## Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC)

**Online Resources**

**Federal Resources**

*Disproportionate Minority Confinement: Lessons Learned From Five
States.* 1998. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

<http://www.ncjrs.gov/94612.pdf>

The five states developed differing responses to their respective
circumstances, but they generally reflected the following
problem-solving process: (1) assign organizational responsibilities for
the DMC initiative; (2) identify the extent to which minority juveniles
are overrepresented in state and local juvenile justice systems; (3)
identify underlying factors that contribute to minority
overrepresentation; (4) create new and enhance existing interventions;
and (5) develop methods to measure the impact of interventions. Within
each state, the factors underlying DMC fell within the following
domains: the juvenile justice system, the educational system, the
family, and socioeconomic conditions. Because these domains are
significantly interrelated, the simultaneous examination of the effects
of each domain upon a juvenile or population of juveniles is necessary
to identify successful remedies to DMC. The DMC initiatives had several
universal effects, including development of automated systems for
monitoring DMC activities, increased community collaboration,
institutionalization of DMC awareness, and improvement of local
services.

*Disproportionate Minority Confinement: A Review of the Research
Literature From 1989 Through 2001.* 2002. U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.

[http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/dmc/pdf/dmc89_01.pdf](http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/dmc/pdf/dmc89_01.pdf%0D)

Similar to an earlier research summary (Pope and Feyerherm, 1990), the
current review focuses on empirical research studies of the official
processing of minority youth, defined by the U.S. Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention as African Americans, American
Indians, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics. The studies reviewed
examined an array of processing points and outcomes, including arrest,
detention, petition, adjudication, and disposition. Disposition (20
studies) and petition (13 studies) were the most frequently examined
processing points; more than half (18) of the studies examined multiple
decision points in juvenile justice processing. The majority of the
studies reviewed (25 of 34) reported race effects in the processing of
youth. Taken together, the research findings support the existence of
disparities and potential biases in juvenile justice processing;
however, the causes and mechanisms of these disparities are complex.
Important contributing factors may include inherent system bias, effects
of local policies and practices, and social conditions (inequality,
family situation, or underemployment) that may place youth at risk. This
review shows that the body of knowledge concerning DMC is growing,
albeit slowly, and the research is increasing in complexity. It
highlights the diversity present across the studies in terms of
perspectives, approaches, designs, definitions, and measures. This
Bulletin concludes with guidelines for further research in this area and
recommendations for a national policy agenda regarding DMC research.

*Disproportionate Minority Confinement: Year 2002 Update.* 2002. U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

<http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/201240.pdf>

Although minority youth account for about one-third of the United States
juvenile population, they comprise two-thirds of the juvenile
detention/corrections population. For both these youthful offenders and
society, the problem with DMC has far-reaching consequences. The present
levels of minority overrepresentation within the juvenile justice system
indicate that efforts to reduce DMC must identify and address all
contributing factors. This summary report outlines the efforts that have
been made at the national level during the past 5 years to address DMC;
it provides an update on DMC efforts at the state level, including a
summary of the status of state compliance with the DMC core protection
requirements; and it describes Washington State's efforts to reduce DMC
over the past 10 years as an example of a comprehensive systems change
approach to the problem. The report concludes with a look at the
modifications to the DMC requirement contained in the Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention Act of 2002 and OJJDP's action steps in
support of continuing efforts to reduce DMC. Effectively addressing DMC
will require long-term coordinated efforts at the federal, state, and
local levels.

*Disproportionate Minority Contact Technical Assistance Manual, 3d ed.*
2006. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

<http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/dmc_ta_manual/index.html>

This online manual provides detailed guidance on DMC identification and
monitoring, assessment, intervention, and evaluation. Its intended
audience is Juvenile Justice Specialists, members of State Planning
Agencies and State Advisory Groups, DMC researchers and consultants, and
policymakers and practitioners involved in the juvenile justice system
at the state and local levels. This manual incorporates lessons learned
in DMC efforts over the years. It brings states and localities the
latest information and tools for understanding and effectively
addressing minority overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system.
Electronic publication of the manual offers important benefits including
wide distribution, hyperlinks for instant access to related materials,
and annual updates.

*Minorities in the Juvenile Justice System.* 1999. U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.

<http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/179007.pdf>

This Bulletin presents information on overrepresentation of minority
youth in the juvenile justice system in comparison to their proportion
in the general population, with focus on disproportionate confinement of
minorities. This Bulletin includes statistics on racial-ethnic makeup of
juvenile offenders from arrest, court-processing, and confinement
records. It notes that there is substantial evidence of widespread
disparity in juvenile case processing of minority and nonminority youth
and that racial-ethnic differences can occur at all stages of the
process.

*Race as a Factor in Juvenile Arrests.* 2003. U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.

<http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/189180.pdf>

This Bulletin analyzes statistics from the Federal Bureau of
Investigation's National Incident-Based Reporting System for evidence of
racial bias in police arrests of juveniles for violent crimes. Although
previous research has explored the degree to which race impacts the
juvenile justice system, the results have been mixed. Some studies have
found evidence of racial bias, while others have found that race is not
a significant factor. This Bulletin focuses on the role that race plays
in police decisionmaking. It compares arrest probabilities of white and
nonwhite juveniles for violent crimes and finds no direct evidence that
an offender's race affects police decisions to take juveniles into
custody in such incidents.

