**Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency**

**Prevention Quarterly Meeting**

**March 2, 2007**

**U.S. Department of Education, Barnard Auditorium**

**400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202**

**Abstract**

At the March 2007 Quarterly Meeting of the Coordinating Council on
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, two Council working groups
that were formed as an outgrowth of the December planning meeting
updated Council members on their activities and presented
recommendations for Council action. Following these presentations, the
Council voted to:

-   Proceed with the Federal Coordination Pilot Project, which will (1)
    bring together resources from each agency to positively impact
    at-risk youth in one or two communities and (2) develop a model for
    effective federal collaboration that can be replicated in other
    communities.

-   Proceed with the Comprehensive Community Initiatives and Technical
    Assistance Inventory Project, which will conduct an inventory of
    federal comprehensive community initiatives and the technical
    assistance dedicated to support them.

Council members then heard from Judge David Bell, Chief Judge, Orleans
Parish Juvenile Court, and Monique Preau, Director, Education Support
Services, Recovery School District, about recovery efforts in
post-Katrina New Orleans. The panelists talked about the progress that
has been made and highlighted the tremendous need that still exists for
services and programs for the city's children.

In addition, several attendees provided legislative and program updates
on behalf of their agencies.

Action items emanating from the March 2007 Council meeting are as
follows:

-   The Council voted to proceed with the Federal Coordination Pilot
    Project as proposed and to authorize staff to contact Council
    members for a vote on the site(s).

-   The Council voted to proceed with the Comprehensive Community
    Initiatives and Technical Assistance Inventory Project as proposed.

-   Mr. Flores will continue to talk with member agencies about how best
    to bring federal resources together to serve at-risk youth in New
    Orleans.

**Meeting Summary**

**Call to Order**

***J. Robert Flores, Vice Chair, Coordinating Council; Administrator,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ)***

Mr. Flores called the March 2 quarterly meeting of the Coordinating
Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (Council) to
order and welcomed members of the Council and the public. He provided a
brief overview of the meeting agenda and reported that the public
meeting will be followed by a closed Council planning team session. He
invited members of the audience to submit written questions and comments
and said there would be opportunities for discussion following the
presentations.

He introduced Pamela F. Rodriguez, a newly appointed practitioner member
of the Council. Ms. Rodriguez is executive vice president of TASC, Inc.,
of Illinois, a statewide nonprofit case management agency that serves
adults and youth with substance abuse and mental health disorders. Mr.
Flores welcomed Ms. Rodriguez and the skills that she brings to the
Council.

Mr. Flores thanked the U.S. Department of Education (ED) for hosting the
meeting and introduced Deborah Price, Assistant Deputy Secretary, Office
of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, ED.

**Opening Remarks**

***Deborah Price, Assistant Deputy Secretary, Office of Safe and
Drug-Free Schools, ED***

Ms. Price welcomed Council members and said that ED is excited to host
the Council meeting. She observed that much of the Council's work
touches the work of ED and her office as they work to make schools
safer, more secure, and healthier.

**Report from Council Working Groups**

Robin Delany-Shabazz, Director, Concentration of Federal Efforts, OJJDP,
reported that the Council held a planning meeting on November
30--December 1 in which participants identified priority areas and
activities for the Council to focus on during the next 12 to 24 months.
As an outgrowth of the planning meeting, two working groups were
formed---the Pilot Project Working Group and the Comprehensive Community
Initiatives Inventory Working Group. The groups reported on the status
of their projects.

**Federal Coordination Pilot Project**

***Ronald Ashford, Director, HOPE VI Community and Supportive Services,
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)***

Mr. Ashford reported that the Pilot Project Working Group (Ron Ashford
and Maria Queen, HUD; Richard Morris, U.S. Department of Labor \[DOL\];
John Foster-Bey, Corporation for National and Community Service
\[CNCS\]; Martha Moorehouse, Lisa Trivits, and Sarah Potter, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services \[HHS\]; Suzanne Le Menestrel,
U.S. Department of Agriculture \[USDA\]; and Robin Delany-Shabazz, DOJ)
has put additional detail to the concept outlined at the
November-December planning meeting. The project would (1) bring together
resources from each agency to positively impact at-risk youth in one or
two communities and (2) develop a model for effective federal
collaboration that can be replicated in other communities.

The end product will be a set of core, guiding principles and best
practices for coordinated federal support. Expected outcomes include (1)
better and more efficient access to and mobilization of existing public
and private resources (short-term); (2) a defined, replicable model for
effective federal collaboration in support of state and local youth
development change efforts (intermediate); and (3) measurable
improvements in youth outcomes (long-term).

Initially, the Council would select one or two sites that most meet a
set of criteria including: site is already receiving federal funding
from multiple agencies and would benefit from federal coordination of
resources, site has successful history of cross-system collaboration,
project has top-level community support, and site demonstrates urgent
need or other necessity. The Council would also undertake a
developmental selection process that builds on the experiences of DOL's
Shared Vision for Youth to identify a second set of three to five pilot
sites using the policy academy/collaboration laboratory model.

The project would require no new program money but would require each
agency to commit sufficient staff and/or contract resources to sustain
and manage the project.

The proposed timeline for the short-term selection process is as
follows:

-   March 22: Agencies nominate sites.

-   May 15: Pilot site(s) selected. Pilot Project Working Group forwards
    recommendations to Council. Members are polled and selection(s)
    made. Meetings held at selected site(s) to discuss project and
    develop action plan.

-   August 1: Rollout/launch of pilot site.

Mr. Ashford referred members to the materials in their packets for
additional detail on the project.

***Questions and Comments***

Mr. Flores observed that the Council has worked to find ways to better
coordinate federal efforts, and this project is a natural progression of
the Council's work. This project would build on the work that individual
agencies are already doing and focus it on a select community. The
project will examine whether collaboration translates into better
results for children. Mr. Flores emphasized that the project will focus
on a community that is "ready" (with existing collaborations and
cross-agency relationships) so that results can be measured more
quickly. Council agencies will be asked to identify these communities.

Robin Delany-Shabazz invited members to ask questions and share comments
on the proposed project. The following questions were raised.

*Can you provide a more detailed explanation of the Shared Vision for
Youth (SVY) project?*

Richard Morris explained that SVY takes a developmental approach. The
project demonstrates coordination/collaboration around youth issues at
the federal level and encourages similar collaboration at the state
level. The Coordinating Council provided DOL and its partnering agencies
with funds to host several forums to help develop the collaborative
relationships that need to be in place at the state level. Sixteen
states participated in these forums, and now these state teams have been
invited to submit proposals for work in specific jurisdictions within
their state. The top state teams will be awarded funds, and other states
will receive technical assistance (TA) to improve their collaborative
efforts. Eventually all 16 states are expected to implement projects
that will demonstrate a Shared Youth Vision across agencies with the
support of a formal collaboration at the federal, state, and local
levels. Ms. Delany-Shabazz added that this project, while led by DOL,
represents a collaboration between a number of federal agencies.

*How is Shared Vision for Youth linked to the proposed Federal
Coordination Pilot Project?*

Mr. Morris responded that both projects emphasize working with
communities where collaboration is already taking place. So it seems
logical for the Federal Coordination Pilot Project to consider
communities in these 16 states in its selection process.

*Will the Coordinating Council make the final determination of sites?*

Mr. Ashford said that the Council will make the final determination. In
early May, members of the working group will contact Council members
with recommendations. If there is agreement among Council members, the
site(s) will be selected by May 15.

*What is the timeline for short-term outcomes?*

Ms. Delany-Shabazz said that it will probably take a couple of years to
(1) understand if collaboration at the federal level has an impact and
(2) develop a set of core, guiding principles. Mr. Morris observed that
it will take time to know if we have done a good job coordinating at the
federal level. However, other short-term outcomes will be available more
quickly (e.g., better and more efficient access to and mobilization of
existing resources). Mr. Ashford said that additional short-term
measures of success can be used, such as (1) getting all of the
organizations funded by member agencies to come together and establish a
working group or (2) increasing the number of youth served.

*At what point will this effort yield a set of core, guiding principles
or best practices for coordinated federal support?*

Richard Morris said that this might take 2 years. However, other
indicators and markers will be available sooner so the Council can make
midterm corrections if necessary.

David Eisner (CNCS) proposed that by August 1, when the project is
rolled out, a timeline should be developed for short-term, intermediate,
and long-term outcomes. He observed that the Council should commit to an
evaluation timeline by the time the project is launched.

***Council Vote***

It was moved and seconded to authorize the Council to proceed with the
Federal Coordination Pilot Project as proposed and to authorize staff to
contact Council members between meetings to get a vote on the site(s).
The motion was unanimously approved.

Mr. Flores observed that this is the first time that all nine member
agencies will work together in a community to target at-risk youth.
During the next few months, agency staff and practitioner members will
have the opportunity to provide input into the project and to propose
agency programs that might lend themselves to this project.

