U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Shay Bilchik, Administrator

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

OFF ICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS

BJA NI J OJJDP BJS OVC

October 1999 #118

Teen Courts in the United States:

A Profile of Current Programs

by Jeffrey Butts, Dean Hoffman, and Janeen Buck

Teen courts, also known as youth courts, have become a popular

intervention for relatively young and usually first-time offenders.

The number of teen courts nationwide grew from an estimated

50 programs in 1991 to between 400 and 500 programs in 1998

(Nessel, 1998). To document the characteristics and effectiveness

of these courts, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention (OJJDP) funded an evaluation of teen courts in 1998.

The Urban Institute of Washington, DC, is conducting the

evaluation.

Based on information provided by OJJDP and the American

Probation and Parole Association, Urban Institute researchers

mailed questionnaires to every known teen court program in

the country between October and December 1998. A total of 335

teen court programs responded—more than 70% of the programs

contacted. This Fact Sheet summarizes the results of the survey.

Program Characteristics

More than two-thirds of the teen court programs surveyed indicated that, at the time of the survey, they had existed for less than

5 years; of these, 20% had been operating for less than 1 year.

Most teen courts have relatively small caseloads. Forty-eight percent

of the programs indicated that they received fewer than 100 referrals

per year. Only 9% of the programs reported handling 300 or more

referrals per year. Survey findings indicated that teen courts nationwide handled approximately 65,000 cases in 1998.

Godwin (1998) described the following case-processing models

used by teen courts:

◆ Adult Judge—An adult serves as judge and rules on legal

terminology and courtroom procedure. Youth serve as attorneys, jurors, clerks, bailiffs, etc.

◆ Youth Judge—This is similar to the adult judge model, but

a youth serves as judge.

◆ Tribunal—Youth attorneys present the case to a panel of three

youth judges, who decide the appropriate disposition for the

defendant. A jury is not used.

◆ Peer Jury—This model does not use youth attorneys; the case

is presented to a youth jury by a youth or adult. The youth jury

then questions the defendant directly.

Most teen courts reported using only one case-processing model

for all cases. Forty-seven percent used the adult judge model,

12% used the peer jury model, 10% used the tribunal model, and

9% used the youth judge model. The remaining 22% used more

than one case-processing model.

Most teen courts do not determine the guilt or innocence of

youth. Rather, they serve as diversion alternatives and youth must

admit to the charges against them in order to qualify for teen

court. According to the survey, only 13% of teen courts were

authorized to determine guilt; of these, 44% used the tribunal

model and 36% used the youth judge model.

Program Administration

Administrators of teen court programs most often include

juvenile courts, probation agencies, law enforcement agencies,

schools, and private youth agencies. In 1998, the most common

Most Teen Courts Are Less Than 5 Years Old

Source: The Urban Institute. 1998. National survey of youth courts

and teen courts (unpublished).

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

<1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16+

Years in Operation as of 1998

Number of Teen Courts
PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/OJJDP

PERMIT NO. G–91

FS–99118 Fact Sheet

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

administrators of teen court programs were local court or

probation departments (36%), private agencies (24%), and law

enforcement agencies (12%).

Most of the costs associated with teen court programs were

covered by State or local governments. Only 33% of the programs responding to the survey received 10% or more of their

annual funding from private sources.

Case Characteristics

Teen courts usually handle first-time offenders charged with

offenses such as theft, misdemeanor assault, disorderly conduct,

and possession of alcohol. The majority (87%) of teen courts

reported that they “rarely” or “never” accepted youth with prior

arrest records, and 98% reported that they “rarely” or “never”

accepted youth with prior felony arrests. Respondents reported

that, on average, 24% of their cases involved youth under age 14

and 66% involved youth under age 16.

Community service was the most common disposition used in teen

court cases. Virtually all of the programs (99%) reported that they

used community service “often” or “very often.” Other dispositions

that were used “often” or “very often” included victim apology

letters (86%), apology essays (79%), teen court jury duty (75%),

drug/alcohol classes (59%), and monetary restitution (34%).

Process and Impact Evaluations

In the next phase of the evaluation project, researchers will conduct process and impact evaluations at four teen courts. These

evaluations will measure the intended outcomes of teen courts,

including reduced recidivism, increased prosocial attitudes, and

improved perceptions of justice. Results are expected to be

available in 2001.

For Further Information

The Urban Institute

2100 M Street NW.

Washington, DC 20037

Internet: www.urban.org

References

Godwin, T.M. 1998. Peer Justice and Youth Empowerment: An

Implementation Guide for Teen Court Programs. Lexington, KY:

American Probation and Parole Association. (Available from the

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse, 800–638–8736.)

Nessel, P.A. 1998. Teen Court: A National Movement. Technical

Assistance Bulletin Number 17. Chicago, IL: American Bar

Association, Division for Public Education.

Jeffrey Butts is the Director of the Evaluation of Teen Courts project at

The Urban Institute. Dean Hoffman is the Program Manager for the

project in OJJDP’s Research and Program Development Division.

Janeen Buck is a Research Associate at The Urban Institute.

Source: The Urban Institute. 1998. National survey of youth courts

and teen courts (unpublished).

The Most Popular Teen Court Model is an Adult Judge

With Youth Attorneys

Percent of U.S. Teen

Courts Using Each Model

Teen Court Used Used in

Model Exclusively Some Cases Total

Adult Judge 47% 17% 64%

Youth Judge 9 5 14

Tribunal 10 2 12

Peer Jury 12 14 26

FS–99118

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of

Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute

of Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime.