EVALUATION OF THE

DISPROPORTIONATE MINORITY

CONFINEMENT (DMC) INITIATIVE

Iowa Final Report

U. S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention

May 8, 1996
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................... iii

I. INTRODUCTION .................................................. I-1

1. BACKGROUND ........................................... I-1

1.1 Summary of DMC Literature ............................ I-1

1.2 OJJDP's DMC Initiative ............................... I-2

2. IOWA DMC DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ..................... I-3

2.1 DMC Phase I Research ............................... I-3

2.2 Iowa's Phase II Initiatives .............................. I-4

3. PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE OF THE EVALUATION REPORT .... I-6

II. METHODOLOGY ............................................. II-1

1. STATEWIDE PROCESS EVALUATION ........................ II-1

1.1 Evaluation Design ................................... II-1

1.2 State-Level Data Collection ............................ II-2

1.3 Data Analysis ....................................... II-5

2. PILOT COUNTY INTERVENTION ............................ II-5

2.1 Evaluation Design ................................... II-6

2.2 Data Collection and Analysis ........................... II-6

III. IOWA DMC INITIATIVE - STATE-LEVEL PROCESS .................. III-1

1. IOWA'S DMC PROJECT ORGANIZATION .................... III-1

2. PHASE I RESEARCH ACTIVITIES AND FINDINGS ............. III-2

2.1 Juvenile Confinement Data ........................... III-4

2.2 Case Processing Data ............................... III-5

2.3 Town Meetings ..................................... III-6

2.4 Formula Grant Recipient Reporting Requirements ......... III-7
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

PAGE

3. STATE-LEVEL PHASE II PLANS AND ACTIVITIES .............. III-7

3.1 Overview of Phase II Milestones ....................... III-7

3.2 State-level DMC Planning ............................ III-8

3.3 Phase II Implementation ............................. III-17

3.4 Phase II Management and Resources .................. III-28

3.5 Future Plans to Address DMC ........................ III-29

IV. IOWA'S PHASE II DEMONSTRATION INITIATIVE ...................... IV-1

1. COMMUNITY-BASED INTERVENTION ....................... IV-1

1.1 Cedar Rapids and Wellington Heights ................... IV-2

1.2 Positive Youth Development Project (PYDP) .............. IV-3

2. POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STRUCTURE ..... IV-4

2.1 The Positive Youth Development Task Force ............. IV-4

2.2 Positive Youth Development Project Components .......... IV-6

2.3 Program Components Within the Scope of the Evaluation ... IV-8

2.4 Program Components Outside the Scope of the Evaluation . IV-18

2.5 PYDP Family Results ............................... IV-19

V. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED .......................... V-1

1. DMC IMPACTS .......................................... V-1

1.1 DMC Statewide Impacts .............................. V-1

1.2 DMC Community Initiative Impacts ...................... V-2

2. SPECIFICATION OF LESSONS LEARNED .................... V-3

2.1 Statewide DMC Lessons Learned ...................... V-3

2.2 DMC Neighborhood Initiative Lessons Learned ............ V-5

3. LESSONS FOR THE NATIONAL EVALUATION ................ V-7

APPENDIX A ...................................................... A-1

APPENDIX B ...................................................... B-1

APPENDIX C ...................................................... C-1

APPENDIX D ...................................................... D-1

APPENDIX E ...................................................... E-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The disproportionate minority confinement (DMC) mandate of the Juvenile

Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act requires states to develop and

implement strategies to address and reduce the overrepresentation of minority youth in

secure facilities. In an effort to facilitate compliance with the mandate, the Office of

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) sponsored demonstration

projects in five pilot states. In Phase I of OJJDP's DMC Initiative, each pilot state

assessed the extent of DMC in its juvenile justice system. In Phase II, each state

designed and implemented strategies to address the disproportionate representation

identified in Phase I. The Initiative also included a National Evaluation to document the

lessons learned, identify key factors in the success of state and local efforts, and

determine the efficacy of different interventions in reducing DMC. At the request of

OJJDP, Caliber Associates, in conjunction with state representatives and Portland

State University, conducted the National Evaluation, consisting of separate evaluations

of each pilot state and one non-pilot state. This report presents findings from the

evaluation of the Iowa DMC demonstration project, which began in mid-1991, prior to

Iowa's selection as a DMC pilot site, and concluded in the Spring of 1995.

METHODOLOGY

The evaluation of Iowa's DMC Initiative consisted of a state-level process

evaluation and an evaluation of the Phase II community demonstration intervention. 

The state-level process evaluation consisted of qualitative analysis of project

documents from Phase I research and findings and Phase II planning activities and

interviews with key DMC participants on Phase I issues and Phase II planning,

development, implementation, and monitoring issues. The evaluation of the Phase II

community demonstration project consisted of quantitative analysis of incidence data;

qualitative and quantitative analysis of program operations data; measures of

participant satisfaction; and qualitative analysis of interview and focus group data

obtained from program staff and community representatives who discussed their

perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge of the programs, as well as broader issues

pertaining to minority youth.
iv

IOWA'S DMC INITIATIVE

Iowa's Phase I research efforts focused on defining the extent of minority

overrepresentation within secure settings. Research efforts included conducting a

statewide assessment as well as a more intensive analysis of data in four pilot

counties: Black Hawk, Polk, Scott, and Woodbury. These counties have the largest

minority populations in the state. The analysis of juvenile confinement data revealed

that during the 1992 state fiscal year, minority youth were over-represented in jails,

lockups, juvenile detention facilities, state mental health institutes, and the boys' state

training school. Furthermore, the length of stay in juvenile detention facilities, state

training school, and state mental health institutes varied among minority groups. 

Quantitative analysis of case processing data from the four pilot counties revealed that

race/ethnicity affected decision-making within the juvenile justice system depending

upon the stage of the process and the county. Additionally, these analyses uncovered

unintentional biases in the decision-making process and revealed that social and

community factors significantly contributed to the disproportionate representation of

minorities in the juvenile justice system. Participants in town meetings conducted in the

four pilot counties, identified factors contributing to DMC, including a lack of economic

and social opportunities, a lack of minority staff working within the justice system, and

ignorance of minority cultures among educators and service providers. Analysis of

interviews with African American youth who were on probation or within state

institutions revealed that, although blatant racism was rare, cultural prejudice or

ignorance was rampant among justice system personnel.

Once the Phase I research on overrepresentation was completed, the Iowa DMC

team developed and implemented its Phase II plans, which focused on community

problem identification and community problem solving. Through a competitive process,

the Iowa DMC team selected the Jane Boyd Community House to receive funding as

the Phase II community demonstration project. The Jane Boyd "Positive Youth

Development Project" (PYDP) is based on a "wrap-around" services model. The PYDP

is a comprehensive, multiagency effort to reduce criminal and delinquent activity

among youth. The PYDP provides primary delinquency prevention to minority youth as

well as family services. The PYDP also advocates on behalf of youth and families in

the community and seeks to strengthen the neighborhood through citizen action and

collaboration with public providers of family services. The evaluation revealed that the

PYDP served a significant number of families and individuals, referring family members

for needed services to both PYDP and to outside agencies. In addition to the PYDP,

Iowa’s DMC Initiative also included minor financial support for four other community

demonstration projects that had already progressed in organizing and planning DMC-
v

related efforts.

LESSONS LEARNED

A primary objective of the state demonstration projects is to provide

opportunities for other states and locales to learn from the pilot state experiences. To

this end, the evaluation of the Iowa DMC Initiative identified several lessons learned

from state and local efforts. Iowa's Phase I planning demonstrated the consensusbuilding value of investing in quality research. The Phase I research provided the DMC

Committee a platform for discussing the status of DMC in the state, not just in

confinement, but in the systemic structure that leads to confinement as well. The

search for causes of systemic DMC is a separate challenge for consensus. Phase I

Committee members offered explanations about the causes of high levels of DMC. 

One explanation holds that the causes of DMC are chiefly due to the juvenile justice

system reflecting the racism of the larger community and that the justice system must

be reformed to reduce DMC. The other explanation holds that DMC is caused by

socio-economic factors beyond the control of the juvenile justice system and the

government, and even if racism disappeared, youth from the lowest economic class

would continue to be disproportionately confined. Finally, the Phase II activities

demonstrated that even small community programs can effectively pursue different

approaches to the reduction of DMC. The PYDP multiplied the impact of its efforts by

advocating for minority youth and their families; collaborating with juvenile justice

agencies, other public agencies, and community non-profit organizations; and

developing alternative resources, such as culturally sensitive delinquency treatment.

FUTURE PLANS

The structure for future DMC efforts in Iowa has been established with the

creation of the DMC 2000 strategy. The goals of DMC 2000 are to enhance prevention

and diversion programming; expand community-based alternatives to secure detention;

effectively monitor juvenile justice system activities and outcomes; review decisionmaking policy, legislation, and practice; and develop and provide culturally appropriate

training. The evaluation found that the DMC 2000 strategy is technically sound,

energetic, and appears to be an appropriate "flagship" for revitalizing, channeling, and

focusing the DMC Committee's efforts.
I. INTRODUCTION
I-1

I. INTRODUCTION

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) sponsored,

in five states, demonstration projects that were designed to address problems of

Disproportionate Minority Confinement (DMC) within the juvenile justice system. This

report presents findings from the evaluation of the Iowa DMC project. This chapter

presents relevant background information, an overview of the Iowa demonstration

project, and the purpose and organization of the report.

1. BACKGROUND

 Findings from a large body of literature suggest that disproportionate minority

confinement occurs within many juvenile justice systems across the nation. Recent

congressional legislation requires states to assess the extent of DMC in their juvenile

justice systems and to develop and implement strategies to address DMC problems

that are found. OJJDP's DMC initiative seeks to assist states to comply with the

mandate. The initiative includes support for the development and implementation of

DMC projects in five pilot states, including Iowa. The DMC initiative also calls for

evaluation of pilot state projects to help OJJDP determine the best methods for

assisting states to comply with the mandate, as well as to suggest strategies and

provide useful lessons to non-pilot states that are developing and implementing DMC

projects of their own. The following paragraphs provide a summary of the DMC

literature followed by a more detailed description of the OJJDP DMC Initiative.

1.1 Summary of DMC Literature

Disproportionate minority confinement is defined by OJJDP as a ratio of "the

share of the juvenile justice population that is minority relative to the share of the at-risk

population that is minority." Since the late 1960s, scores of researchers have

published studies assessing the extent to which DMC exists within the juvenile justice

system. Approximately two thirds of all published studies found evidence of DMC

(Pope and Feyerherm, 1992). One third of the studies, however, did not find evidence

of DMC. Researchers note that inherent methodological difficulties contributed to the

inconsistent findings. Another factor contributing to the inconsistent findings may be

that most DMC studies were restricted to one stage in system processing (Bishop and

Frazier, 1988). Such an approach, several authors contend, fails to measure the

"cumulative disadvantage" to minority youth within a juvenile justice system. Although

race may have a small, statistically insignificant effect on decision-making at particular
I-2

stages, race may still have a significant, cumulative effect on the juvenile justice system

outcomes overall (Zatz, 1987).

Approximately one third of all DMC studies found an overall pattern of DMC,

while an equal proportion of studies found DMC only at particular points within the

juvenile justice system (Pope and Feyerherm, 1992). Many researchers believe that

DMC is most pronounced at the "front end" of the juvenile justice system, yet few DMC

studies have focused on the front end (Conley, 1994). Measuring the racial bias that

occurs when police officers decide which juveniles to question—or when citizens, social

workers, and school officials decide to alert authorities to delinquent behavior—is

fraught with methodological challenges (Sampson, 1986). 