*Resources for Juvenile Detention Reform.* 2000. U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.

<http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/fs200018.pdf>

This publication addresses the issue of crowding in juvenile detention
facilities because of minority overrepresentation and discusses the
Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative, which has yielded some
success in facilities in Chicago, Portland, and Sacramento. This Fact
Sheet highlights 12 monographs published by the Annie E. Casey
Foundation that, as a collection, present a roadmap for comprehensive
reform of the detention system.

**State and Local Studies**

*Addressing Disproportionate Representation of Youth of Color in the
Juvenile Justice System.* 2001. *Journal of the Center for Families,
Children and the Court*.

<http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/pdffiles/V3Cox.pdf>

Santa Cruz County, California, Juvenile Probation Department has been
working to address DMC since 1997. This article provides a step-by-step
account of how the probation department built strong organizational
leadership and support for DMC reduction, examined the data and
practices at each decision point in the juvenile justice system, and
instituted cultural competency, partnerships with families, alternatives
to formal handling and incarceration, and a full continuum of treatment,
supervision, and placement options. The steadfast efforts have yielded
positive results. For example, Latino youth made up 33 percent of all
youth ages 10 through 17 in Santa Cruz but 64 percent of youth in
detention in 1997 and 1998. That percentage dropped to 53 percent in
1999 and 46 percent in the first half of 2000.

*Assessing Disproportionate Minority Contact with the Illinois Juvenile
Justice System.* 2005. Illinois Criminal Justice Authority.

<http://www.icjia.org/public/pdf/Bulletins/dmc.pdf>

Research data revealed the dramatic overrepresentation of minorities
within the juvenile justice system in Illinois. African American youth
were overrepresented among youth arrested and committed to the Illinois
Department of Corrections (IDOC). Specifically, the arrest
representation index for African American youth was 3.14 compared to
0.65 for white youth. The relative rate index indicated that African
American youth in Illinois were arrested at five times the rate at which
white youth were arrested and were committed to the IDOC at five times
the rate of white youth. State-level data also indicated that Hispanic
youth were overrepresented among IDOC commitments, although to a lesser
extent than were African American youth. Data were drawn from the U.S.
Census Bureau, the Computerized Criminal History Information System
(CHRI), and the IDOC.

*Assessment of Disproportionate Minority Confinement in Tennessee's
Juvenile Justice*

*System.* 2003. Tennessee Commission on Children and Youth.

<http://www.tennessee.gov/tccy/dmcrep.htm>

This research project is sponsored by the Tennessee Commission on
Children and Youth, pursuant to a federal mandate, to assess the extent
and causes of disproportionate confinement of minority youth in the
Juvenile Justice System in seven Tennessee counties. For an overview of
this study, please review the Executive Summary located at
<http://www.state.tn.us/tccy/dmc-sum.pdf>.

*Assessment of Disproportionate Minority Contact in South Dakota.* 2005.
Mountain Plains Research and Evaluation.

<http://www.state.sd.us/CORRECTIONS/FullDMCReportFinal.pdf>

DMC has been documented in research over the past three decades. The
results of the most recent research differ from the previous DMC reviews
in that a greater proportion of the recent studies showed inconclusive
results. Research that is more recent has used multiple factors with
more sophisticated research and statistical techniques, while earlier
studies mainly focused on ethnicity. In addition to the differential
handling of minority youth, factors that have been found to be related
to confinement or other decisions in the juvenile justice system include
gender, geography, age, prior criminal history, family factors, peers,
experiences in school, differential offending of minority youth,
differential opportunities for prevention and treatment, and substance
abuse. An effective and comprehensive DMC assessment must consider
multiple factors and use varied research methods. Both qualitative and
quantitative methods were used in the current analyses of DMC in South
Dakota. Focus group methodology was the qualitative procedure employed,
and various univariate and multivariate statistical procedures were used
for the quantitative analyses of the available data.

*The Color of Justice: An Analysis of Juvenile Adult Court Transfers in
California.* 2000. Mike Males and Dan Mccallair. Building Blocks for
Youth.

<http://www.buildingblocksforyouth.org/colorofjustice/coj.pdf>

The purpose of this analysis was to test the hypothesis that minority
youth were disproportionately transferred to adult court and sentenced
to incarceration compared to white youth in similar circumstances. This
study analyzed data from county and state agencies for juvenile
arrestees in 1996--1998 and the sentencing of juveniles in 1997--1999.
The analysis compared the proportions of white, African American,
Hispanic, and Asian/others in the total juvenile population (ages
10--17) and in the total number of juvenile arrestees by offense
category with the respective proportions of their transfers to adult
court and sentencing to a facility. The study found that minority youth
were 2.7 times more likely than white youth to be arrested for a violent
felony (the crimes most likely to result in transfer to adult court).
Once in the system, minority juvenile violent-crime arrestees were 3.1
times more likely than white juvenile violent-crime arrestees to be
transferred to adult court and sentenced to confinement in a California
Youth Authority prison. The limited analysis of Los Angeles County data
found that the major factor in the large racial disparities in
sentencing was the more frequent transfer of minority juveniles to adult
court. Given the current analysis and previous studies that have shown
similar racial discrepancies in other areas of the juvenile justice and
criminal justice systems, future research should examine the basis for
the disparities in sentencing found in the current study.