**Comprehensive Community Initiatives and Technical Assistance Inventory
Project**

***Sarah Potter, Policy Analyst, Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), HHS***

Sarah Potter reported for the Comprehensive Community Initiatives
Inventory Working Group, which includes Sarah Potter (HHS), Lisa Trivits
(HHS), Gary Quinn (HHS), Reynaldo Decerega (DOL), Winnie Reed (DOJ), Pam
Rodriquez (practitioner), and Robin Delany-Shabazz (DOJ).

The working group proposes to conduct an inventory of federal
comprehensive community initiatives (CCIs) and the TA dedicated to
support them. The group defined CCIs as local community interventions
that seek to improve the living conditions of individuals, families, and
communities through systems change. The groups will focus on CCIs that
include the following key components: broad-based, multisector
participation; long-term strategies and perspectives; focus on systems
change; family-centered, strengths-based approach; community
assessments; and effective use of data.

The project has two purposes: (1) to identify effective CCIs and
determine what TA is most useful and at what points in time, and (2) to
guide future federal implementation and support of CCIs and TA.

The inventory project could be linked with the Federal Coordination
Pilot Project in the following ways. In the short-term, the inventory
will determine whether CCIs exist in the pilot site(s) and conduct an
intensive review of them. In the long term, findings from the inventory
will support pilot project activities by providing more information
about what CCIs can achieve and what resources are required to support
them.

To implement this project, the working group proposes two possible
strategies:

1.  *Expansive approach.* Conduct a full inventory of CCIs and TA and
    evaluations conducted. This approach, which would take about 18
    months, would require 0.1 FTE across agency staff and \$125,000 to
    \$150,000 for contractor support.

2.  *Expedient approach.* Conduct a more abbreviated inventory. This
    approach, which would take about 1 year, would require 0.1 FTE
    across agency staff and \$75,000 to \$100,000 for contractor
    support.

Ms. Potter referred Council members to materials in their packets for a
more detailed explanation of the proposed project activities.

Ms. Potter said that if this proposal is approved by the Council, the
working group would request each agency to assign a point of contact for
the project. The group would then work with these individuals to gather
an initial list of CCIs that each agency has funded. She said that the
group would welcome participation from other federal agencies.

***Questions and Comments***

*In the handout, it appears that the sections on required resources for
the two approaches are out of order.*

Ms. Delany-Shabazz said that the sections were inadvertently switched
and that the information on resource requirements presented by Ms.
Potter is correct.

*Are any practitioners on the committee?*

Ms. Delany-Shabazz said that Pam Rodriguez is serving on the committee.

*When looking at CCIs, will the project look at state funds as well?*

Mr. Flores said that by definition, CCIs involve state and local
partners. So state grants and state-funded projects will be considered.

*For all sites, it is important to identify the source of all public
moneys, foundation moneys, local foundations, etc.*

Mr. Flores agreed, and pointed out that identifying funding sources is
listed in the project activities.

Mr. Flores commented that this project is exciting for several reasons.
(1) Each agency provides TA related to comprehensive community
strategies, and together the agencies spend enormous amounts for
overhead for TA contractors. As a result of this project, agencies will
have information about other agencies' TA providers with overlapping
goals in a given community. Agencies can increase the effective reach of
their limited TA budgets. (2) In addition, many CCIs are not succeeding
or meeting their goals. It will be helpful to identify which ones are
effective.

Bill Gibbons (practitioner member) suggested changing the name of the
second approach from "expedient" to "fast-track" approach.

***Council Vote***

Mr. Flores called for a Council vote on whether to proceed with the
proposed project. He observed that, because the Council's budget has not
yet been approved by Congress, the working group has proposed two
possible approaches. The Council's final budget will help determine
which approach to take.

It was moved and seconded to authorize the Council to proceed with the
Comprehensive Community Initiatives and Technical Assistance Inventory
Project as proposed. The motion was unanimously approved.

Richard Morris recognized the leadership and role of Robin
Delany-Shabazz in moving the two work groups forward.