Studies finding evidence of DMC typically ascribed its causes to either: (1)

systematic racial bias against minority youth within the juvenile justice system or (2)

more serious and/or more frequent offenses being committed by minority youth. Both

explanations were considered legitimate in the Federal DMC legislation which was

developed, in large part, to answer the research findings summarized above. 

1.2 OJJDP's DMC Initiative

The 1988 amendments to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

(JJDP) Act included a requirement to states participating in the OJJDP Formula Grants

Program to address the growing problem of the disproportionate confinement of

minority youth in secure facilities. The 1992 amendments to the JJDP Act included a

mandate requiring the states to assess the level of minority youth confinement in their

juvenile justice systems and to implement strategies to reduce disproportionate

representation. To facilitate states' ability to comply with this mandate, OJJDP

established the Disproportionate Minority Confinement Initiative. Through a

competitive process, OJJDP selected five states—Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Oregon, and

North Carolina—to receive training, technical assistance, and financial assistance. 

The DMC Initiative was designed to include two 18-month phases. During

Phase I, each of the five pilot states assessed the extent of disproportionate

representation in its juvenile justice system, and reported the findings to OJJDP. 

During Phase II, the pilot states designed strategies to address the disproportionate

representation problems identified during their Phase I assessments.
I-3

Phase II includes a National Evaluation of the DMC Initiative. OJJDP has

requested that Caliber Associates design and conduct the evaluation in collaboration

with pilot state representatives and the national technical assistance providers from

Portland State University. The National Evaluation will include separate evaluation

reports on each pilot state and one non-pilot state. To complement the pilot states, the

National Evaluation will include the State of Michigan, which developed and

implemented a DMC plan without OJJDP support. The inclusion of Michigan will

provide a more robust picture of state efforts to reduce minority overrepresentation.

The objectives for the National Evaluation are to document the lessons learned

and factors key to the success of state and local efforts, as well as to determine the

efficacy of different types of interventions in reducing the degree of disproportionate

representation. The evaluation findings will be incorporated into training and technical

assistance manuals, which OJJDP will disseminate to all states as a resource that will

assist their planning and implementing approaches to reduce the disproportionate

representation of minorities in the juvenile justice system.

2. IOWA DMC DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

The Iowa DMC demonstration project was conducted in two phases. To provide

a context for the evaluation report, the Iowa DMC Phase I and Phase II activities are

summarized below and described in more detail later in this report.

2.1 DMC Phase I Research

During Phase I of its initiative, the Iowa Department of Human Rights' Division of

Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP) assessed the extent of disproportionate

representation in the state's juvenile justice system. This research effort included a

statewide assessment of minority youth overrepresentation and an intensive analysis of

data in four pilot counties: Black Hawk, Polk, Scott, and Woodbury. These counties

have the largest minority populations in the state.

CJJP's analysis of statewide data revealed that minority youth were overrepresented in jails, lockups, juvenile detention facilities, state mental health institutes,

and the boys' state training school. Specifically, Native Americans and African

Americans experienced longer stays at the state training school than Anglo youth; 

African Americans experienced longer stays in state mental health institutes than Anglo
I-4

youth; and African Americans and Hispanics/Latinos experienced longer stays at

juvenile detention facilities than Anglo youth.

Analysis of case processing data from the four pilot counties indicated race

effects that varied by county. The influence of race or ethnicity also varied at different

stages of the juvenile justice system. Analysis of qualitative data collected in each of

the four counties indicated that unintentional biases were evident in the juvenile justice

decision-making process.

The analyses of data collected at town meetings held in each county and data

from interviews with minority youth involved in the juvenile justice system identified

other factors that contributed to the overrepresentation of minority youth in the system. 

These factors included a lack of:

• Minority staff in both line and management positions within the juvenile

justice system

• Recognition by juvenile justice system workers of the unique culture of

minority youth

• Economic and social opportunities for minority youth.

Following completion of the Phase I background research on minority youth

overrepresentation, the CJJP project team began Phase II of its initiative: developing

and implementing plans to address the problems identified by the research findings.

2.2 Iowa's Phase II Initiatives

To address the problem of minority youth overrepresentation in the juvenile

justice system, CJJP developed an array of initiatives. These initiatives included:

• Funding a pilot community program to provide prevention and intervention

services targeted at minority youth

• Providing planning grants to the four pilot counties that participated in the

Phase I data analysis

• Implementing a state-wide cultural competency training program.

These three initiatives are briefly described below.
I-5

Community-Based Intervention

CJJP solicited proposals from counties and agencies to receive funding to

implement a community demonstration project. CJJP selected the proposal from Cedar

Rapid's Jane Boyd Community House. Jane Boyd's Positive Youth Development

Project (PYDP) targets the Wellington Heights neighborhood in the city of Cedar

Rapids. PYDP is supported by a coalition of Cedar Rapids agencies.

PYDP's primary objective is to provide a holistic approach to strengthening the

Wellington Heights neighborhood by empowering families and providing prevention

and intervention services to parents and their children. The Jane Boyd DMC project

was incorporated into PYDP to provide neighborhood children and families with any

array of services, delivered in the three ways:

• Specific program services were funded by the new resources obtained

from Iowa's DMC grant

• Jane Boyd services targeted to minority youth who were at-risk for

juvenile justice involvement were extended

• Additional services were developed or extended through the PYDP

coalition of agencies.

Representatives from the coalition formed a task force to oversee the project's

provision of family-oriented services to reduce minority overrepresentation in the

juvenile justice system.

Pilot County Planning Grants

The four counties that participated in the Phase I research were initially awarded

$10,000 planning grants each. The purpose of the smaller community-planning grants

was to provide the individual communities with the opportunity to pursue their unique

approaches to reducing the disproportionate representation of minorities in local

juvenile justice systems.

Statewide Cultural Competency Training

The Iowa Phase II plans included the development and provision of cultural

competency training. This initiative included, (but was not be limited to) curriculum

development and the actual provision of training. Other activities focused on providing
I-6

support to the revision of personnel manual sections and chapters; efforts were made

to blend cultural competency issues, policies, and procedures within appropriate

sections of the personnel manual.
I-7

3. PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE OF THE EVALUATION REPORT

The purpose of this document is to present Caliber Associates' evaluation

findings on the DMC initiative in Iowa. This chapter provided an overview of the DMC

literature, OJJDP's DMC initiative, and Iowa's approach to addressing the DMC

problem. Chapter II describes Caliber's objectives and methodology for conducting the

evaluation. Chapter III presents findings from the state-level process evaluation of

Iowa's DMC initiative, and Chapter IV presents findings from the evaluation of the

Jane Boyd Positive Youth Development Project. Finally, Chapter V summarizes key

lessons learned from Iowa's experience that may be applicable to states developing

their own DMC initiatives. Throughout the report, specific agencies or organizations

are introduced by name and (in parentheses) by acronym, thereafter, they are referred

to only by acronym. To assist the reader, Appendix A provides an alphabetical list of

organizations and their acronyms.
I-8

REFERENCES

Bishop, D.M. and C. Frazier. "The Influence of Race in Juvenile Justice Processing" 

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 25(3) 1988.

Conley, D.J. "Adding Color to a Black and White Picture: Using Qualitative Data to 

Explain Racial Disproportionality in the Juvenile Justice System ." Journal of 

Research in Crime and Delinquency 31(2) 1994.

Feyerherm, W. Disproportionate Minority Confinement: Lessons Learned from the Pilot

State Experiences. Prepared for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention. Portland State University. 1995. 

Pope, C. and W. Feyerherm. Minorities and the Juvenile Justice System. U.S. 

Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse. 1992.

Sampson, R. "Effects of Socioeconomic Context on Official Reaction to Juvenile 

Delinquency." American Sociological Review 5 1986.

Zatz, M.S., "The Changing Forms of Racial/Ethnic Biases in Sentencing." Journal of 

Research in Crime and Delinquency 24(1) 1987.
II. METHODOLOGY
II-1

II. METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes the overall approach taken in the evaluation of the Iowa

DMC initiative. The Caliber team working with the state’s Division of Criminal and

Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP) and Portland State University developed the overall

evaluation approach for addressing Iowa's major DMC-related activities. The overall

evaluation approach had the following associated objectives:

• Provide a mechanism for the documentation of all activities funded under

the DMC initiative, including a process evaluation plan for state-level

activities.

• Develop a tailored evaluation design for the community demonstration

projects that would:

- Provide support to CJJP management for monitoring grantee

progress and assessing implementation and operations of each

individual grant

- Provide measures, where practical, of intervention effectiveness.

To meet these objectives, the Iowa evaluation design consisted of two evaluation

frameworks. One addressed the total DMC Phase II process, and the second

addresses the individual Jane Boyd community demonstration intervention. Specific

evaluation activities are described in the sections that follow.

1. STATEWIDE PROCESS EVALUATION

The following sections describe the evaluation design, data collection methods,

and analyses for the statewide process evaluation.

1.1 Evaluation Design

The purpose of the statewide evaluation was much broader than normally

associated with a process evaluation. The approach did not focus on a specific

program or set of activities. Rather, the overall purpose of this evaluation effort was to

assess the state and county planning and implementation processes in order to identify

factors that contributed to, as well as distracted from, effective decision-making,

program planning, and program implementation activities. Specific objectives

associated with the statewide evaluation included:
II-2

• Define the operating context for the Iowa DMC approach

• Identify and assess responses to the needs suggested by the Phase I

data analysis

• Identify and document the processes used by CJJP, counties, and other

local agencies to plan, develop, and fund specific interventions.

To meet these objectives, the statewide process evaluation included the

systematic collection of information to answer key process evaluation questions. 

Examples of evaluation questions that guided this investigation included:

• What was the extent of disproportionate representation of minority youth

within the Iowa juvenile justice system?

• What were the major factors contributing to the disproportionate

representation?

• What problems were identified, and what assumptions were made about

the causes?

• What strategies were developed for responding to the disproportionate

representation? How were the strategies determined?

• What programs and other interventions resulted from these strategies?

• What were the implementation experiences associated with the programs

and other interventions?

• What lessons were learned about how to create change? To what extent

can these lessons be generalized?

• What issues remain unaddressed, and what questions remain to be

answered, about the effectiveness of Iowa's DMC strategies?

An illustrative evaluation framework, structured around these evaluation questions, is

presented in Exhibit II-1, on the following page.

1.2 State-Level Data Collection

For the state-level process evaluation, data sources included project documents

and interviews with both key DMC participants, at the state and county levels, and

community representatives. Documentation on Phase I research and findings and 

II-4

II-3

EXHIBIT II-1

EVALUATION FRAMEWORK FOR STATEWIDE PROCESS EVALUATION

EVALUATION QUESTIONS INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCES METHODS

INFORMATION DATA COLLECTION

• What was the extent of • Demographic • Phase I data and researchers

disproportionate representation of characteristics of youth in

minority youth within the Iowa juvenile JJS

justice system?

• Incidence of minority youth

at each stage of JJS

process

• Document reviews including

Phase I data analysis

• What were the major factors • Factors which influence • Phase I data and researchers • Interviews with researchers and

contributing to the disproportionate decisions at each stage in

representation? JJS process

CJJP staff

• What problems were identified and • Perceptions and • Perceptions of JJ system • Interviews with CJJP and other

what assumptions were made about experiences of CJJP and

the causes? other JJS staff

representatives and youth staff

• Perceptions and experiences of

state, county local personnel;

youth

• What strategies were developed for • Factors that influenced • CJJP staff; county and other • Interviews

responding to the disproportionate Project documentation

representation? How were the

strategies determined?

planning and program local personnel

development decisions

• What strategies were most effective in • Funding from detailed • Jane Boyd, county planning • Derivative from local evaluation

bringing about change? evaluations grant evaluations findings

• What lessons were learned about how • Perceptions of CJJP staff; • CJJP and other staff • Interviews

to create change? To what extent are

these lessons generalizable?

county and other local staff Project documentation
II-5

• What issues remain unaddressed, and • Findings from process • Data collected during statewide • Derivative from statewide

what questions remain to be answered

about the effectiveness of lowa's

strategies?

evaluation evaluation evaluation findings

Phase II planning activities were obtained from the CJJP DMC team and included:

• A Description and Discussion of Minority Over-Representation in Iowa's Juvenile Justice System

• Juvenile Justice Decision-Making in Iowa: An Analysis of the Influences of Race on Case Processing in

Three Counties

• Juvenile Justice Decision-Making in Iowa: An Analysis of the Influence of Race on Case Processing in

Scott County

• The Disproportionate Over-Representation of Minority Youth in Secure Facilities: A Survey of DecisionMakers and Delinquents

• Iowa's Phase II Group Application for Discretionary Funding in the Incarceration of Minorities Project

• Categorical Assistance Progress Report; Iowa DMC Project Quarterly Reports.

These documents were reviewed by the evaluation team to enhance understanding of Iowa's DMC initiative and to

develop chronologies of events. 

In May 1995, a three-person evaluation team made on-site visits to Cedar Falls, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Des Moines,

Eldora, Sioux City, and Waterloo, Iowa to conduct in-depth interviews with key state, county, and community-level

leaders and participants in the DMC initiative. A total of 21 interviews were conducted with CJJP staff; members of the

Minority Over-Representation Task Force, The Juvenile Justice Advisory Council, the DMC pilot counties, and

community-based organizations; and the Phase I researcher.
II-6

The interviews explored all of the question areas described above: understanding DMC; Phase I issues, definitions,

and findings; Phase II planning; Phase II program development; Phase II implementation; Phase II monitoring; DMC

impacts; and DMC "Lessons Learned." All interviews were conducted with semi-structured interview guides tailored to

each specific situation. A copy of this interview guide is presented in Appendix B.
II-7

1.3 Data Analysis

The analyses conducted were driven by the evaluation objectives. For the state-level process evaluation, project

documents were analyzed primarily for background and context information.

To ensure a systematic, comprehensive, and accurate summary of interview data and observation notes, the

evaluation team applied content and consistency analysis techniques. These techniques involved recording and

tabulating responses from individual interviews and observation notes in a series of matrices. The substance of, or key

words from, responses from each data source were recorded in the matrices. Data from each individual source were

tabulated by each specific question or topic in order to aggregate the data and make comparisons. The aggregation of

data is a structured, but to some extent, judgmental process. Yet the approach yielded an affordable means for providing

a reasonably complete and accurate picture of what happened, and why.

2. PILOT COUNTY INTERVENTION

The project selected as Iowa's pilot county intervention was the Positive Youth Development Project (PYDP),

operated by the Jane Boyd Community House in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The PYDP is a collection of activities, services,

and interventions, each with their own objectives. Although all of the program components target the Wellington Heights

community, many of the services are limited to a specific number of people during the grant period.

Given the wide range of activities, the limited number of youth or parents to be served, and the lack of rigorous

controls on program entrants and completers, the PYDP is not an appropriate candidate for an experimental, or quasiexperimental, design. The project lends itself, however, to a series of evaluation activities that draw upon process

evaluation methods and effectiveness evaluation measures. This evaluation approach does not allow for a definitive

measurement of the project's effectiveness; however, it does support the collection and analysis of multiple indicators of

project performance. Specifically, the evaluation for the PYDP provided:

• Monitoring support for state-level grants management
II-8

• Project information to support internal project monitoring

• Low levels of project effectiveness measurement.

The project effectiveness data, while not statistically rigorous, is of sufficient quality to inform Jane Boyd, CJJP, and

OJJDP of the types of interventions that are most appropriate to different youth, family, and community needs.

2.1 Evaluation Design

The PYDP is comprised of 10 program components. The evaluation team, together with CJJP and the Jane Boyd

Community House Director, reviewed these components in terms of their objectives and the measures that could be used

to evaluate the achievement of the objectives. This information has been summarized and is presented in Exhibit II-2 on

the following pages. This matrix forms the foundation of the evaluation design for the PYDP.

2.2 Data Collection and Analysis

In July 1995, a two-person evaluation team conducted an on-site data collection visit to Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 

Several types of information were collected in support of the evaluation of the PYDP, including the following:

• Incidence data—number and type of incidents to be affected by the program component. For

example, the Law Enforcement Initiative collects number of local criminal events, number of police

calls, number of arrests, and other standard law enforcement measures.

• Project operations - quantitative —quantitative data that reflected the level and type of project

operations. Examples include: number of participants, number of training sessions, number and type

of other project activities, and number of parents in parent groups.

• Project operations - qualitative —in addition to the quantitative project operations data, information

that indicated the content of the project component. For example, the curriculum of the Master

Teachers Program, the agendas for the Coffee Break groups, and the type of support provided

during the Home Visitation and Counseling component.
• Measures of participant satisfaction —participant feedback questionnaires were developed and used

for several of the project components. Using simple, five-point scales and brief narrative reports,

these questionnaires requested that participants record their levels of satisfaction with the project

experiences, as well as what they liked most and least about the experience.
II-7

EXHIBIT II-2

POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT COMPONENTS

OBJECTIVES, MEASURES, AND EVALUATION SUPPORT

COMPONENT OBJECTIVES MEASURES/INDICATORS SUPPORT ACTION STEPS

TYPE OF

EVALUATION EVALUATION TEAM

Community Focus Change law enforcement Tallies of incidents; local Technical Assist Jane Boyd to

Law Enforcement service Number of foot patrols Overall recording forms

image to that of supportive residents' police calls assistance develop final measures,

Increase beat officers' and Number of occasions design Include this component in

residents' exposure to each officers use Harambee evaluation design

other House for breaks

Obtain Departmental Number/type of preventive

support in monitoring activities

neighborhood incidents Other standard law

enforcement measures of

effectiveness

Family/Parent Early identification of family Number of agencies Technical Assist Jane Boyd to

Focus needs involved in case assistance develop recording forms

PATCH/Case strengths, needs, resources Number youth/families in

Management system Strengthen family's system

Work with families to identify management

neighborhood network Source/timing of referrals

Refocus programs, into PATCH

resources to neighborhood- Levels of satisfaction

based system among families/youth

Master Teacher Select Master Teacher Increased self-esteem of Technical Assist Jane Boyd to

Program participants Master Teacher trainees assistance develop final measures,

Conduct 10 weeks of Increased neighborhood Overall recording forms,

training knowledge of program design evaluation forms

Refer families to social 40 families complete 10 Include this component in

worker sessions evaluation design

Track family participation in Number of referrals for

other programs counseling

Work with 50 families with a

90% completion rate
II-8

EXHIBIT II-2 (Continued)

POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT COMPONENTS

OBJECTIVES, MEASURES, AND EVALUATION SUPPORT

COMPONENT OBJECTIVES MEASURES/INDICATORS SUPPORT ACTION STEPS

TYPE OF

EVALUATION EVALUATION TEAM

Coffee Break Involve Master Teacher Formation of group (90% Technical Assist Jane Boyd to

participants in ongoing of participants) assistance develop final measures,

support group Involvement of parents in Overall recording forms, feedback

Further training process planning/implementing design forms

Create forum to assess family nights Include this component in

family and neighborhood evaluation design

needs

Home Visitation and Help families in crisis Number of home visits Technical Assist Jane Boyd to

Counseling become stable Level of use of counseling assistance develop final measures,

Use case management services recording forms, feedback

system to review cases Number of referrals to forms

Obtain insight and other agencies Include this component in

understanding about each Indicators of family evaluation design

family's situation empowerment

Family Night Out Provide six "family night out" Number of "family night Technical Assist Jane Boyd to

social events out" events assistance develop final measures,

Improve family functioning Program attendance by Overall recording forms, feedback 

by providing healthful social - Youth design forms

opportunities - Parents Include this component in

Involve community residents Community-wide evaluation design

in organizing community participation and feedback

activities

Domestic Violence Conduct gender specific Increased number of None None

Prevention programs with youth — minorities using services

increase awareness of date- Employment of minority

related abuse staff

Encourage use of local Evidence that gendershelter specific programs were

Provide crisis and aftercare conducted

services Evidence that this program

Provide support groups integrates with other

programs/services
II-12

II-9

EXHIBIT II-2 (Continued)

POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT COMPONENTS

OBJECTIVES, MEASURES, AND EVALUATION SUPPORT

COMPONENT OBJECTIVES MEASURES/INDICATORS SUPPORT ACTION STEPS

TYPE OF

EVALUATION EVALUATION TEAM

Youth Focus • Provide strategies to • Academic peformance and Technical Assist Harambee House staff

Youth-In-Action/ esteem, academic • Program attendance and systems

Rites of Passage performance, interpersonal participation

enhance youths' self- attendance Assistance to develop reporting/recording

skills, critical thinking/ • Program-related activities

decision-making such as development of

• Provide youth with student journals

tutors/mentors

Tutors/Mentors • Recruit 25 mentors to 25 • Number tutors/mentors • Technical • Assist Jane Boyd to

youth recruited and trained assistance develop final measures,

• Identify mentors who will • Number tutors/mentors • Overall recording forms, feedback

provide positive role models who stay active for one design forms

• Identify youth who need year • Include this component in

basic skills tutoring and/or • Number of youth who are evaluation design

mentoring for self-esteem tutored/mentored

• Increase individual and • Indicators of tutoring

business participation impact (school

performances, etc.)

TAFT Alternative • Provide educational • Youth attendance, program None None

Program alternatives for youth completion

expelled from school • Youth returned to school

• Involve parent(s) in youth's • Follow-up tracking during

educational process school year

• Foster behavior modification

of program participants

• Enable eventual reenrollment
II-13

In addition to the project component specific data, information was collected from

project staff and other community representatives including law enforcement officers,

adults who served as tutors/mentors, and Task Force/other agency representatives. 

This information included their perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge of the PYDP, as

well as broader issues pertaining to minority youth involvement with the juvenile justice

system.

Information on individual perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge was collected using

one of two methods:

• One-on-one interviews using carefully constructed interview protocols for

agency staff, community leaders, and law enforcement officers

• Focus group interviews with youth who participated in the project

components.

Interview and focus group guides are presented in Appendix C. Participant feedback

surveys are presented in Appendix D.

Following data collection, the data were compiled for analysis. To complete the

analysis, these steps were followed:

• Quantitative data obtained from each project component were tabulated

• Qualitative data on project components were summarized using content

analysis techniques

• Participant feedback data were tabulated and combined with the above

sources

• The broader-based interview data were analyzed by source (i.e., parents,

youth, and agency staff). 

