Public Safety 2000: Barriers

Studies show that the precursors to crime occur early in the lives of serious offenders (Loeber & Farrington, 1998). However, by law, the juvenile system cannot deal with delinquency by youth below the age of 10, and there is no alternative agency that is responsible for delinquency by younger juveniles. Consequently, there is a fragmented and limited system of services for troubled youth below the age of 10 (Mauer, 1999).

As was mentioned previously, from what we know of the prevention system, it appears that Austin/Travis County has the types of programs, if not slots, that are needed by troubled youth. Barriers to the crime prevention "system" are not limited to a need for new types of programs, but rather there needs to be a change in the manner in which current programs are delivered.

Despite the fact that children at risk of offending typically have multiple risk factors (see Table 3), the prevention "system" often does not assess children to determine all of their needs and treat them and their families in a holistic manner. If only one risk factor is addressed in a child that has several, the risk of offending is not greatly reduced (Loeber & Farrington, 1998).

In addition to the lack of assessment and holistic intervention, some prevention services are not provided long enough to have long-lasting results. Often prevention and intervention programs provide only a few days or hours of intervention. Despite good intentions, this duration may not be long enough to permanently change behavior (Loeber & Farrington, 1998).

Finally, another barrier to success of the prevention "system" is lack of funding. Studies show that treatment is a more effective, and often less costly, approach to addressing crime than is incarceration, yet much more money is put into incarceration than into prevention. (See Expenditures section.)

JUSTICE SYSTEMS

In order to determine the greatest barriers to success for the Travis County juvenile and adult criminal justice systems, Travis County Health, Human Services, and Veterans Service's Research and Planning Division met with juvenile and adult criminal justice system experts. During these focus group meetings, the issues listed in Table 12 were identified as barriers to the systems. Most of the barriers are common to both the juvenile and adult systems.

Table 12.
Barriers to the Travis County Juvenile and Adult Criminal Justice Systems

Barrier	Juvenile System	Adult System
Lack of alternatives to incarceration	X	X
Repeat offenders; recidivism	X	X
Lack of collaboration among agencies and entities	X	X
Lack of family support	X
Lack of public awareness, understanding; credibility	X	X
Lack of access to services	X	X
Lack of economic independence; poverty; no living wage	X	X
Racial bias	X	X
Cultural/language differences; communication problems	X	X
Lack of consensus on goals and purpose of system	X	X
Lack of money/funding/resources	X	X
Challenges to parents and their children: education, supervision, external circumstances	X	X
Drug use and lack of treatment funding	X	X
Laws/legislative process confusing and constantly changing	X	X
Lack of a user-friendly system	X	X
Lack of research; unable to measure and track success	X	X
Offender-directed rather than victim-driven system		X
Lack of support for children, esp. teenagers	X
Lack of resources for defendants with mental disabilities		X
System is inflexible, overburdened, and too narrowly focused		X

Source: Focus groups conducted by Travis County HHS & VS - Research & Planning with system experts

One barrier identified during the focus group meetings is racial bias. A recent study by the United States Justice Department found that Black and Hispanic youth are treated more severely at every step of the juvenile justice system than are white youth charged with comparable crimes (Butterfield, April 26, 2000). The study found that minorities are more likely to be arrested, held in jail, sent to court for trial, convicted, and given longer prison sentences than are white youth. The study did not address reasons for the differences in treatment of minorities and Whites.

Another barrier discussed during the focus group meeting is that, at some facilities, inmates do not receive the programming (e.g., GED classes, vocational training, substance abuse treatment, cognitive restructuring) that they need while they are incarcerated. For instance, despite the high needs that Community Justice Center (state jail) inmates have for programming, few (from 11% to 27%, depending upon program area) inmates released between March 1998 and February 1999 had completed programming prior to release. Two-thirds of CJC inmates, for example, did not have a high school diploma or GED at intake. Despite the availability of programming, only 4% of these inmates earned a GED while incarcerated (Wilkinson, et. al., January 2000). The lack of programming may be due, in part, to a lack of motivation by the offender to participate.

In addition to the lack of participation in programming, many inmates who do receive programming do not show improvements. For CJC inmates released between March 1998 and February 1999, the assessed need for required programs was almost as high, and in some program areas higher, at discharge than at intake. This finding suggests that programs at the CJC had little positive impact on inmates (Wilkinson, et. al., January 2000).

The need for programming appears to be higher in some areas than in others. Many system experts pointed to the lack of substance abuse treatment for offenders and those at-risk of offending, despite the fact that the majority of adult offenders are under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of their arrest (Superville, January 8, 1998). Although drug treatment capacity in Texas prisons has been expanded in recent years (Yahoo! News, February 1, 2000), waiting lists for treatment still exist. Also, due to budget cuts by the Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, substance abuse treatment options have recently decreased, and some treatment slots in Travis County may have to be cut (Brooks, February 29, 2000).

As with substance abuse, mental health needs are not always adequately addressed by the justice system (Heikes, February 2000). If the mental illness leads to criminal behavior that results in arrest, individuals become part of the criminal justice system where mental health services are often lacking. Furthermore, national studies indicate that, once released, untreated mentally ill inmates are more likely to be arrested than are other types of offenders. Furthermore, mentally ill offenders who receive treatment for their illnesses are less likely to recidivate than those who do not (Heikes, et. al., February 2000).

In addition to the lack of participation in programming while incarcerated, there is a general lack of reintegration programs for offenders upon release into the community (Washington Post, April 23, 2000). Currently, parole officers are overworked and social service agencies are under-funded, leaving a lack of comprehensive services to assist in integrating releasees into the community (Washington Post, April 23, 2000). The most serious gaps in services for those individuals are housing¹² and employment assistance. Housing needs stem, in part, from reductions in transition times for releasees in settings such as halfway houses and a toughening of rules designed to keep drug dealers out of public housing (Washington Post, April 23, 2000). Without housing and employment options, recidivism rates for released offenders are unlikely to decrease.

In addition to the focus groups, Research and Planning distributed a survey to community members to get their input on the justice system. When asked, "In your opinion, what are the worst things about the justice system in Travis County?", many community members responded:

VICTIM SERVICES

Numerous groups within Texas and Austin/Travis County have studied barriers to effective service delivery for victims of crime. The Texas Crime Victims' Institute (1999), for example, surveyed 969 victims across Texas regarding negative experiences with the criminal justice system. Results of the survey are included in Table 13.

Table 13.
Negative Aspects of Criminal Justice System According to Surveyed Texas Victims

The statewide findings listed in Table 13 are mirrored by local reports. The main weaknesses in the current victims services system in Austin/Travis County that were listed in Austin/Travis County Victim Services 2000 Year One (Pelaez-Wagner & Torres, June 1999) are presented in Table 14.

As is listed in Table 14, one barrier to providing victims services is a lack of funding. Some of the victim services providers operate with waiting lists, due to funding constraints. SafePlace, for example, reported that they are constantly expanding shelter space to meet the immediate safety and crisis needs of families, that they have more requests for prevention programming in schools than they can meet, and that their waiting list for children who have been sexually abused or are living in violent families and need counseling grows daily. They also stated that there are not enough Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners to conduct rape exams in hospitals throughout Austin.

In addition to the barriers found within the victim services system in the traditional justice system, there are also barriers within the child welfare system. Each year, in almost one-half of all confirmed cases of child abuse, families do not receive any type of services to prevent re-abuse. Forty to fifty percent (40-50%) of the children who die from abuse and neglect in the US had previous referrals to agencies mandated by law to protect them. The Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services claims these problems are due to a lack of resources and overburdened child caseworkers (Griest, January 7, 1999). Child welfare officials suggest hiring more caseworkers and improving their training so at-risk children are better identified. There are also suggestions to raise case worker salaries. Starting salaries in Texas are about $23,000 a year, and more than one in three entry-level caseworkers leave in search of less stressful, higher-paying positions, three times the turnover rate for other state employees.

Table 14.
Main Weaknesses of Current Victim Services System in Austin/Travis County

Issue	Description
Restricted Information Delivery	The current system is not user-friendly. It is not easy for victims to know what questions to ask, who to ask for information, or where to obtain assistance if their rights are not being met.
Lack of Coordinated Services	Lack of computer technology and a common MIS to log and track information about victims Lack of funds and staff. Communication and information sharing between and among service providers are limited and sporadic. Additional memoranda of understanding are needed to clarify responsibilities and establish consistent protocol among loosely connected organizations.
Lack of Funding and Staff	The state does not provide any funding for state-mandated victim assistance programs. There is insufficient staff and time for monitoring and assessing services. There is a dwindling pool of volunteers and recruitment, training and utilization of volunteers.
Insufficient Training	Not every agency has a training program for professional and support staff.

12. Refer to the Community Action Network's Housing Assessment and the Through the Roof report for more information on larger community housing issues that affect offenders

Barriers

PREVENTION

JUSTICE SYSTEMS

VICTIM SERVICES