**Recovery in the Gulf Coast: Nexus of Juvenile Justice and Education**

***Judge David Bell, Chief Judge, Orleans Parish Juvenile Court***

***Monique Preau, Director, Education Support Services, Recovery School
District***

***Bill Modzeleski, Moderator, Associate Assistant Deputy Secretary,
Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, ED***

Mr. Flores said that OJJDP recently received a request from the U.S.
Attorneys Office for assistance addressing juvenile justice issues, lack
of detention space, and the need for TA in the wake of Hurricane
Katrina. OJJDP staff have been working with professionals in the Gulf
Coast to identify the best way to help. He observed that the panelists
will talk about the progress that has been made in the region but also
about remaining needs. For example, when summer arrives, there will be a
need to keep children engaged in positive activities. He challenged
member agencies to think about how they can use their existing programs
and TA opportunities to effectively meet some of the needs identified by
the panelists.

Bill Modzeleski, panel moderator, said that he had spoken with the
panelists about recovery efforts in New Orleans and that they agreed on
a number of issues. The situation in New Orleans is "getting better,"
but the city still has a long way to go. All of the problems will not be
resolved tomorrow---it will take time. A job that is complex and
difficult under normal circumstances is even more complex and difficult
in post-Katrina New Orleans. And finally, one cannot appreciate the
extent of the city's devastation without seeing it firsthand.

**Juvenile Justice**

Mr. Modzeleski introduced David Bell, Chief Judge of Orleans Parish
Juvenile Court. Judge Bell said that he has come before the Council with
seven specific requests:

1.  The Youth Study Center (youth detention center) was flooded and is
    uninhabitable. Currently the parish has 20 beds for juveniles
    (pre-Katrina there were 108 beds and rollover went into the adult
    system, which the court does not want to happen again). From OJJDP,
    he requested funds from the Juvenile Accountability Block Grants
    Program to help rebuild the detention facility.

2.  He requested the transfer or long-term lease to the Orleans Parish
    Juvenile Court of a HUD-controlled site adjacent to the detention
    center for emergency shelter beds, transitional housing, and reentry
    post-adjudication. Currently 18 to 20 percent of the juveniles in
    the parish are homeless and without parents.

3.  From ED, he requested the use of a school site adjacent to the
    detention facility to operate a year-round school for older
    juveniles with educational difficulties. Currently, some 16- and
    17-year-olds are enrolled in elementary schools.

4.  From DOL, he requested assistance setting up a vocational-technical
    school for older youth in another nearby facility. Because New
    Orleans is experiencing a shortage of carpenters, welders,
    electricians, plumbers, etc., kids with a GED and a skill could be
    placed immediately in a job.

5.  From HHS, he requested funds to provide mental health and substance
    abuse treatment and environmental health for youth. Since Katrina,
    the court has seen a major increase in self-medication among youth.
    Many of these kids are experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder,
    are homeless, have been moved around, have lost their families, and
    their needs are great.

6.  He requested TA collecting and managing data to inform
    decisionmaking.

7.  He asked the Council to invite him to its next quarterly meeting to
    tell him what will be done to address the needs he identified at
    this meeting. He observed that the Council is an interagency
    collaboration looking for a site and pleaded that they consider New
    Orleans.

Judge Bell said that before Katrina, Orleans Parish Juvenile Court had
26,500 open juvenile delinquency cases. After Katrina, the court's
budget was cut by 80 percent, and 70 percent of the employees were laid
off. The court reopened on September 12, 2005, following the August 29
flooding of the city. During the next 90 days the court serviced
approximately 13,500 youth (that is, the court located kids across the
country, located their families, brought them in for dispositional
hearings, modified sentences and placements, did family reunification
planning, assessed educational status, etc.). The court had the
assistance of the district attorney, public defender, Juvenile Justice
Project of Louisiana, social services, Department of Health and
Hospitals, and others to get juveniles released and reunified with their
families. Then in January 2006, when the courthouse reopened, volunteers
from law schools across the country helped the court to screen,
reassess, and close another 10,000 cases that were before the court.
Currently the court has 1,500 open cases. Judge Bell observed that the
court is doing its job with limited resources, but it is "maxed out."
Currently Orleans Parish has only 20 detention beds, 3 mental health
providers, and the juvenile bureau has only 6 juvenile officers.

Judge Bell observed that self-medication is a major problem among youth
and estimated that 50 percent are self-medicating. In addition,
homelessness is a major problem. Juveniles who were separated from their
parents during the evacuation have returned and are living in vacant
buildings or with friends. There is a need for emergency shelter beds
and transitional housing where homeless youth can receive a health
assessment, drug screen, and educational assessment while their family
is being located. Then when they are reunified with their families, a
plan would be in place to help them reintegrate into the family and the
educational system.

Judge Bell concluded by saying, "All I need from you \[federal
agencies\] is what you already have."

**Education**

Mr. Modzeleski introduced Monique Preau, Director of Education Support
Services for the Recovery School District (RSD), Louisiana Department of
Education (DOE). Ms. Preau provided an overview of RSD's effort to
rebuild the New Orleans public schools and the challenges and obstacles
encountered. To date, 37 public schools have reopened in Orleans Parish;
of these, 20 are RSD-operated and 17 are charter schools.

The RSD was developed in response to the No Child Left Behind Act. RSD
was created in 2003 to allow the state to take over failing schools.
Following Hurricane Katrina, a special legislative session transferred
authority over 107 of 128 Orleans Parish public schools to RSD. At the
time, RSD had only two full-time employees.

In January 2006, three RSD charter schools reopened to accommodate
returning students. Working with the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) and contractors, DOE developed a two-track plan to reopen schools
(an immediate plan for additional schools to open in spring 2006 and a
longer-term plan for still more schools to open in the fall).
Demographers' estimates of the number of students who would return
varied widely, so DOE had no idea how many students to expect. As
contractors assessed and worked on the schools, they encountered
numerous delays due to decades of deferred maintenance and extensive
storm damage. Three more schools were scheduled to open in April;
however, the week before opening day, the schools were still facing a
shortage of teachers, the need for clearance from the fire marshal and
public health authorities, lack of bus drivers, and the inability to
obtain portable meals that would meet USDA standards. Against all odds,
the schools opened on April 18. At that point, the schools were still
being run from Baton Rouge.

By May 2006, the open schools were running fairly smoothly and DOE
shifted its focus to the upcoming school year. More children than
expected were returning to the city, and DOE estimated that it would
need to reopen an additional 20 to 25 schools in the fall. The DOE team
reassessed the schools, and there were serious doubts about many of the
facilities. Schools that had been vacant for so long were plagued by
theft, vandalism, mold and water damage, and violence. It was necessary
to ask the National Guard and other armed guards to secure the
facilities so contractors could safely work. Meanwhile, DOE increased
recruitment efforts for teachers and staff, upgraded registration to an
electronic system, and launched a national campaign to notify displaced
citizens about registration for the fall.

In July, the Office of Risk Management determined that the contents of
all schools (including desks, textbooks, computers, and telephones) had
to be removed and destroyed because they were considered hazardous. So
DOE had to develop replacement lists, bid contracts, and place orders
for equipment and supplies. Deferred maintenance issues emerged at the
sites, including termite damage, lead paint, asbestos tiles, and
substandard wiring. Meanwhile, high numbers of students were registering
for the fall.

In late August, DOE learned that four schools that were at full
occupancy would not be ready to open in September. As DOE worked to
transfer students registered for these schools into other schools,
registration of new and returning students continued at a record pace.

Schools were scheduled to open on September 7. On September 1,
contractors verified that several additional schools would not be ready
by opening day. Plans were quickly made to "platoon" high school
students (split shifts) and to bus some elementary students to the West
Bank of New Orleans (a lengthy commute). A couple of days before school
started, the Central Office opened. Meanwhile, up until the day school
started, students continued to register in high numbers.

The school year, which started September 7, got off to a rough start.
Because of platooning and bussing to alternate sites, buses picked up
children as early as 5:30 a.m. and dropped children off as late as 9
p.m. Most schools had no phones (so administrators were given cell
phones) or Internet access, many schools did not have books and
supplies, schools were short staffed, and there were problems with
buses. Initial episodes of violence including attacks on faculty and
staff pointed out the need for increased security. Parents complained
about buses breaking down, school violence, cold school lunches, lack of
books, etc.

By late fall, schools were moving toward a "new normal." The unfinished
schools opened, so platooning and long bus routes were discontinued.
Books, supplies, computers, and telephones were delivered, and hot meals
were served. The schools began planning for sports and carnival seasons.
However, discipline and absenteeism problems were increasing.

Large numbers of children continued to enroll, and by December 2006 the
schools had run out of space. Because of crowded conditions, there were
delays in placing students. Lawsuits were filed against RSD for not
placing children immediately. RSD began placing all students
immediately, which resulted in class sizes of 40--50 in many schools.
Other schools in Orleans Parish refused admission of new students and
counseled parents to withdraw "problematic" children and to re-enroll
them in RSD schools.

In winter 2006--2007, RSD established new discipline policies, opened an
alternative school, hired transition and behavior intervention
coordinators to help schools develop discipline plans, and developed
procedures for transitioning "overage" students. In addition, school
officials began working with the juvenile court to address overlapping
issues of concern.

RSD is striving to get children enrolled in school and to keep them
there. To achieve this goal, it is working to improve record procedures,
seeking additional mental health professionals, working to establish
school-based health centers, revising discipline policies and
procedures, and providing training in positive behavior support for
faculty and staff. Ms. Preau observed that the children of Orleans
Parish have seen and been through so much. They need to and deserve to
be in school, and they need extensive support.

Ms. Preau concluded by stating that, if there is one thing federal
agencies could do to help, she would ask for help with recordkeeping and
data-sharing capabilities. Student records were destroyed in the storm;
then students scattered across the nation, and RSD is having difficulty
retrieving student records from schools in other states. In addition,
there is a need for data-sharing capabilities among systems (educational
records, disciplinary records, medical records, information about
services needed and received, placement in foster care, contact with the
juvenile justice system, etc.). Children come into contact with many
systems, but the systems do not communicate with one another. She
commented that the need for systems to share data holds true not only
during disasters, but in everyday life. She urged federal agencies to
think about how to reinterpret federal laws such as the Family
Educational Rights and Privacy Act and the Health Insurance Portability
and Accountability Act in order to reduce barriers to information
sharing.

***Discussion: Implications, Challenges, and Opportunities for Member
Agencies***

Mr. Modzeleski thanked the panelists for their powerful presentations
and opened the floor for questions and discussion.

Judge Steven Jones said that in the early 1980s he had inherited a
system with no resources. He said that his court worked with not only
state and federal funders but also private organizations, corporations,
foundations, and faith-based communities to build facilities for
juvenile offenders. He asked Judge Bell if he had considered asking
private organizations to renovate the detention facility. Judge Bell
responded that there are few state and local resources for his court to
turn to. Eighty percent of the city is still unoccupiable. Businesses
have not reopened, and faith-based and private organizations have lost
their own facilities. In addition, five juvenile detention facilities in
Louisiana were destroyed in Katrina, so the state's resources are tight.
For the past 18 months, his program has been seeking funds from national
foundations.

In addition, Judge Bell emphasized that the court's needs go far beyond
bed space. In 1998, Orleans Parish had one of the worst juvenile courts
in the nation. They do not want to renovate broken down old buildings
and return to the old broken system. A goal has been to retrain judges
about making the proper decision about who to detain and how to detain
them. In addition to the need for more detention space, there is a
tremendous need for community treatment and emergency shelter beds.

Mr. Modzeleski asked Ms. Preau to comment on the involvement of the
private sector in education. Ms. Preau responded that the schools have
received assistance from private foundations. In addition, many
volunteers have traveled to New Orleans for short periods of time to
provide help in a variety of ways. She said that, although RSD must make
sure that what volunteers want to do is consistent with RSD needs, RSD
welcomes volunteers to come to the city to help its children.

Richard Morris asked Judge Bell about the age range of students who
would attend the proposed vocational-technical school. Judge Bell said
that it would serve students starting around the age of 15. By age 15,
some students are no longer manageable in a traditional classroom
environment and the plan is to place them in a nontraditional classroom
environment and to teach them something they like to do. The upper age
of juvenile jurisdiction for most crimes is 18. Mr. Morris said that
Louisiana is not one of DOL's 16 Share Youth Vision states, but he is
looking for avenues for DOL to help (such as registered apprenticeships)
that he can present to DOL leadership.

Mr. Morris asked Ms. Preau to describe RSD's alternative school. Ms.
Preau said that state law requires that children must be removed from
their original school for weapons, drugs, and attacks on faculty. RSD's
alternative school is currently limited to these children and does not
serve other "problematic" students. However, Orleans Parish has many
youth who have been living on their own and caring for other children,
so they have difficulty fitting into a traditional classroom setting.

Bill Gibbons asked Judge Bell to identify the top priority from his list
of requests for federal assistance. Judge Bell responded that his top
priority is emergency shelter beds/transitional housing. He said there
is a direct link between unsupervised juveniles in the community at
night and crime.

Mr. Gibbons asked Ms. Preau about school enrollments pre-Katrina and
today. She responded that before the storm 59,000 students were enrolled
in public schools in Orleans Parish; today there are about 30,000.

A meeting participant asked Ms. Preau about the upper age limit of
students in RSD. She responded that the high schools enroll students up
to age 21. Some are special education students, and some have returned
after being out of school. At the age of 21, a student is allowed to
remain in school if there is a chance that he or she can complete
diploma requirements within a year.