The focus of the analysis was two-fold:

• Component-specific descriptions of the operations, outcomes, and

participant satisfaction

• Broader-based descriptions of community needs and issues pertaining to

youth, parents, and families.
II-14

For both the state-level process and the community demonstration project

analyses, the content of each response to a specific question or topic was compared to

determine the diversity as well as the commonalities of findings or experiences

reported. Findings from the data analyses for the process evaluation are presented in

the next chapter. Findings from the analyses that focused on the PYDP are presented

in Chapter IV. Combined, the two sets of analyses revealed the lessons learned and

formed the foundation for the conclusions presented in Chapter V.
III. IOWA DMC INITIATIVE—STATE-LEVEL PROCESS
III-1

III. IOWA DMC INITIATIVE—STATE-LEVEL PROCESS

The emphasis of the Iowa Disproportionate Minority Confinement (DMC)

Initiative was on community problem identification and problem-solving. Transforming

the examination of DMC from a federal mandate to community-based initiatives

required extensive state and local level planning, collaboration, and negotiation. The

purpose of this chapter is to describe the DMC planning and collaboration activities that

were initiated and directed by the Iowa DMC team. The chapter begins with a

description of the organization of the Iowa DMC Initiative. The Phase I research

activities and findings are summarized in order to provide a context for the description

of the Phase II state-level activities. The chapter concludes with a description of Iowa's

future plans for addressing DMC.

1. IOWA'S DMC PROJECT ORGANIZATION

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act mandates statelevel juvenile justice and delinquency prevention programs and activities. According to

the JJDP Act, each participating state and U.S. Territory must create a state advisory

group to support the development of state plans and to oversee formula and

discretionary grant activities. The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning

(CJJP) within Iowa's Department of Human Rights provides the required administrative

support for DMC-related activities. In addition, the Governor appointed the Juvenile

Justice Advisory Council (JJAC) to develop the juvenile justice-related plans and

oversee the juvenile justice programs.

The disproportionate overrepresentation of minority youth in secure facilities

(DORMSF) was simultaneously recognized as an important policy and program issue in

the late 1980's by CJJP and an independent researcher, Michael Leiber, Ph.D. at The

University of Northern Iowa. When the JJDP Act was amended in 1988 to require that

states address disproportionate minority confinement in secure facilities, the JJAC

allocated a portion of formula grant dollars to fund Dr. Leiber's research, which

examined race and juvenile justice decision-making in three Iowa counties. On the

strength of Dr. Leiber's findings, CJJP applied for, and was awarded, an Office of

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) Special Emphasis Grant to

become a pilot state and, as a national demonstration, to provide interventions to

address the disproportionate confinement of minorities.
III-2

The Iowa DMC project is organized functionally. OJJDP, as the funding agency,

is organizationally at the top and has a direct relationship with CJJP. Portland State

University, Community Research Associates, and Caliber Associates are funded

directly by OJJDP and provide technical assistance and evaluation services.

During Phase I of the DMC initiative, CJJP temporarily staffed the project with

the Juvenile Justice Specialist and the Jail Removal Coordinator, both of whom were

under the direction of the Administrator. In March 1994, a full-time Justice System

Analyst was hired as the DMC Coordinator and assumed primary responsibility for the

Phase II activities. In addition to planning, implementing, and monitoring the overall

Iowa DMC project, the CJJP DMC team has direct responsibility for the DMC cultural

competency training initiative and the coordination of the DMC information systems

development activities. Each of these DMC initiatives are described in subsequent

sections of this chapter.

Even before the OJJDP grant, the JJAC recognized that the DMC issues and

initiatives would require dedicated oversight. Therefore, the JJAC appointed a group of

juvenile justice system professionals, from the state and county levels, and community

representatives to the Minority Over-representation Task Force. The Task Force has

guided the DMC work with CJJP, and provided recommendations to JJAC during the

DMC Phase I and Phase II activities. As the Iowa DMC Initiative matured, the Task

Force shifted slightly in focus and membership, encouraging a higher proportion of

community representatives, and is currently referred to as the DMC Committee.

Operating under the guidance of the CJJP DMC team are the local DMC

communities including the demonstration project in Cedar Rapids and the four

recipients of county planning grants: Black Hawk, Polk, Scott, and Woodbury

Counties. These local jurisdictions currently have direct responsibility for planning,

implementing, and operating the Iowa community-based DMC interventions. These

organizational relationships are illustrated in Exhibit III-1 on the following page.

2. PHASE I RESEARCH ACTIVITIES AND FINDINGS

As previously described, CJJP, under the direction of the JJAC, sponsored the

Iowa DMC research efforts. Initially with formula grant funds, then as part of the
Moore, R.G. A Description and Discussion of Minority Over-Representation in Iowa's Juvenile 1

Justice System. Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning and Statistical Analysis

Center. June 1993.

III-3

Special Emphasis Grant, the Iowa research efforts focused on defining the extent of

minority overrepresentation. 1
PORTLAND STATE

UNIVERSITY

 Overall project support

 and technical assistance 

 

COMMUNITY RESEARCH

ASSOCIATES

 

Technical assistance 

 

Office of Juvenile 

Justice and Delinquency

Prevention (OJJDP)

EXHIBIT III - 1

IOWA DMC PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART

Iowa Dept of Human 

Rights 

Division of Criminal 

and Juvenile Justice

Planning (CJJP)

CEDAR RAPIDS

Positive Youth Development

Project

Demonstration

Project

Davenport

Scott County

Planning Grant

Des Moines

Polk County

Planning Grant

Sioux City

Woodbury County

Planning Grant

Waterloo

Black Hawk County

Planning Grant

Iowa Juvenile Justice

Advisory Council

(JJAC)

DMC Committee (1994 -

)

Minority

Over- Representation 

Task Force

(1992-1994)

CALIBER ASSOCIATES

Evaluation 

 

III-3
III-5

The Iowa DMC research efforts included conducting a statewide assessment of

minority youth overrepresentation and a more intensive analysis of data in four pilot

counties: Black Hawk, Polk, Scott and Woodbury. These counties have the largest

minority populations in the state. Although the JJDP Act emphasizes

overrepresentation in confinement, the Iowa research team expanded their scope by

examining decision points throughout Iowa's juvenile justice system. The research had

three general objectives:

• To assess the extent of minority youth overrepresentation statewide and

in four pilot counties

• To identify the decision points in Iowa's juvenile justice system where the

most overrepresentation occurs

• To explore the implications of current research findings for future

research on the reasons why overrepresentation occurs.

To address these objectives, Iowa's research team employed four primary data

collection methods, including:

• Refining existing data on juvenile confinement

• Collecting case processing data in four pilot counties

• Holding four town meetings

• Modifying formula grant recipient reporting requirements.

Each of these data collection methods and the findings from the data analysis are

summarized below.

2.1 Juvenile Confinement Data

The data already being collected on the number of juveniles held in jails and

lockups, juvenile detention facilities, mental health institutes, and the state training

school were examined and additional data items, including race and gender, were

collected. Uniform Crime Report (UCR) juvenile arrest data from the Department of

Public Safety, and data on youth receiving juvenile justice services through the

Department of Human Services (DHS) were also collected and analyzed. Because

information on the numbers and types of juveniles involved with the juvenile justice

system was previously unavailable, CJJP expanded its existing data collection

procedures and sources, and refined data collection instruments to complete its

statewide assessment. A primary goal during Phase I was to develop procedures and
III-6

systems that would provide the capability for on-going monitoring of the extent of

minority youth involvement in the juvenile justice system. CJJP's analysis of statewide

data found that:

• Minority youth were over-represented in jails, lockups, juvenile detention

facilities, state mental health institutes, and the boys' state training school

during the 1992 state fiscal year

• Native Americans and African Americans experienced longer stays at the

state training school

• African Americans experienced longer stays in state mental health

institutes.

The analysis also found that African Americans and Hispanics/Latinos experienced

longer stays at juvenile detention facilities.

2.2 Case Processing Data

The Phase I research also explored the extent to which the race and ethnicity of

juveniles contributed to the disproportionate representation indicated by CJJP's

statewide assessment. The research team collected and analyzed case processing

data in the four pilot counties and interviewed juvenile justice officials and youth about

their perceptions and attitudes regarding race, ethnicity, and other factors that may play

a role in influencing decision-making. This effort was designed to collect information

previously unavailable about the numbers and types of juveniles involved in the

juvenile justice system in those counties, and to determine if minority youth were overrepresented as they moved through the system.

Quantitative analysis of the case processing data from four pilot counties

indicated that although legal factors, such as offense severity, were generally the

strongest determinants affecting outcomes, the race or ethnicity of the youth also

influenced decision-making. The effect of race on decision-making varied by the stage

of the process and by county. Analysis of the qualitative interview data indicated that

unintentional biases in the decision-making process affected the level of minority

overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system. Despite these findings concerning

the impact of race and bias on the decision-making process, the research also

demonstrated that other factors, namely social and community factors, were also

significant causes of the disproportionate representation of minorities in the juvenile

justice system.
III-7
III-8

2.3 Town Meetings

CJJP and Iowa's Minority Over-Representation Task Force conducted four town

meetings and interviewed youth involved in the juvenile justice system. The town

meetings were held in the four pilot counties to solicit the community's input and

feedback on factors that contribute to overrepresentation and strategies to address the

issue. The following indicates the major issues identified by the town meeting

participants:

• Minority youth often live in "forgotten neighborhoods" characterized by

economic depression and a lack of economic and social opportunities

leading some youth to engage in delinquent activities that provide

immediate power and status.

• The juvenile justice system lacks minority staff in both line and

management positions, as well as an understanding of the unique needs

of minority youth and families.

• The educational system fails to recognize the unique culture of minority

youth and subsequently inappropriately places minority youth in

"behavioral disability" and "learning disability" classes and suspends and

expels minority youth.

• Because the family plays a critical role in the scholastic, social, and

economic success of youth, programs that provide services to minority

youth must recognize the unique culture needs of minority families and

include the family in their efforts.

Seventy-one African American youth, either on probation or in state institutions, were

interviewed about their experiences in, and perceptions of, the juvenile justice system. 

The following indicates the major issues identified by these youth:

• Most of the youth interviewed felt they were not understood as African

Americans by their probation officers and/or staff at the state training

school.

• More than half of the probationers felt that their minority status was a

major consideration that led to their being placed on probation.

• Many stated that they had not received any service prior to probation and

that they received few services or meaningful contact with their probation

officers while on probation.
Moore, R.G. A Description and Discussion of Minority Over-Representation in Iowa's Juvenile 2

Justice System. Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning and Statistical Analysis

Center. June 1993. Section 3: Youth Input.

III-9

In summary, while the African American youth who were interviewed did not report

experiences with blatant racism, they did perceive that they were treated differently

because of cultural factors.2

2.4 Formula Grant Recipient Reporting Requirements

Also during Phase I, CJJP modified its reporting requirements for all JJDP Act

formula grant recipients to include detailed information about the youth served to more

effectively evaluate prevention and intervention programs that address minority

overrepresentation. CJJP, with input from the grant recipients, developed a data

collection form that provided information about the race/ethnicity of youth, the youth's

referral source, the situation that led to the youth being referred, and outcomes

experienced by the youth. Although the available data only permitted a rudimentary

analysis, the fact that only 11 percent of the 159 youth being served in these programs

experienced a "negative outcome" suggests that these programs were successful. 

CJJP plans to further refine the reporting requirements enhancing the ability to track

youth and quantify outcome measures that will enable agencies to monitor program

effectiveness and facilitate the development of appropriate interventions.

3. STATE-LEVEL PHASE II PLANS AND ACTIVITIES

Once the Phase I background research on overrepresentation was completed,

the Iowa DMC team and the Minority Over-Representation Task Force developed and

implemented the Phase II plans. The purpose of this section is to describe the process

through which the Phase II plans were developed and implemented, as well as the

outcomes from this process. This section begins with an overview of the Phase II

milestones followed by a description of the Phase II planning process. The Phase II

implementation status for each of the DMC objectives is then provided. This section

concludes with a description of DMC management and resource development and

Iowa's future plans for DMC.

3.1 Overview of Phase II Milestones

The Iowa DMC initiative can best be described as comprehensive, interactive,

and inclusive, involving all jurisdictional levels including state government, county
III-10

agencies, community-based organizations, and community representatives. Employing

lessons learned from Iowa's rich traditions of community-based caucusing and

problem-solving, the Iowa Phase II action plan did not focus on one intervention but

rather on a multi-faceted strategy that targeted many of the factors perceived to

contribute to disproportionate minority confinement.

The involvement of community representatives, multiple task forces, and multiple

government agencies provided a broad basis for DMC public policy analysis and 

problem-solving. As the Iowa team experienced, however, the multiplicity that adds

breadth and strength to the process also impedes straight-forward progress. Rather,

as the public education process progressed, as public agencies and private citizens

reconciled their perceptions of DMC, and as program interventions were designed and

implemented, the Iowa DMC team has moved forward in a "zig-zag" fashion in an

attempt to reconcile the competing perspectives of the various participating groups.

Beginning in Phase I and continuing through Phase II, the Iowa DMC team

together with the JJAC, the Minority Over-Representation Task Force, and county and

community representatives made simultaneous progress in the following areas:

• Planning and needs assessment including providing public education,

establishing policies, and developing program and funding plans 

• Implementing the program action plan including selecting the projects,

funding the projects, and providing technical assistance

• Monitoring the program action plan including establishing monitoring

mechanisms and collecting appropriate information.

A time line, which presents highlights from the Iowa DMC Phase II activities and

accomplishments, is presented in Exhibit III-2 on the following page. These activities

and accomplishments are further elaborated in the following paragraphs.

3.2 State-Level DMC Planning

According to the Iowa DMC team, as well as project documentation, the DMC

planning process has been, and will continue to be, an on-going and cyclical activity. 

The DMC team's approach to DMC planning is highly interactive; in fact, the DMC staff

define their planning responsibilities to include facilitating the Minority OverRepresentation Task Force planning, as well as developing DMC plans themselves.
III-11
Community

collaboration

to develop

comprehensive

approach;

community

prevention

program all

funding

developed

(Title V)

CC training

provided

for 

"Helping

Professionals"

Collaborate

CC training

for

judiciary

Work with 

ICIS

continues

DMC 

Taskforce

met to redefine

roles

March -June

1993 1994

Phase I

Report

delivered

to

OJJDP

EXHIBIT III-2

HIGHLIGHTS FROM IOWA DMC PHASE II ACTIVITIES

March 1993 Through March 1995

July -September October -December January -March April -June July -September October -December January -March

1995

CC*

Training

Plans

continue

CJJP

Annual

Plan

includes

DMC

Phase I

report

distributed

CC* training

plans

developed

CC* Training

for State

Courts Admin

Office

DMC Task

Force met

CJJP developing

risk assessment

instrument

DMC 2000

Launched

6 judge team

attends CC

training in

Chicago;

Join DMC 

2000

CC training

provided

Davenport, State

Training School

Phase II

grant

planning

and

T.A.

sessions

6 applications

received for

demonstration

grant

Jane

Boyd

selected

County

appeal

Jane Boyd

funded

as demo

site

4

Planning

Grants

offeredDMC

Coordinator

recruited

Jane Boyd

begins

implementation

ICIS

formatted

data for

CJJP

DMC

Coordinator

Hired

DMC

Coordinator

conducted

TA needs

assessment,

provides TA

(on-going)

State-wide

DMC

fiscal

monitoring

system

developed

Community

Planning 

Efforts - 5 task

forces to develop

and implement

DMC activities 

4 Planning

Counties

develop

continuation

grants

Des Moines

local planning

results in

42 agency

consortium 

*CC = Cultural Competency

III-9
III-13

The evaluation collected information on all of the Iowa DMC planning activities

and milestones. This section focuses on the events and perceptions of key staff in the

pre-Phase II intervention planning, since the Phase II interventions are the primary

beneficiaries of the Special Emphasis Grant. A summary of other planning activities is

presented at the conclusion of this section.

Planning for Phase II Interventions

The Iowa DMC team recognized that effective planning for DMC interventions

requires consensus-building among policy planners, decision-makers, and community

representatives around three critical components:

• Defining the DMC problem;

• Identifying causes and contributing factors; and

• Designing programs and other interventions.

To document the planning process and assess its effectiveness, the evaluation has

drawn from the factual reporting of events through Quarterly Reports and other project

documents, as well as the perceptions of key participants in the process from both the

state and county levels.

Defining the DMC problem. As previously described, the Phase I research

was the principal mechanism through which the incidence of disproportionate minority

confinement was systematically identified and the Phase I analyses determined the

extent to which DMC occurs due to other than natural causes. A summary of the Phase

I findings are described earlier in this chapter.

The Phase I research resulted in the publication of three reports: (1) Juvenile

Justice Decision-Making in Iowa: An Analysis of the Influences of Race on Case

Processing in Three Counties; (2) Juvenile Justice Decision-Making in Iowa: An

Analysis of the Influence of Race on Case Processing in Scott County; and (3) the

Disproportionate Over-Representation of Minority Youth in Secure Facilities: A Survey

of Decision-Makers and Delinquents. The findings from these documents were then

synthesized and the DMC Phase I product was produced: A Description and

Discussion of Minority Over-Representation in Iowa's Juvenile Justice System. This

report was delivered in draft, first to JJAC and the Task Force, and then to OJJDP. 

The report was finalized in June 1993 and distributed broadly to other state agencies,

counties, and local community representatives.
III-14
III-15

As stated earlier, gaining agreement on the definition of a problem is the first

critical step to solving the problem. To determine the extent to which Iowa's key

decision-makers agreed on the definition of DMC, the evaluation queried DMC policy

and decision-makers, as well as county and community representatives.

When asked to describe their understanding of the DMC problem definition,

most of the 20 evaluation respondents identified either personal observation or the

Phase I report as their primary source of information about disproportionate minority

confinement. Over one-half of the respondents cited both sources.

A majority of respondents also reported that the Phase I findings were not

controversial. Rather, they found that the data confirmed their personal observations

and/or suspicions. Reactive comments included: "Data were powerful" and "I was

surprised about the extent of the problem, but not the issue itself." Several

respondents, however, were less receptive of the Phase I data, and two respondents

questioned the data's accuracy and reliability.

In describing the group's reaction to and acceptance of the Phase I research,

Minority Over-Representation Task Force members noted that a small minority of Task

Force members expressed dissention around the definitions of the DMC problem. 

There was minimal controversy, however; the Task Force was not disrupted, nor the

DMC planning process derailed, since dissenters were able to focus on DMC planning

without fully accepting the DMC definition. One Task Force member reported,

however, that members who were "uncommitted dropped out of the meetings."

The success of Iowa's DMC effort in achieving consensus on the problem

definition was reportedly assisted by two strategic events. First, the presentation of the

DMC Phase I research findings was designed to be as non-flammable as possible,

given the sensitivity of racial bias issues. This strategy was not totally invisible,

however. One interviewee observed: "It seemed like the Leiber study showed 'racism'

but didn't want to say 'racism'." Second, the DMC team purposely released the draft

Phase I report to Task Force and JJAC members prior to the broader distribution,

thereby enabling politically sensitive issues to be digested before the public's scrutiny.

Identifying factors which contribute to DMC. Devising appropriate,

community-based intervention strategies to address DMC first requires accurate

identification of factors that contribute to DMC, as well as agreement on those factors

among the DMC planners. The following paragraphs present a description of factors
III-16

identified by the Iowa DMC planning process. The primary source of information is the

evaluation interviews supplemented by the Phase I analysis of community-identified

DMC causes.

Information collected during the evaluation interviews was analyzed and is

summarized beginning on the following page in Exhibit III-3. As shown, factors that are

perceived by state-level, county-level, and community representatives cover the gamut

from systemic racial bias to characteristics of the minority youth and their families. In

other words, the Iowa DMC respondents' perceptions ranged from "blaming the system"

to "blaming the individual," or, as some would argue, "blaming the victim." 

Understanding these distinctions is theoretically important since the perceived causes

of, or factors which contribute to, DMC determine the appropriateness of the

intervention.

All of the interviewees together with the community representatives (reported in

the Phase I Report) identified problems with the Juvenile Justice System as

contributing to DMC. The most frequently identified systemic problems included a lack

of culturally diverse staff and a lack of cultural awareness and sensitivity among staff

within the juvenile justice system. Other factors include a lack of alternatives to

confinement for minority youth and the fact that minority families often don't know how

to "work the system."

Socio-economic factors were also widely cited as contributing to DMC. In

addition to the fact that minority youth frequently come from economically deprived

communities, it was also thought, by several respondents, that since these communities

have more police patrols and youthful crime is more visible, minority youth are more

likely to be apprehended. The lack of community services for minority youth was also

mentioned by several respondents.

Interviews and community representatives in Town Hall meetings identified

several factors related to the educational system as contributing to DMC. These

included: early school failures; higher rates of truancy, suspensions, and expulsions

among minority youth; lack of prevention programs; and a lack of culturally-relevant

education. The inappropriate labeling of minority youth as being developmentally

disabled was also seen as undermining youthful confidence, possibly leading to school

failure.
III-13

EXHIBIT III-3

PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO DMC

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS SERVICES JUDICIARY CORRECTIONS OTHER COUNTY LOCAL (from Phase I Report)

STATE-LEVEL COUNTY-LOCAL

COMMUNITY

SOCIAL JCOS - CBOS - REPRESENTATIVES 1 2

1. JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Lack of culturally diverse staff X X X X X

• Discriminatory policies and X X X

procedures

• Lack of services: treatment, X X X X X

prevention, diversion

• Lack of cultural awareness among X X X

juvenile justice staff

• Need for minority parent involvement X X

• Subtle racism X X

2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS

• Poverty X X X X X X

• High crime neighborhoods X X X

• Lack of community services X X X X X

3. EDUCATION

• Early school failures X

• Lack of prevention programs X

• High rate truancies, suspensions, X X X

expulsions among minorities

• Inappropriate labeling, diagnosing X X

minority youth

 JCOs = Juvenile Court Officer 1

 CBOs = Community-based Organizations 2
EXHIBIT III-3 (Continued)

PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO DMC

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS SERVICES JUDICIARY CORRECTIONS OTHER COUNTY LOCAL (from Phase I Report)

STATE-LEVEL COUNTY-LOCAL

COMMUNITY

SOCIAL JCOS - CBOS - REPRESENTATIVES 1 2

III-14

• Lower expectations for minorities X

• Lack of cultural education X X

4. FAMILY

• Families of troubled youth need X X

support

• Youth abandon traditional culture X

• Dysfunctional families X X X

• Lack of positive role models X X

• Single family homes X

5. YOUTH

• More minority youth commit crime X X

• Drug use, trafficking X X

• Gangs X X

• Prior record X

 JCO's = Juvenile Court Officer 1

 CBO's = Community-based Organizations 2
III-19

Factors related to minority youth and their families were seen by several

respondents as contributing to DMC. Minority families were characterized as

"dysfunctional" by several interviewees, with the lack of positive role models, lack of

family support systems, and single-parent families all seen as contributing to DMC. 

Two respondents stated that minority youth were over-confined because "they commit

more crime", while others thought that drug use, gang membership, and prior criminal

records all contributed to DMC.

The evaluation also assessed whether there was agreement among the Minority

Over-Representation Task Force membership about the factors contributing to DMC. 

The group was described as disagreeing about the role of racial bias in the juvenile

justice system. Otherwise, opinions were equally divided between system-based and

community-based causal factors. Most Task Force members were reportedly in

agreement that economic factors must be equalized before DMC can be eliminated.

Designing the interventions. CJJP, the JJAC, and the Task Force collaborated to

develop the DMC Phase II plan, building on the data collection and analysis conducted

during Phase I and the shared views of DMC causes and contributing factors. Phase II

planning was guided by Iowa's commitment to sponsoring community-based initiatives

that create new services, policies, and/or procedures. A second goal was to develop

and implement a statewide cultural competency training initiative. Thirdly, the Iowa

DMC staff recognized the need to strengthen the Iowa juvenile justice information

collection systems to create DMC monitoring capability.

The Iowa DMC team, including the Task Force members, developed the DMC

Phase II plans through a series of meetings and discussions and a retreat. During

these sessions, factors believed to impact DMC were considered in light of potential

interventions. For example, the Task Force members considered the following:

• Revising decision guidelines for detention

• Adjusting existing services to ensure equal access and cultural sensitivity

• Developing alternative resources/services.

The Phase II plan evolved to include the cultural competency training initiative,

community-based demonstration(s), and an information monitoring system. A diagram

of the theoretical relationship between the perceived DMC contributing factors and the

planned interventions is presented in Exhibit III-4 on the following page.
DATA COLLECTION AND MONITORING THROUGH

IOWA COURT INFORMATION SYSTEM (ICIS)

CULTURAL COMPETENCY TRAINING

• Statewide plans

• State agency policy and procedural manuals

• Classroom, conference instruction

JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Lack of cultural awareness

• Lack of culturally diverse staff

• Discriminatory practices

• Parental knowledge of system

SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS

• Few economic opportunities

• Lack of community services

EDUCATION SYSTEM

• Lack of prevention programs

• Lack of cultural education

FAMILY & YOUTH

• Lack of family support

• Lack of positive role models

• Lack of alternatives

EXHIBIT III-4

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERCEIVED DMC CAUSES AND PLANNED INTERVENTIONS

COMMUNITY-BASED DEMONSTRATIONS

• Support community-based initiatives

• Grass-roots solutions to DMC root causes

• Comprehensive interventions for youth, family

• Multiple community agency involvement

DMC CAUSES/CONTRIBUTING FACTORS PLANNED INTERVENTIONS

III-16
III-21

Summary of Other Phase II Planning Activities

As previously stated, the Iowa DMC team together with JJAC and the Task

Force regard DMC planning to be an on-going and cyclical process. Introducing the

DMC concept, Phase I data, and an understanding of DMC causes at the state, county,

and local planning processes was a high priority for the Iowa DMC team. Specific

planning-related activities and milestones included:

• CJJP Annual Plan developed to include DMC issues (August 1993)

• CJJP Annual Plan presented to Chair of Senate Human Resources Committee

to provide DMC overview, create future bi-partisan work group (September

1993)

• CJJP Annual Plan presented to Iowa legislature to highlight DMC as a major

policy issue (1993-1994)

• New full-time DMC Coordinator hired resulting in renewed attention and

technical assistance to community planning and collaboration (March 1994)

• DMC staff support county and local community task forces to develop local DMC 

planning, programming (on-going)

• DMC planning groups help to secure state and Federal Title V funds

(Spring 1995)

• Des Moines local DMC planning group created 42-agency consortium that

developed program, obtained funding (January-April 1995).

The final major planning effort conducted by the Iowa DMC team was the creation of

the DMC 2000 plan and strategy. DMC 2000 is discussed in greater detail at the

conclusion of this chapter, under Future Plans to Address DMC.

3.3 Phase II Implementation

Between September 1993 and the present, the Iowa DMC efforts have focused

on the implementation of the Phase II plan. The Phase II planning process concluded

with the identification of four major implementation objectives for Phase II, including:

• Fund a pilot community program to provide prevention and intervention services

targeted at minority youth
III-22
EXHIBIT III-3 (Continued)

PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO DMC

III-23

• Provide planning grants to the four pilot counties that participated in the Phase I

data analysis

• Develop a statewide cultural competency training curriculum and program

• Implement uniform data collection protocols to monitor the state's compliance

with the JJDP Act.

The purpose, objectives, and implementation status of the activities designed to meet

these objectives are described below.

Community Demonstration Project

Although the Phase I data analysis demonstrated that minority youth were overrepresented in the juvenile justice system statewide, CJJP decided that communitybased approaches would have the most significant impact on reducing the

overrepresentation of minority youth in Iowa's juvenile justice system. CJJP chose to

solicit proposals from interested counties and agencies to receive funding to implement

a community demonstration project during Phase II of the initiative. CJJP received

grant applications from the four pilot counties as well as two non-pilot counties. 

Selection criteria were based on CJJP's goals of supporting community-based

initiatives that appeared to most comprehensively address the root causes of the

overrepresentation reflected in the Phase I analysis. Involvement of local community

agencies and residents in the application development and the proposed intervention

was also a factor. From the field of six applications, the proposal from Cedar Rapid's

Jane Boyd Community House was selected based on the close match between CJJP

goals and the proposed intervention.

The Jane Boyd Community House developed a comprehensive approach for

addressing the needs of the Wellington Heights neighborhood residents and,

ultimately, assisting in reducing the disproportionate representation of minority youth

within the juvenile justice system. The Jane Boyd intervention, entitled the "Positive

Youth Development Project" (PYDP), seeks to strengthen and support minority youth,

their families, and their community relationships. The PYDP is based on a "wraparound" services model. The project has been implementing a comprehensive multiagency approach to provide a broad array of services to children and families in the
III-24

Wellington Heights neighborhood in an effort to reduce criminal and delinquent activity

among youth.

The Jane Boyd Community House Positive Youth Development Project was

extensively evaluated as part of this evaluation effort. A full description of the project,

its goals, objectives, and implementation status, together with the evaluation findings,

are presented in Chapter IV.

Pilot County Community Planning Grants

Having selected Jane Boyd's Positive Youth Development Project as Iowa's

community demonstration project for OJJDP's DMC Initiative, CJJP also chose to

provide four of the other five community demonstration project applicants approximately

$10,000 to support DMC-related community planning efforts. In January 1994, each

community was asked to submit a proposal specifying how the planning grant funds

would be spent and to demonstrate how the proposed activities would address the

overrepresentation of minorities in the juvenile justice system. The purpose of the

planning grants was to enable those communities that had already invested

considerable efforts in organizing and planning for the community demonstration

project during the original RFP process to continue working on community-based

approaches to reduce the disproportionate representation.

In January 1995, the four planning grants were renewed and each "DMC county"

received a second planning grant of $10,800. During the May 1995 process evaluation

data collection, representatives from each of the four DMC counties were interviewed

about their DMC experiences. Using information collected during these interviews, the

status of the four counties' DMC efforts is described below.

Polk County (Des Moines). The Youth First Consortium is a coalition of public

and private agencies in Des Moines. Twenty members of the Consortium designed a

collaborative DMC reduction program in response to the opportunity to apply for DMC

funds. The lead agency in this application was the Department of Corrections. The

Department of Corrections has responsibility for the confinement of adults and children

who have been waived to adult court. With the help of the Governor's Alliance on

Substance Abuse, the Department created a program to focus on the treatment of

substance abuse among juveniles under their authority. 
III-25

The juvenile enters the Youth Intervention Program by waiving his or her right to

trial, and agreeing to the terms of the program, including probation and approximately

six months of program participation. Then the juvenile receives substance abuse

assessment and treatment, along with an on-site education component. The

educational structure is tied to a local high school and community college. The

program gives youth the opportunity to earn high school and college credit, or their

GED. After release, youth in the program are assigned to two probation agents, who

are solely dedicated to monitoring the parole of these youth. 

The centerpiece of the Consortium's application for DMC funds was to expand

this program to the Juvenile Court System in Des Moines, where it could be applied to

a greater number of youthful offenders. When the grant application was denied, and

the Consortium was awarded a $10,000 planning grant instead (which was

supplemented by a second grant for $15,000 last year), they chose to use the money to

provide services to youth. Some of the funds went to Children and Families of Iowa to

conduct a youth survey on substance abuse and domestic violence and to facilitate a

conference on youth issues. Some of the funds went to Breaking Barriers, decisionmaking education for youth in the Youthful Offender program. The money also funded

the start-up of a pre-trial release program and a pre-trial enabler, an advocate for youth

and families who are preparing for court appearances. Finally, the funds were also

used for culture-based education for African American youth and the Spanish

Education Center project. 

Woodbury County (Sioux City). Changes in the economy of Sioux City have

caused changes in the neighborhoods. Economic upheavals have resulted in cultural

displacement seemingly overnight. Meat packing has been the anchor industry in the

city for decades, but the industry has changed since the strike ten years ago that was

never settled. Now the plant has a standing advertisement in Texas, recruiting Mexican

immigrants to work for significantly less than the former unionized employees. 

Spanish-speaking immigrants working at the meat packing plant put themselves and

their families at great risk because there are few other employment options for them in

the area. The plant does not provide the services needed by new immigrants without

language skills or the financial resources to adjust to the region. Furthermore, a large

computer company has filled 5,000 new hi-tech positions in the last seven years,

resulting in a severe shortage of affordable housing. 

Sioux City's interest in preventing juvenile delinquency among minority youth

had begun independently before the JJAC began working on the issue in 1992. Seven
III-26

years ago, Sioux City gang violence had reached alarming levels. There were three

murders between 1989 and 1992. The United Way, Board of Education, Police

Department, Sanford Community Center, and local parents formed a Gang Prevention

Committee. They held town meetings to look at the problem. The Committee produced

a brochure on how to identify gang members.

The Committee applied to the JJAC for formula grant funds to add staff to their

gang intervention program. Their application was unsuccessful. The Chief Juvenile

Court Officer had a small amount of money for programs in the juvenile court budget

that was used to partially fund their planned activities. (The Sioux City budget for

delinquency prevention and school retention would eventually rise from zero dollars in

1992 to $2.2 million.)

The Committee's first employee was a gang worker. At first the gang worker

spent his days educating the Police Department and groups in the community. The

gangs quickly found themselves encircled by increasingly informed and concerned

community members. The gang worker understands and acknowledges the language

and the culture of the gangs and has become the leading gang expert in the northwest

corner of the State. The operating principle of the gang worker is to try to keep gang

members in school and out of juvenile justice intake, keeping them as far away from the

formal system as possible. 

At the same time in 1992, the Sanford Community Center, a non-profit

organization that was a member of the Gang Prevention Committee, intervened to help

control widespread behavior problems in two middle schools. The schools were

suffering from violence and unruly classrooms: parents had threatened to kill youth,

students were carrying weapons, and non-students were often in the halls. The

Director of the Sanford Center put three minority outreach workers in the schools as a

crisis prevention measure. These staff were on-call to handle serious behavior

problems in any classroom. Their method was to take the problem out of the

classroom, calm the youth, and return them to class as soon as possible. They would

also take troubled youth home if necessary. In the first year they confiscated a dozen

weapons and prevented a drive-by shooting at the end of the school year. 

During the three years that the outreach workers have been in the middle

schools, suspensions have declined from 445 to 120. In the first year there were 10

serious weapons confiscated. In 1995, no serious weapons were confiscated and there

were also no weapons complaints. 
III-27

The Director of the Sanford Center started a voluntary afterschool program to fill

the need he perceived for structured free-time activities. The agency worked with the

school outreach workers, the Police Department, and the schools to provide community

services, recreation, education, and a meal every night. The Sanford Center stays

open for after-school activities between the hours of 4 and 9 pm. College students from

Briar Cliff are teaching theater, and the kids are putting on a play. Thirty-seven percent

of the 150 youth participating in afterschool activities are minorities. The center serves

youth from all three of the county high schools and middle schools.

In the second year of the school outreach effort, the Juvenile Court positioned

two probation officers in the schools along with the outreach workers. Together they

formed a crisis management and counseling team capable of handling small behavior

problems in the school before they grew into something requiring more serious

measures. (This coincided with the Phase I research results from the DMC project that

found significant DMC outcomes in Sioux City and caused the Chief Juvenile Court

Officer to re-examine the Office's practices.) The positioning of Juvenile Court Officers

established check-points before intake into the formal justice system. Thus, when a

case is finally referred to the downtown office, the Juvenile Court Officers feel that they

know that it is serious and that alternative methods have been attempted. Another

benefit to crisis intervention is that the number of formal cases are reduced: out of 150

complaints to the school-based probation officers last year, only two eventually

required formal juvenile justice intake. The rest were handled by the increasingly

resourceful set of services now located in the school and the community. 

The Sanford Center was primarily responsible for developing the following new

services to meet needs identified in the community:

They have set up a mentoring program, primarily for minority girls. Using

college students as mentors, the program is intended to help the girls with

values and coping skills.

The Center also employs a group of 17 trackers who meet with kids regularly

to help keep them at home and out of the juvenile system. These postcollege age staff are available any time of day or night.

The Alternative School program provides a certified teacher to give academic

instruction to suspended students. It serves six students per day, for a total

of 125 per year. 
III-28

The Summer Program serves 200 middle school kids. This program provides

structured activities during the summer. Youth work on vocational

development in the morning, then are fed lunch. From 1 to 3 pm the youth

work with 12 teachers on math, science, and computer skills. The youth

come back after 6 pm for recreation. This program is now three years old.

Juvenile justice system intake has also been altered. The independent mode of

assessment by a single Juvenile Court Officer has been removed. The Chief Juvenile

Court Officer changed staffing structure to reflect a new commitment to prevention

rather than sanctions. Half of the Juvenile Court Officers used to perform intake

functions, and the other half worked with cases; now there is only one intake worker

and the rest provide case work services. Under the new structure, the lone intake

officer mainly refers the youth to systems in the school and the community. Case

workers now make most of their decisions in tandem. Also, the intake assessment

instruments have been revised to recognize cultural diversity, particularly in the

definition of healthy living situations. The Juvenile Court Officers have received inservice training to help them stay out of the structured decision-making format of the

former guide.

When the DMC research was conducted, Sioux City had the highest number of

youth placed outside the home and outside the state. The Chief Juvenile Court Officer

has worked to develop placement alternatives to reduce unnecessary stress on youth

and families and have these appropriate placements available. Residential placements

are down from 60 to 20, and those 20 are placed in the Sioux City area.

The collaborative partners in Sioux City are trying to provide a positive

alternative to gangs, teenage pregnancy, and dropping out. They have found that

promoting involvement in school has been a key factor in their success. They have

also found that illiteracy plays a large role in gang involvement. Providing role models

is another important factor. The community outreach workers not only follow up with

youth who have been in trouble, but they serve as role models as well. The role

models have different histories from those with whom the youth are familiar, from their

own experience and from what they see on television. Some are college graduates and

some are athletes. The outreach workers have a reputation among the youth for being

able to handle things and for responding when they are needed. The Police

Department has sometimes called them for assistance.

Currently there are eight outreach workers in three middle schools, with the

program planned to expand to the grade schools next. When the outreach workers
The program efforts have been referred to previously as Reclaiming Our Minority Youth Through 3

Community Efforts in the DMC Notes! (April 24, 1995).

III-29

start in the grade schools, the Director of the Sanford Center plans to begin a new

effort to address the issue of parenting skills for the families of youth.

Black Hawk County (Waterloo). Prior to the Iowa Disproportionate Minority

Confinement Initiative, Waterloo served as a data collection site for a study conducted

by Dr. Michael Leiber of the University of Northern Iowa. The focus of the study was

racial and gender equity with respect to detention. Following the Leiber study,

Waterloo participated in the Iowa DMC grant application process. These events,

combined with the planning grant, laid the groundwork for the Village Initiative Project,

which was designed as a community-based, prevention-type program. The Village

Initiative Project represents both a philosophy and a service. The philosophy is based

on the recognition that the underlying problems contributing to disproportionate

minority confinement need to be dealt with comprehensively and not in a singular

fashion. The service components of the Village Initiative Project are provided in

specific geographic areas of Waterloo (referred to as Village I, Village II, etc.). These

services include providing a coordination service between local trade businesses

interested in hiring qualified minorities and those minority candidates qualified for trade

positions and consulting for the Villages in addition to neighborhood associations. The

Project employs a director who works to generate collaboration within the community

and to administer the program. A Board of Directors, which currently meets monthly,

and a Steering Committee, which meets quarterly, provide general direction, oversight,

and advice.

Scott County (Davenport). The United Neighbors of Davenport have been

incorporated since 1980. Since that time, they have offered three basic program

components that have been historically funded via community block grants. One 3

program component, referred to as "house rehabilitation", provides labor and training

support to low-income home owners. Community volunteers provide labor to bring a

home up to the standards required by local code in order to make the home safe, and

to avoid the homeowner potentially losing the home if the home were condemned by

local authorities. Labor for this program component is provided in the areas of

construction, electrical, and plumbing work. The program component also provides for

the construction of handicap ramps for homes. In 1995, the house rehabilitation

program component was responsible for servicing approximately 65 homes within the

Davenport area. In addition, training sessions in basic maintenance are offered to

home owners to enable them to help themselves.
III-30

Another of the program components provides organizational support to various

neighborhoods. That is, representatives of United Neighbors help to organize

neighborhoods into associations to empower the neighborhoods to better help

themselves (e.g., by collectively pressuring the local authorities to install stop signs,

traffic lights, and/or speed bumps). In the first half of 1995 there were approximately 23

active associations, each comprised of between 2 and 13 residential blocks.

The third program component offered by United Neighbors is that of outreach

advocacy. This program component provides advocacy in terms of legal, financial and

transportation assistance for the needy (e.g., by providing bus tokens or by physically

transporting elderly individuals), and school, youth social development and summer

park programs.

A more recent addition to the program is the Sisters Together Empower People

(S.T.E.P.) component. This is a collaborative project with Davenport Public Schools to

enhance self-esteem and a sense of responsibility among African-American females. 

As of 1995, the project was serving 10 females ranging in age from 14- to 18-years old. 

The S.T.E.P. initiative, in particular, is a DMC intervention which provides prevention

services to its target population. The DMC planning grant has been used by the

provider to (1) plan the most appropriate DMC interventions and (2) assist in providing

these services.

Statewide Cultural Competency Training

Through the Phase I research efforts, together with information obtained from

juvenile justice data systems, community testimonies, and staff experience, CJJP

understood that interventions that are appropriate for addressing one community's

disproportionate confinement of minority youth may differ from interventions that are

appropriate for another community. A consistent theme emerged, however, from the

Phase I data analysis and other sources: efforts are needed to address inadequate

cultural awareness and inappropriate, though unintentional, bias among juvenile justice

and other agency staff.

To respond to this need, CJJP developed a plan to initiate, improve, support,

and institutionalize cultural competency training. A major goal of the training is to offer

those who interact with minority youth better tools for providing meaningful education,

guidance, and supportive and rehabilitative services. According to the plan, the
EXHIBIT III-3 (Continued)

PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO DMC

III-31

training will focus on juvenile justice personnel who are making decisions affecting the

placement of minority youth within service facilities.

The cultural competency training initiative was designed, as follows:

• CJJP would provide cultural competency training directly. For example,

CJJP would contract with a trainer to provide cultural competency instruction

within the pilot community or for all juvenile court intake workers.

• CJJP would support the improvement of existing training by enhancing the

training curriculum with a cultural competency component.

• CJJP would work with state personnel systems to ensure the inclusion of

culturally appropriate materials in personnel handbooks, policy and

procedural manuals, and other venues affecting intra-agency personnel

matters, as well as state personnel who interact directly with the public.
III-32

CJJP is also developing a monitoring mechanism for these activities that will capture

such information as the number of staff trained, the number of curricula enhanced, and

the number and extent of policies and procedures developed, modified, or amended.

The statewide cultural competency training initiative has not been fully

implemented, as planned. Considerable progress has been made in terms of

developing cultural competency curricula, forging collaborative relations with other

state agencies, and providing cultural competency training sessions. A chronology of

major milestones for the cultural competency training initiative include:

• DMC team met with the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy to explain DMC

initiative, cultural competency plans (July 1993)

• ILEA provides cultural competency training for state law enforcement

officers; the training decisions were influenced in part by CJJP staff (ongoing)

• DMC team invited ILEA and the Departments of Human Services and

Education and the State Court Administrator's Office to participate in

planning and delivering cultural competency training (August 1993)

• CJJP was in discussions with the State Court Administrator's Office to assist

in meeting cultural competency training goals (January 1994)

• CJJP and the State Court Administrator's Office collaborated in providing

cultural competency training for Clerks of the Court, magistrates and judges

as part of state-sponsored conferences for each group (April-June 1994)

• JJAC, jointly with the University of Iowa Summer School for Helping

Professions, funded a two-day cultural competency session for secure

facility staff and more general sessions for others (Summer 1994)

• Six-member team of Iowa judges attended DMC training funded by JJAC;

following the training, CJJP met with the judges team, who will now be

represented on the DMC Committee (formerly The Minority OverRepresentation Task Force) (March 1995).

In addition to these milestones, the cultural competency training initiative has

been greatly strengthened by the full-time DMC Coordinator whose background

includes, among other skills and experiences, cultural competency training

development and delivery. Since joining the Iowa DMC team in March 1994, the DMC

Coordinator has assumed full responsibility for the cultural competency training

initiative. He has personally conducted cultural competency training in numerous 
III-33

venues including, most recently, the provision of training to a Davenport residential

treatment facility for 100 staff and community leaders. The training focused on

culturally appropriate service delivery and DMC problem-solving. During this same

time period, the DMC Coordinator provided training at the state training school for

African American gang-influenced youth and training school staff.

The Iowa DMC team has realized considerable accomplishments for the cultural

competency initiative; however, team members also expressed frustrations with their

ability to formulate and implement statewide training for all affected agencies and

officials. The Iowa DMC team persists with the commitment to fully implement the

cultural competency initiative. CJJP reportedly recognizes, however, that progress may

continue to be incremental as opportunities to provide training occur on a communityby-community basis.