*Disproportionate Minority Contact in Iowa's Juvenile Justice System.*
2006. Iowa Department of Human Rights.

<http://www.state.ia.us/government/dhr/cjjp/images/pdf/06_pub/2006_DMC_Report.pdf>

This report was developed to provide summary information to allow Iowa
state agency staff, practitioners, and juvenile justice system officials
to access a specific section of Iowa's Three Year Plan. It includes the
DMC section of Iowa's 2006 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Act formula grant Three Year Plan. The complete Three Year Plan serves
as Iowa's application for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Act formula grant funding.

*An Examination of the Factors that Influence Justice Decision Making in
Anchorage and Fairbanks, Alaska: An Assessment Study.* 2006. Alaska
Division of Juvenile Justice.

<http://vitalrecords.alaska.gov/djj/dmc/06AssessmentStudy.pdf>

This study reexamines the quantitative data component collected by the
Craniun Research Group in the 2004 publication, *2004 Assessment Study
Disproportionate Minority Contact with the Alaska Juvenile Justice
System*. While the same data set is used and many of the same variables
(both independent and dependent) are included in the analysis, the
present research was performed more traditionally by examining additive
models and then reestimating those models for each racial/ethnic group.
Tests for race/ethnic interaction relationships with each independent
variable and decisionmaking stage were also conducted.

*Juvenile Disproportionate Minority Contact in Maine.* 2005. Maine
Statistical Analysis Center.

<http://www.maine.gov/corrections/jjag/ReportsPubs/DMCReport9-15-05.rtf>

This report describes Maine's first attempt to not only identify whether
DMC exists, but also to evaluate gaps in current data systems and the
quality of the available data to assess Maine's capacity to effectively
identify DMC. This evaluation of the data systems and the quality of the
data they provide will inform the state about potential next steps to
take to ensure the quality of its juvenile DMC data.

*Minorities in South Carolina's Juvenile Justice System:* *Understanding
the Disparities and Assessing Community Readiness for Change.* 2003.
Institute for Families in Society.

[http://www.scdps.org/ojp/jjgp/DMC%20Final%20Report.pdf](http://www.scdps.org/ojp/jjgp/DMC Final Report.pdf)

South Carolina has clearly identified DMC as a central concern (South
Carolina Department of Public Safety, 2000; South Carolina Department of
Public Safety, 2003). Formula grant funds have been used to fund prior
studies in South Carolina to provide hypotheses to the causes of DMC in
the state. Additionally, numerous local program initiatives have been
funded to address DMC. South Carolina is the recipient of national
technical assistance provided by the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention to address DMC. The current study represents a
more focused effort to address DMC and will offer recommendations to
link these findings to an implementation plan to strategically reduce
DMC within the state. The current analysis uses both a quantitative
study and qualitative study to aid in further understanding the
disparities in the juvenile justice system and to prepare South Carolina
for focused action planning.

*Profiles, Predictors, and Minority Overrepresentation in Jurisdictional
Decisions for Maryland Youths: A Final Report.* 2003. U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

<http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/205509.pdf>

Maryland's waiver laws mandate adult-court original jurisdiction for all
juveniles charged with 1 or more of 14 specified serious offenses. These
laws have had the effect of changing the court of original jurisdiction
from the juvenile to the adult court for approximately 1,500 juveniles
per year. The purpose of the current study was to determine whether the
juveniles targeted in this legislation were being processed in
accordance with the legislature's expectations. The subjects for the
study were 298 males ages 12--19; 80.2 percent were African American.
The sample was a combination of urban and rural juveniles processed in
1998. A total of 69 were classified as at-risk for waiver; 105 were
waived by judicial decision; 72 had a wavier reversed; and 52 were under
mandated legislative waiver. Logistic regression was used to create
predictor models of waiver and reverse waiver. Clustering was used to
develop profiles of the waiver groups, and the overrepresentation data
were analyzed by using a proportion to the general population index in
the state. The study concluded that waiver decisions were based in
predictors that involved both legal and extra-legal variables. The
profiles of the juveniles suggest treatment and security needs and
indicate the need for flexible individualized treatment. The
overrepresentation of African American juveniles at nine decision points
in case processing has worsened since 1992 in the juvenile justice
system and also is present in the adult system. The study recommends
that the Maryland legislature tailor waiver decision criteria and their
proportional weights to the desired outcomes of waiver policy. Although
the data collected and analyzed indicated the overrepresentation of
African American juveniles in the waiver system, a racial basis for
waiver decisions was not found. Future research should address the
causes of overrepresentation so as to inform policy changes.

*Reassessment of Minority Overrepresentation in Connecticut's Juvenile
Justice System.* 2001. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention-sponsored.

<http://www.opm.state.ct.us/pdpd1/grants/jjac/reassess_final_report-final_version2.pdf>

The reassessment study focused on the extent to which minorities were
overrepresented in the juvenile justice system and whether the level or
nature of minority overrepresentation had changed since the baseline
study. The study compared state juvenile justice system data to census
data to determine the extent to which minority juveniles 10--16 years
old were overrepresented at various stages in the juvenile justice
system. Overrepresentation data were compared for 1998 and 1991. In
addition, data from police, Juvenile Matters Court, Department of
Children and Families, and adult court were analyzed to determine what
differences, if any, existed in decisions made for African American,
Hispanic, and white juveniles processed for similar types of offenses as
they moved through the system. The data were also analyzed to determine
whether observed differences remained when controlling for offender and
offense characteristics or were neutralized by predictor variables.
In-depth, one-on-one interviews were conducted with a sample of African
American, Hispanic, and white juvenile offenders to explore their
experiences with and perceptions of the various components of the
juvenile justice system. Finally, qualitative and quantitative research
was used to determine juvenile justice system practitioner reaction to
findings from the other three phases and to preliminary Juvenile Justice
Advisory Committee (JJAC) recommendations to address these findings. For
both 1998 and 1991, African American and Hispanic juveniles were
overrepresented at each decision point, and the extent of the
overrepresentation increased as juveniles moved from court referral to
confinement. For both 1998 and 1991, overrepresentation was greater for
African American than Hispanic juveniles at each decisionmaking point,
particularly detention. The extent of overrepresentation in 1998 was
less than in 1991, but was still considerable. JJAC recommendations for
action are in three categories: accountability, personnel, and program.

*Reducing Disproportionate Minority Confinement: The Multnomah County
Oregon Success Story and Its Implications.* 2002. Center on Juvenile and
Criminal Justice.

<http://www.cjcj.org/pubs/portland/portland.html>

This policy brief reviews the work done in one jurisdiction that has
succeeded in reducing the number of minority youth detained pre-trial;
summarizes the lessons learned from innovations in Multnomah County,
Oregon; and highlights their national significance. While the more
general nationwide picture on reducing racial disparity in the juvenile
justice system may seem gloomy, Multnomah County's success story
provides inspiration for communities looking to create a more efficient
and fairer juvenile justice system.

*Strategic Plan for Statewide Juvenile Disproportionate Contact
Monitoring, Reduction, and Prevention Efforts.* 2006. M. Bellas.

<http://www.ahs.state.vt.us/CFCPP/Docs/2006-05-24-Strategic_Plan.pdf>

This strategic plan makes recommendations pertaining to each of the
phases required by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention as mandated in the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act of
2002. It proposes a timeline for implementing the recommendations during
the 3-year period, July 1, 2006, to June 30, 2009. It recommends hiring
a DMC coordinator to carry out most of the outlined work, in
consultation with Vermont's juvenile justice specialist and members of
the DMC Committee of Vermont's Children and Family Council for
Prevention Programs.

**Other Resources**

*Disproportionate Minority Confinement: Practical Solutions for Juvenile
Justice Professionals.* 2001. American Prosecutor Research Institute.

<http://www.ndaa-apri.org/pdf/dmc_2002.pdf>

Presented in this resource are strategies, policies, and programs that
have been successfully implemented by juvenile justice practitioners and
community members to reduce the disproportionate numbers of minority
youth in confinement. The paper provides strategies and ideas for a
range of juvenile justice practitioners, from law enforcement and
probation officers to prosecutors and judges. Strategies described
include community-oriented policing, cultural awareness education and
training, Latino and African American advocates for offenders, the
development of clear criteria for eligible detention offense categories,
and accelerated intake programs to reduce processing times for juvenile
offenders. Prosecutors are advised to develop written, objective
criteria for charging decisions, transfer decisions, and sentencing
recommendations. Judges are urged to take an active role in the
development of alternative placement options and less restrictive
release options for juveniles. Also discussed in this paper are the
extent and the possible causes of minority overrepresentation in the
juvenile justice system and juvenile detention. One of the main
conclusions of a myriad of research projects concerning this topic is
that the differential incarceration rate of minority youth cannot be
explained solely by their greater involvement in violent crime. Indeed,
the position of most experts in this field is that the disproportionate
rates of arrest and incarceration of minority groups is due to economic,
family, and community factors, as well as the decisionmaking process of
the juvenile justice system. It is only through combining strategies
that address all of these issues that the country will realize a
decrease in the rate of juvenile minority confinement.

*Disproportionate Minority Contact in the Juvenile Justice System.*
2005. Child Welfare League of America.