David Eisner said that he is very worried about what will happen this
summer. He is concerned that there may be a setback with the youth
population. Judge Bell responded that he shares the same fear. There are
many unsupervised children in the parish, and their only structure is
the school. Eighty percent of the city is still unoccupied, and when
school is not in session the abandoned buildings serve as a playground.
He noted that there is a lack of recreational programs for youth. The
site that he mentioned earlier has a large park, so it would be a good
place for recreational activities.

Ms. Preau said that RSD plans to provide breakfast and lunch (funded by
USDA) at the schools during the summer. RSD is trying to set up programs
and hopes to keep all 20 sites open this summer. However, it is facing
challenges such as the large age range (elementary schools serve
children from pre-kindergarten to grade 8) and transportation issues.
RSD is looking for funding sources and partners help provide summer
programs.

Pam Rodriguez said that she is happy to hear Judge Bell say that this is
an opportunity for the city to rebuild things the right way. She
requested that Judge Bell and Ms. Preau write down their requests for
federal assistance and send them to Robin Delany-Shabazz in the form of
a memo.

Judge Jones asked Judge Bell about Louisiana's transfer laws and whether
there has been an increase in the number of youth transferred to adult
court since Katrina. Judge Bell responded that at age 15 a juvenile can
be transferred into the adult system. Orleans Parish has not seen an
increase in transfers. It has, however, seen increases in
self-medication and possession of firearms per capita.

Mr. Modzeleski observed that the panelists' presentations had focused on
the youth in their two systems. He asked about the numbers of children
and youth in Orleans Parish who are not in school or in the juvenile
justice system. Judge Bell said the city doesn't know. Available
statistics do not include immigrant children, children of transient
workers, children who are hiding, etc. Ms. Preau agreed. She said that
many children move into the city with construction workers and live
there temporarily, and many enroll in schools and never show up. The
city's population is shifting constantly. She observed that many
children are not in school and haven't been for a long time.

Mr. Modzeleski thanked the panelists for their dedication and commitment
to the children of New Orleans.

Mr. Flores thanked the panelists for sharing their first-hand report
with the Council. Federal staff from Council agencies have visited New
Orleans during the past 18 months and have seen different aspects of the
city's devastation and needs. This presentation gives the Council a
common frame of reference and a common starting point.

**Legislative, Program, and Council Activity Updates and Other
Business**

**Proposed No Child Left Behind Act Reauthorization**

***Martha Snyder, Policy Advisor, Office of Planning, Evaluation and
Policy Development, ED***

Deborah Price introduced Martha Snyder, who discussed ED's *Building on
Results: A Blueprint for Strengthening the No Child Left Behind Act.*

Ms. Snyder reported that the fundamental pillar of the No Child Left
Behind Act (NCLB), the belief that every child can learn, remains
unchanged. ED looked at the progress made under (NCLB) during the last 5
years and has suggested refinements to focus on turning around
struggling schools and improving the academic performance of older
students:

1.  ***Every Child Performing at or Above Grade Level by 2014.*** States
    continue to measure students individually and by student group, and
    participate in the National Assessment of Educational Progress
    (NAEP). Information about the results is made transparent and
    readily available to parents. Schools missing adequate yearly
    progress goals are held accountable and given assistance to turn
    around their performance.

2.  ***Flexibility for Innovation and Improvement.*** States are given
    additional flexibility to improve student achievement. Innovative
    methods to measure progress are utilized, such as growth models.
    Districts can prioritize support based on a school's success.
    Innovative approaches are permitted for schools making progress in
    assessing students with disabilities and teaching English to limited
    English proficient (LEP) students. Essential reforms will support
    state efforts to ensure the safety of students.

3.  ***Challenging Our Students and Preparing Them to Succeed.*** States
    must demonstrate real progress in accurately reporting and improving
    high school graduation rates. States implement more rigorous
    standards so that graduates receive a meaningful diploma. Increased
    and dedicated Title I resources are provided to help at-risk older
    students stay in school and on the path to graduation. Expansion of
    Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate programs will
    improve the availability of rigorous coursework. An Adjunct Teacher
    Corps composed of professionals from the math and science fields
    will provide expertise and support in the classroom.

4.  ***Helping Teachers Close the Achievement Gap.*** A Teacher
    Incentive Fund rewards teachers and principals whose students make
    exceptional progress. The President's Math Now for Elemen­tary and
    Middle School Students programs promote and implement proven,
    research-based instructional methods. Science assessments are
    factored into state accountability calculations. The effective
    Reading First program is strengthened to help more children learn to
    read by grade three. The Striving Readers program is expanded to
    help struggling older students catch up academically.

5.  ***Strengthening Public Schools and Empowering Parents.*** The Title
    I School Improvement Fund is expanded to help schools create better
    outcomes for students. Students attending underperforming schools
    are given new school choice options. New Promise Scholarships are
    created for low-income students in chronically low-performing
    schools. Charter school options are expanded. Supplemental
    Educational Services (SES) is strengthened and expanded,
    particularly for students with disabilities, limited English
    proficient students and students living in rural areas.

Mr. Flores remarked that NCLB is one of the most visible, far-reaching
programs of the Bush Administration and it is important for Council
members to understand the program parameters. He encouraged members to
read the materials distributed at the meeting and to send questions to
Robin Delany-Shabazz, who will forward questions to ED. For more
information about ED's proposal for reauthorization of the Act, visit
<http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml>.

**Federal Mentoring Council**

***David Eisner, CEO, Corporation for National and Community Service***

Mr. Eisner reported that the Federal Mentoring Council (FMC) has been
working to coordinate resources around mentoring for disadvantaged
youth. At its January 18, 2007, meeting, the FMC focused on recruitment
as a key challenge. Seventy-five percent of mentoring programs report
that recruitment of mentors is their top issue. Retention is a
challenge, and there is often a bottleneck in the screening, training,
and processing of volunteers as a result of insufficient infrastructure.

Based on input from the National Mentoring Working Group
(representatives of nonprofit organizations that focus on mentoring),
the FMC will:

-   Explore development of a policy statement on mentoring that would
    support federal investment in mentoring as a relevant and
    cost-effective approach to positive youth development.

-   Promote the expansion of the National Mentoring Month campaign
    across all FMC agencies in January 2008.

-   Learn more about SafetyNet, a pilot Federal Bureau of Investigation
    (FBI) volunteer screening program that allows local mentoring
    organizations to access the FBI's fingerprint-based criminal
    background information quickly and inexpensively.

-   Explore possible linkages with USAFreedomCorps and others to promote
    flex-time for federal employees to mentor.

In addition, the FMC is exploring ways to better coordinate training and
technical assistance activities and is considering a pilot project on
mentoring for youth aging out of foster care.

**Other Business**

Bray Barnes, practitioner member, asked if the Council plans to host
another national conference similar to the January 2006 conference. Mr.
Flores said that currently there are no plans for such a conference.
OJJDP took the lead in organizing the 2006 conference, and he again
invited another agency to take the lead for the next conference.

Holly Rogers, Public Health Advisor, Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration (SAMHSA), HHS, reported that an update on the
interagency agreement between SAMSHA and OJJDP is included in the
meeting packet.

Judge Adele Grubbs, practitioner member, observed that the need to
provide vocational-technical training is not unique to New Orleans. This
is true everywhere. Youth who drop out of school are the ones who come
before the court. Teaching these kids a skill can help to redirect them
and prevent them from entering the adult jail population. She observed
that federal agencies should be thinking about expanding
vocational-technical education programs in many communities.

Richard Morris, Workforce Development Specialist, Employment and
Training Administration, DOL, provided an update on the work of his
agency.

-   DOL is working on a project that would include registered
    apprenticeships, which would help to meet the need identified by
    Judge Grubbs. The agency is trying to address the needs of older
    juveniles and young adults who are coming out of correctional
    facilities.

-   DOL will target \$24 million for gang-prevention-like efforts in
    2007.

-   An update on the Shared Youth Vision initiative is included in the
    meeting packet.

Mr. Flores announced that on March 9, he and the Surgeon General will
participate in a joint conference at George Mason University on health
care in the juvenile justice system. He encouraged other Council members
to attend.

David Eisner reiterated his concerns about the lack of programs for
youth in New Orleans this summer. He suggested convening a subgroup of
the Council to address this issue. Mr. Flores responded that he will
continue to talk with member agencies and the Reconstruction Oversight
Office about how best to bring federal resources together to serve
at-risk youth in New Orleans.

**Adjournment**

***J. Robert Flores***

Mr. Flores announced that the next Council meeting will be held on
Friday, June 8. Proposed agenda items should be sent to Ms.
Delany-Shabazz. As a result of the two votes taken today, working groups
will be taking action steps before the next meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:35.