students and students in year-round schools who are "off track." He indicated that the task force may wish to consider strengthening the administrative options in dealing with truants, such as student peer courts, while at the same time modifying or streamlining the process for dealing with parents or guardians of students who appear to be violating the compulsory education or educational neglect statutes.

    Ms. Camille Anthony, Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, pointed out that regardless of where the jurisdiction ends up, a referral or information has to be given to the juvenile court so that a record of behavior can be established for the youth.

7.    Possible Committee Action Items

    Chair Haymond referred to the handout "Possible Committee Action Items" for the task force to decide what actions they would like to address.

    Mr. Dalton suggested having the juvenile justice working group make specific recommendations for the next meeting. He also made the recommendation to have the attorneys prepare a model guideline regarding truancy and educational neglect.

8.    Adjournment

    MOTION: At 3:30 p.m., Mr. Dalton moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously with Sen. Hillyard, Sen. Hull, Sen. Tanner, and Ms. Williams absent for the vote.