<http://www.cwla.org/programs/juvenilejustice/disproportionate.pdf>

DMC is being actively and effectively pursued in the context of
comprehensive detention reforms. Effective methods in reducing DMC
include (1) the assigning of organizational responsibility; (2) data
collection and analysis; (3) prioritizing and building consensus; (4)
training; (5) implementation of community-based interventions; (6) the
development of risk assessment instruments; (7) access to counsel; and
(8) evaluation. Successful DMC reduction models presented include Santa
Cruz, California; Multnomah County, Oregon; and Cook County, Illinois.
The information in this paper is provided to educate practitioners,
administrators, policymakers, child welfare agencies, and juvenile
justice agencies about the ramifications of DMC in the U.S. juvenile
justice system. It delineates the extent of racial disparity among
juvenile offenders in the arrest, referral, pre-adjudication detention,
adjudication, and post-disposition confinement stages, and examines how
statutory and policy shifts have intensified DMC. Lastly, the paper
reviews the status of federal legislation pertaining to juvenile DMC,
causal factors, and lessons from successful state and local models,
along with research recommendations.

*No Turning Back: Promising Approaches to Reducing Racial and Ethnic
Disparities Affecting Youth of Color in the Justice System.* 2005.
Building Blocks for Youth.

<http://www.buildingblocksforyouth.org/noturningback/ntb_fullreport.pdf>

This report is the final report from the Building Blocks for Youth
multi-strategy initiative, which set out to reduce the
overrepresentation and disparate treatment of youth of color in the
justice system and promote fair and effective juvenile justice policies.
The report presents a collection of stories from advocates and others
who have worked on successful campaigns across the United States,
describing the problems they sought to address, the steps they took, the
results they achieved, and the lessons they learned. The report
identifies 10 successful campaigns and initiatives to reduce the
overrepresentation and disparate treatment of youth of color in the
justice system: (1) the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiatives in
Santa Cruz, California, and Multnomah County in Portland, Oregon; (2)
the W. Haywood Burns Institute Approach in Seattle, Washington; (3) the
Citizens for Juvenile Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union
paper on the Overrepresentation of Minorities in Massachusetts Juvenile
Justice System; (4) the juvenile justice initiative and the Cook County
Public Defender's Office in Illinois; (5) the Campaign to Derail the
Super-jail in Alameda County, California; (6) the "Parents Who Care
Coalition" in South Dakota; (7) the Maryland Juvenile Justice Coalition
in Maryland; (8) the "No More Youth Jails" campaign in New York, New
York; (9) the Faith Communities for Family and Children coalition in Los
Angeles, California; and (10) the "Close Tallulah Now" campaign in
Louisiana.

*Reducing Racial Disparities in Juvenile Detention.* 2003. Annie E.
Casey Foundation.

<http://www.aecf.org/publications/data/8_reducing.pdf>

The Annie E. Casey Foundation launched a multiyear, multisite project
called the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI) in 1992.
Three sites participated in JDAI with the goal of increasing effective
alternatives to juvenile detention. This report focuses on challenges
and lessons learned during this pilot project, especially in regard to
racial sentencing disparities in the juvenile justice system. Chapter 1
discusses why jurisdictions should focus on racial sentencing
disparities in their efforts to improve the effectiveness of the
juvenile justice system and reduce incarceration rates among youth.
Chapter 2 presents guiding principles for reducing DMC in juvenile
detention facilities. Chapter 3 provides an overview of the problem of
DMC, including its scope and causes. Chapters 4 and 5 present lessons
learned from the three JDAI sites on how to curb racial disparities in
juvenile detention practices.

*Seven Steps to Develop and Evaluate Strategies to Reduce
Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC).* 2005. Justice Research and
Statistics Association.

<http://www.jrsa.org/jjec/about/dmc_guidebook.html>

The first step to reduce DMC is to define the problem, which involves
data collection that will identify the sources of DMC. This may involve
the implementation of methodological improvements in data collection
that take into account the race and ethnicity of juveniles processed.
This step also involves the collection of baseline data and the
examination of minority overrepresentation throughout the juvenile
justice system. The second step is to implement evidence-based
programming. Specific evidence-based programs that have proven their
effectiveness in reducing DMC should be examined to determine their
relevance to the problems identified, followed by their implementation.
The third step is to develop a logic model that visually represents a
program's theory, objectives, activities, and desired achievements. The
fourth step is to select performance measures for tracking the progress
and achievements of the selected strategy. Step five involves collection
and analysis of data that will show whether the strategy employed has
reduced DMC at the targeted stages of case processing. Step six is the
reporting of the findings to stakeholders so that those who will
influence future programming decisions are aware of existing program
impacts. The final step is to reassess program logic such that
modifications are made with the intent of improving outcomes.

###  

### Resources Available from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Library 

The following documents are available from the NCJRS Library at
<http://www.ncjrs.gov/abstractdb/search.asp>. See the "Obtaining
Documents" section at <http://www.ncjrs.gov/tutorial/obtain.html> for
instructions on how to acquire publications.

*Closer Look at Disproportionate Minority Confinement in the North
Carolina Juvenile Justice System.* 2000. Doug Yearwood, Michael Wilson,
and Tina Gillespie. North Carolina Criminal Justice Analysis Center. NCJ
182837.

Data were collected from the North Carolina State Bureau of
Investigation's Division of Criminal Information. A questionnaire was
also developed and administered to law enforcement agencies, juvenile
court counselors, and juvenile detention and training school
administrators. Arrest data for minority youth between 10 and 18 years
of age were compared for the 1990 to 1998 period. The minority arrest
index score declined after 1994, but the statewide index climbed during
the period. Although minority detention and training school admission
indexes remained constant between 1994 and 1998, both indexes escalated
over the 1990 to1998 period. Further analysis indicated the number of
alternative programs within a specific district had no effect on
minority detention and training school indexes. However, both crime
seriousness and community variance had an effect on detention and
training school admissions. The authors concluded that disproportionate
minority confinement still exists in North Carolina's juvenile justice
system, and they offered recommendations to address this problem.

*Color of Justice: An Analysis of Juvenile Adult Court Transfers in
California.* 2000. Mike Males and Dan Macallair. NCJ 183847.

The study hypothesized that minority youth were disproportionately
transferred to adult court and sentenced to incarceration, compared to
white youth in similar circumstances. Data revealed Hispanic youth were
6 times more likely, black youth were 12 times more likely, and Asian
and other youth were 3 times more likely than white youth to be found
unfit for juvenile court and transferred to adult court in Los Angeles
County. Minority youth had higher arrest rates for felony violent crimes
than white youth. While some of the discrepancy may have reflected
racial biases in the arrest and charging system, the result was that the
pool of violent arrestees, those most likely to be transferred to adult
court, was disproportionately minority. Adult courts were considerably
more likely to sentence black and Asian offenders to prison than
Hispanic and white offenders. Compared to white youth, minority youth
were 2.8 times as likely to be arrested for a violent crime, 6.2 times
as likely to wind up in adult court, and 7 times as likely to be sent to
prison by adult courts.

*Cumulative Disadvantage as an Explanation for Observed
Disproportionality Within the Juvenile Justice System: An Empirical
Test.* 2002. M. Dyan McGuire. *Juvenile and Family Court Journal* 53(1):
1--17. NCJ 193838.

The study arose from recognition that some researchers believe that
disproportionality in the justice system is a function of cumulative
disadvantage. The research used detention, adjudication, and commitment
as dependent variables to examine the influence of race on the handling
of black juveniles at each stage. The study controlled for other factors
known to contribute to differential handling. These factors included the
seriousness of the charged offense, prior record, age, and the presence
of a detention facility in the processing decision. Results indicated no
clear pattern of accumulating disadvantage. Instead, racial effects
occurred at the stages in case processing where decisions took place
regarding detention and commitment. Thus, disadvantage did not appear to
aggregate consistently as the juvenile moved through the juvenile
justice system, but it did accumulate between the detention and
adjudication stages when controlled for legal differences. The strongest
racial effects appeared to occur at the detention stage. The large
amount of unexplained variance suggested that other factors not measured
by the data must also have an important role in decisionmaking. The
analysis concluded that minorities tend to be most disadvantaged at
stages in the process where juvenile justice personnel made decisions
regarding confinement.

*Devastating Report on Racial Disparities in Juvenile Justice.* 2000.
*Youth Law News* 21 (2--3): 27--29. NCJ 184171.

The report, entitled "And Justice for Some," examined the DMC issue by
focusing on a common set of critical decision points that exist in all
states as they process juveniles charged with law violations: arrest,
intake, detention, adjudication, and disposition.

It found that, at each stage, white youth experience more favorable
outcomes than youth of color. It also found that the disparity is most
pronounced at the early stages of processing but becomes more
concentrated as youth move through the system. The report refers to this
phenomenon as "cumulative disadvantage." The study notes that much of
the previous work on DMC focused exclusively on the juvenile justice
system. With the numbers of juveniles being prosecuted as adults
increasing, it is important to consider the racial disparities in this
arena as well. The numbers at this final stage are even more
disproportionate.

*Disproportionate Minority Confinement (DMC) of Youth: An Analysis of
State and Federal Efforts to Address the Issue.* 2002. Michael J.
Leiber. *Crime and Delinquency* 48 (1): 3--45. NCJ 192853.

This study focused on the identification of the extent of minority
overrepresentation in states' juvenile justice systems and assessment of
the causes of DMC. Results revealed that minority youth
overrepresentation existed in every state and at all decision points.
The decision point where minority youth overrepresentation was greatest
varied by state. Overrepresentation existed for African American and
Hispanic youth, with greater overrepresentation among African American
than Hispanic youth. In addition, 32 of the 40 state studies of the
assessment stage revealed race differences not totally explained by
differential involvement in crime. Minority overrepresentation resulted
solely from legal factors (i.e., severity of the crime) in 12 states.
Race and gender interacted in some states to influence decisionmaking
even after controlling for legal factors. The analysis concluded that
the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention's (OJJDP)
tentative approach to DMC has resulted in significant contributions to
understanding of the issues, innovative initiatives in some states to
address the issue, and inconsistent implementation of the DMC mandate.
However, OJJDP's recent efforts to address the deficiencies may result
in improved information and greater efforts to address DMC.

*Disproportionate Minority Contact Reduction Initiatives in North
Carolina.* 2005. Michael Wilson and Kimberly Wilson. North Carolina
Governor's Crime Commission. NCJ 213943.

In an effort to identify and reduce any DMC in its juvenile justice
system, the North Carolina Governor's Crime Commission created a DMC
Committee. This committee provides recommendations to the Juvenile
Justice Planning Committee regarding efforts to reduce the number of
minority youth disproportionately detained or confined in secure
detention, correctional facilities, and jails or lockups in relation to
their representation in the general population. One strategy being
pursued to address DMC in the state's juvenile justice system is to work
with four demonstration counties to provide resources, technical
assistance and ongoing monitoring, and evaluation of programs and
activities designed to reduce DMC in these jurisdictions. This paper
describes the efforts to reduce DMC in the juvenile justice systems of
the four demonstration counties. As each demonstration county proceeds
with an individualized DMC reduction plan, progress and outcomes will be
measured, assessed, and duplicated if proven effective.

*Equitable Treatment of Minority Youth in the Arizona Juvenile Justice
System.* 2002. Arizona Supreme Court, Juvenile Justice Services
Division. NCJ 202486.

This report assesses the progress in reducing minority
overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system by comparing relevant
data from 1990 to 2000, followed by recommendations for change. The
focal points of the juvenile justice system for examining minority
overrepresentation are referrals, detention, probation, commitment, and
adult prosecution (juveniles prosecuted in adult court). A total of 12
interviews and 5 focus group sessions were conducted, resulting in input
from 62 individuals. An overarching theme was the perceived lack of
significant progress in reducing minority overrepresentation in the
juvenile justice system. There was a constant reference to the continued
use of an Anglo-based, middle-class treatment model by numerous focus
group participants, particularly Latino clients. Respondents considered
bias in assessment as a problem. Although respondents reported that the
recruitment of minority agency and treatment staff had increased, and
pay bonuses had been instituted for bilingual employees, the resource
pool of available treatment staff was viewed as diminishing.
Recommendations are as follows: encourage and promote collaboration
among the state agencies and organizations directly involved with the
juvenile justice system; develop an annual "report card" with specific
benchmarks for success each year; review detention assessment
instruments and identify those variables that increase detention of
minority youth in the adult criminal system; address the administrative,
staff training, provider services, and staffing issues identified in the
various focus groups; and identify and support the development and
expansion of programs that work.

*Overrepresentation of Minority Youth in the Juvenile Justice System:
Discrimination or Disproportionality of Delinquent Acts?* 2000. Janice
Joseph. NCJ 183613.

Despite the claims of some researchers that the juvenile justice system
is not discriminatory, there is clear evidence that, in some cases,
discrimination is a factor in the juvenile justice decisionmaking
process. Equal justice dictates that every juvenile delinquent in the
system be treated fairly, irrespective of his or her racial or ethnic
background. This fact calls for significant changes in the juvenile
justice process. Although policy changes are usually slow to be
implemented, discrimination in the juvenile justice system should not be
tolerated. Of equal importance is the prevention of juvenile delinquency
among minority youth. Policymakers, juvenile justice officials, and
minority communities should work together to reduce the
overrepresentation of minority youth in the juvenile justice system and
to reduce minority youth involvement in juvenile delinquency.

*Overrepresentation of Minorities in the Juvenile Justice System: Three
Counties in Rural Texas. 2004. H. Elaine Rodney and H. Richard Tachia.*
*Federal Probation* 68 (3): 44--48. NCJ 208963.

While research over the past 20 years has increasingly focused on the
problem of minority overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system,
not many of these studies have focused on rural southwestern states. The
current study revisited the problem of minority overrepresentation in
the juvenile justice system in three counties in rural Texas that were
researched on this topic in 1990. The purpose of the study was to
explore whether the problem had changed in these counties since the
original 1990 study, with particular attention paid to the youth's
family, social background, and prior juvenile delinquency involvement.
Participants were 316 adolescents who were processed through the
juvenile justice systems of the counties under examination from January
1999 to December 2000. Participants completed a questionnaire probing
demographics, current offense characteristics, and experiences at the
predisposition, adjudication, and disposition phases of the system, such
as number of days detained and disposition outcomes. Results of
statistical analyses indicated that there were significantly more
African American youth in the juvenile justice systems of the three
counties than would be expected from their numbers in the population;
the problem was noted particularly at intake into the system. Findings
also revealed that 72 percent of African American youth who were
detained came from homes with single mothers. Cultural and sensitivity
training is suggested for officers, as well as state laws that
incorporate standard guidelines for the processing of juvenile
offenders.

*Proposed Methods for Measuring DMC as Required by the 2002 JJDP Act: An
Overview of the DMC Relative Rate Index.* 2003. Jeffrey Butts. U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention. NCJ 205291.

The JJDP Act requires that juvenile justice systems continually measure
and monitor the DMC of their juvenile case processing in order to ensure
the equal and fair treatment for every youth in the juvenile justice
system regardless of race and ethnicity. The current system of measuring
DMC involves determining the proportion of minority juveniles in a
justice system in relation to their proportion in the general
population. This video conference discusses why a new method of
measuring DMC is needed and then proposes a new measurement method
called "Relative Rate Index" (RRI). The RRI is proposed as a more
accurate and useful measure for revealing the degree to which the
juveniles of each of six major minority groups may be involved at each
stage of juvenile case processing at higher rates than white juveniles
being processed for similar offenses. Under the RRI method, the rate of
representation for each minority juvenile group is compared with the
rate for white juveniles. The RRI is computed for each group at each
stage of case processing. The only RRI that is computed in relation to
the group's representation in the general population is the initial
police contact with the juvenile. The RRI at successive stages of
processing is based on population representation at the previous stage
of case processing. This permits the isolation of the degree of
potentially biased decisionmaking with respect to minority juveniles in
relation to white juveniles at each stage of decisionmaking that bears
on case outcomes.

*Racial Disparities in the Punishment of Youth: A Theoretical and
Empirical Assessment of the Literature.* 2002. Rodney L. Engen, Sara
Steen, and George S. Bridges. *Social Problems* 49(2): 194--220. NCJ
196279.

The authors explored the overrepresentation of minority youth in the
juvenile justice system from a variety of theoretical perspectives
including the differential involvement theories, structural-process
theories, and macro-contextual approaches. The authors analyzed existing
empirical research and literature in order to conduct this study. The
study was designed to address nine hypotheses: (1) research studies
designed to control for prior offenses and seriousness of offense were
less effective tools for determining the effect of race on dispositions;
(2) research studies designed to control for socioeconomic and family
structure factors were less effective tools for determining the effect
of race on dispositions; (3) research studies that examined summary
measures of processing severity or system penetration were more
effective tools for determining the effect of race on dispositions; (4)
research studies that examined the earlier stages of the juvenile
justice process were more likely than studies focusing on the later
stages of the process to find direct race effects; (5) research studies
that controlled for discretion earlier in the process were more likely
to find direct race effects; (6) research studies that controlled for
social or court characteristics would be less likely to find direct race
effects; (7) studies of processing in mixed or non-urban jurisdictions
were more likely than studies of urban areas to find direct race
effects; (8) recent studies were more likely than older studies to
produce findings of racial effect; and (9) research studies conducted in
the South were more likely than studies in other regions to produce
findings of racial effect. In general the authors found a significant
relationship between race and the severity of disposition of juvenile
offenders.

*Solvable Problem: Reducing the Disproportionality of Youths of Color in
Juvenile Detention Facilities.* 2005. James Bell. *Corrections Today* 67
(5): 80--83. NCJ 210858.

Participating jurisdictions begin the Burns Institute process by forming
a representative governing body that includes high-level representation
from key agencies in the juvenile justice system as well as
representatives from community groups, parents, and juveniles. This
board is the key decisionmaking body responsible for ensuring that all
steps in the planned reform are completed. The jurisdiction is then
encouraged to hire a full-time local site coordinator to lead the
process locally. The first step in reform efforts is to collect baseline
data on DMC. This requires analyzing local juvenile crime data by race,
gender, offense, time, and location via police data on juvenile arrest
and/or probation data on youth in detention. A community profile is then
developed to show which segments of the community have the most
juveniles in detention. This helps in identifying community strengths
and deficits that should be enhanced or remedied. Upon completion of the
community profile, the jurisdiction creates a system flowchart to
illustrate the process by which juveniles move through the entire
juvenile justice system, analyzing the risk assessment instrument by
race, defining a local target population that contributes minority youth
to detention, and conducting an analysis of the case review. The Burns
Institute has worked with the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative
(JDAI) of the Annie E. Casey Foundation to construct a risk assessment
instrument that focuses on detention decisionmaking free of bias so as
to reduce DMC.

**Additional Resources**

*The Role of Race and Ethnicity in Juvenile Justice Processing.* 2005.
Donna M. Bishop. In *Our Children, Their Children: Confronting Racial
and Ethnic Differences in American Juvenile Justice,* edited by Darnell
F. Hawkins and Kimberly Kempf-Leonard. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.

This article provides an overview of the research literature on the
mechanisms through which race and ethnicity influence juvenile justice
system responses. In a review of research dealing with studies of police
handling of juveniles and juvenile court processing and placement, the
author finds that extralegal factors are among those most responsible
for the generation of racial disparities. The author finds that at all
stages of police processing (juvenile encounters, arrests, charging
decisions, and referral decisions), differential treatment of white and
minority youth seems to be affected most by behavioral and attitudinal
indicators of risk (danger and hostility) that are perceived to be
linked to class and race. In addition, studies of the juvenile court
process indicate that racial stereotyping by juvenile justice officials
influences decisionmaking at all decision points (intake, detention,
formal charging, and correctional placement). Justice officials, who
often lack the information on which to base reliable and valid
assessments of an offender's dangerousness or amenability to treatment,
develop a "perceptual shorthand" based on stereotypes and attributions
that are linked to offender characteristics, including race and
ethnicity.