Data Collection and Monitoring

The Iowa DMC team recognized the need for an on-going capability to monitor

and evaluate the extent to which minority youth were over- represented in the juvenile

justice system. With this recognition, CJJP made a commitment, as part of the DMC

Phase II plan, to ensure a data gathering and reporting capability. According to the

plan, CJJP would pursue the collection and analysis of data through two avenues: (1)

include "race" and other relevant data in the routine JJDP compliance monitoring

process and (2) work with the State Court Administrator's Office to develop on-going

reporting of juvenile court information from the Iowa Court Information System (ICIS). 

ICIS will be used to obtain case processing reports that can be used to monitor the

number of minority youth involved in the juvenile system and the nature and extent of

disproportionate representation of minority youth. ICIS will better enable CJJP to

develop policies, procedures, and programs to address the issue and target their

efforts where needed.

Considerable progress has been made in strengthening CJJP's capability to

monitor DMC. The 1994 Fiscal Year compliance monitoring data collection process

included race-related variables for jails, lockups, juvenile detention facilities, the state

training school, and secure mental health facilities. At the time of this evaluation, these

data were being cleaned and analyzed.

CJJP also continues to work with the State Court Administrator's Office to

include the DMC data gathering and monitoring capability in ICIS. Some progress has
III-34

been realized; a sample management information report was developed and is being

tested for one site. The DMC team reports frustration, however, with the slow progress

in expanding the statewide automated information system to include juvenile DMCrelated information gathering and reporting capabilities.

Two new data gathering efforts have been initiated. First, the DMC team has

requested community arrest data from all of the DMC demonstration and planning grant

communities, formula grant recipients, and Iowa's Community Prevention Initiative

Communities. Also, CJJP has requested state-level arrest data from Iowa's

Department of Public Safety.

At this time, the Iowa DMC initiative has not met its goal of providing

comprehensive DMC-related data collection and monitoring. The DMC team is

disappointed that ICIS has not proved more fruitful; however, there is encouragement

that other sources of data and other data gathering efforts are potentially available.

3.4 Phase II Management and Resources

The Iowa DMC project changed its staffing arrangements during the course of

the Phase II operations. Also, Iowa has invested considerably more resources than

those provided by the discretionary grants into its DMC efforts. These two events are

significant in the successful performance of the Iowa DMC project.

Full-Time DMC Coordinator

In accordance with the Phase II plan, the Iowa DMC demonstration was staffed

and managed by CJJP. In March 1994, a full-time DMC Coordinator was hired. The

impact of having a full-time dedicated resource was quickly realized. Beginning in

April 1994, each of the DMC grant recipients received an on-site assessment of plans

and progress and a technical assistance needs assessment. The DMC Coordinator

also assessed the level of local task force involvement with the DMC project and

together with local representatives developed community collaboration strategies.

The DMC Coordinator also designed a statewide fiscal and performance

monitoring system. As a result of the new system, local DMC grant recipients began

tracking performance and progress according to their original goals and objectives. 

Also the system provided the DMC project with more comprehensive performance data

and more detailed fiscal data. The impact of the new system on the local projects was
III-35

readily apparent to the evaluation team. The local DMC grantees, particularly the

demonstration project (see Chapter IV), were more focused on tracking progress and

accomplishments in accordance with their stated goals and objectives than they had

been during the January 1994 evaluation planning visit. Exhibit III-5, on the next page,

provides a sample reporting format for each project's performance monitoring.

Iowa DMC Resources

The level of resources allocated to the DMC initiative is one indicator of Iowa's

level of commitment to the project. In the words of a senior state official, "The

discretionary grant is not what we consider our DMC program; we pumped a lot

more...into it." In fact, between 1993 and 1995, the JJAC allocated the following:

• An initial $40,000 in formula grant funds was used to support the DMC

research, prior to the Phase I discretionary grant.

• An initial $200,000 in formula grant funds was allocated for Phase II

($100,000 for the community demonstration, $50,000 for cultural

competency training, and $50,000 for evaluation).

• An additional $200,000 in formula grant funds was made available to

continue the community demonstrations.

According to one Task Force member, this level of funding is exceptional in the history

of the JJAC. The commitment of $200,000 to the community demonstration is four

times the level of funding offered to any one project previously.

3.5 Future Plans to Address DMC

As demonstrated by the allocations of formula grant funds, the JJAC has been

highly committed to the success of the DMC initiative and Task Force members report

that this level of commitment will continue into the future. According to CJJP and JJAC

representatives, additional funding is currently being sought to continue the full-time

DMC Coordinator position.

The structure for future DMC efforts has already been established by the DMC

Coordinator with the creation of the DMC 2000 strategy. The DMC 2000 strategy

includes a written plan, the rejuvenation of the Task Force (now entitled the DMC

Committee), the establishment of working groups, and the implementation of
III-36

communication mechanisms including a news bulletin entitled "DMC FLASH," which is

distributed to DMC Committee members via Fax machines.

The direction for current and future DMC efforts is shifting toward more

community-based collaboration and emphasis on prevention, as demonstrated by the

DMC 2000 goals, which include:

• Enhance prevention and diversion programming

• Expand community-based alternatives to secure detention in minority

neighborhoods

• Effectively monitor juvenile system activities and outcomes

• Review decision-making policy, legislation, and practice

• Develop and provide appropriate training.

The DMC Committee has as its mission to advise and make recommendations to the

JJAC on progress and problems in achieving these goals, and how such progress and

problems are related to the other requirements of the JJDP Act.

To ensure that progress is made toward achieving the DMC goals, the DMC

Committee has voluntarily organized within four working groups, including:

• Information dissemination

• Project development

• Monitoring

• Training.

As part of the training team planning, the Cultural Competency Coalition (CCC) has

been developed to provide culturally appropriate service delivery information and a

coordinated framework for agency collaboration.

The evaluation found that the DMC 2000 strategy is technically sound and

energetic and appears to be an appropriate "flagship" for revitalizing, channeling, and

focusing Task Force member efforts. Similar to the current DMC Coordinator role,

continued leadership and facilitation is essential to Iowa's ability to implement the DMC

2000 plans.
IV. IOWA’S PHASE II DEMONSTRATION INITIATIVE
IV-1

IV. IOWA'S PHASE II DEMONSTRATION INITIATIVE

This section discusses the program that was chosen by the Division of Criminal

and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP) and the State Advisory Group as the DMC

reduction demonstration for Phase II of the Iowa DMC initiative. Section one outlines

the overall approach of the program, while section two describes the various

components of the program in detail and indicates the extent of their implementation.

Although the Phase I data analysis demonstrated that minority youth were overrepresented in the juvenile justice system statewide, CJJP decided that communitybased approaches would have the most significant impact in reducing the

overrepresentation of minority youth in Iowa's juvenile justice system. CJJP chose to

solicit proposals from interested counties and agencies to receive funding to implement

a community demonstration project during Phase II of the initiative. CJJP received

grant applications from the four pilot counties, as well as two non-pilot counties. 

Selection criteria were based on CJJP's goals of supporting community-based

initiatives that appeared to most comprehensively address the root causes of the

overrepresentation reflected in the Phase I analysis. Involvement of local community

agencies and residents in the application development and the proposed intervention

was also a factor. From the field of six applications, the proposal from Cedar Rapid's

Jane Boyd Community House was selected based on the close match between CJJP

goals and the proposed intervention.

1. COMMUNITY-BASED INTERVENTION

CJJP selected the proposal submitted by the Jane Boyd Community House

to receive funding as Iowa's Phase II community demonstration project. Jane Boyd's

project, known as the "Positive Youth Development Project" (PYDP), targets the

Wellington Heights neighborhood in the City of Cedar Rapids. The PYDP offers a

comprehensive approach for reducing the disproportionate representation of minority

youth in the juvenile justice system. In an effort to reduce criminal and delinquent

activity, the PYDP provides a broad array of services to youth and families that address

socio-economic factors identified in Phase I research activities. These factors include: 

educational system failure, lack of family support, and lack of prevention programs. 

This section provides background information about the environmental characteristics

of the Wellington Heights community and describes the structural and programmatic

elements of the PYDP.
Moore, R.G. A Description and Discussion of Minority Over-Representation in Iowa's Juvenile 4

 Justice System. Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning and Statistical Analysis

 Center. June 1993. Appendix A: Minority Census Data-1990.

Jane Boyd Community House. Community Demonstration Project [Application]: 5

 Disproportionate Over-Representation of Minority Youth in Secure Facilities. August 1993.

IV-2

1.1 Cedar Rapids and Wellington Heights

The City of Cedar Rapids is located within Linn County, Iowa. The population of

Linn County is approximately 42,430 of which almost two-thirds (26,203) live in Cedar

Rapids. The total minority populations of Linn County exceed five percent of the total

population and most of the minority populations live in Cedar Rapids. The largest Linn

County minority group are African Americans, of whom 94 percent (1233 of 1313) live

in Cedar Rapids. 4

The largest concentrations of ethnic and racial minorities within Cedar Rapids

reside within census tract 17, the Wellington Heights neighborhood. Recent increases

in illegal drug and gang activity within Cedar Rapids have adversely affected the

Wellington Heights community, which has experienced a rise in youth-committed

delinquent and criminal activities. The lack of social and economic opportunities within

the community have caused the selling and using illegal substances to become socially

acceptable activities for youth in Wellington Heights. As a result, many Wellington

Heights youth have been, currently are, or are at-risk of becoming involved in the

juvenile justice system. Additionally, the following demographic characteristics of

Wellington Heights contribute to the potential vulnerability of this community's youth to

become involved in delinquent or criminal behavior :

5

• Fifty eight percent of Cedar Rapids' African American residents live in

Wellington Heights.

• Forty seven percent of the Wellington Heights African American population

are under 18 years of age.

• The average age of the total population in Cedar Rapids is 29.6 years; the

average age in Wellington Heights is 22.4 years.

• Almost one third (31%) of the Wellington Heights population are classified

as belonging to single parent families compared to just over one-tenth in

Cedar Rapids.
IV-3

Also, a large number of young adults, aged 16- to 24-years old , are not in school or

employed.

Meanwhile, Cedar Rapids has a long history of providing community-based

support to families in social and economic need. The Jane Boyd Community House

has been in operation since 1921 and has coordinated the provision of the city's social

services, as well as provided services directly, for over 70 years.

The Director of Jane Boyd House said that the effect of disproportionate minority

confinement in Wellington Heights was clearly connected to families and to the

community. A large proportion of adult males in the neighborhood were in jail or had

been incarcerated at some point. Various related evidence indicated that delinquency

was increasing among the children of the neighborhood, particularly boys. 

Furthermore, delinquent boys often came from families with criminal histories. 

Consequently, when these youth went before judges, there were few alternatives

besides confinement. Once the youth was locked up, neither the youth nor the family

received any help to deal with the circumstances of confinement, or help planning for a

healthy return home. Lack of transportation or child care sometimes meant that no one

was available to get a child who had earned a weekend outside, or alternatively, the

youth's home might be declared dysfunctional by Juvenile Court authorities, and off

limits. Parents who participated in Jane Boyd programs told stories about losing their

children, often not without cause, but the parents were left disempowered to address

the system and get their children back on their own. The effect on children was also

devastating. The Director said that children who could be rehabilitated would go into

the juvenile justice system and be "ate up." They would come back irredeemable,

having acquired a whole new set of skills for crime. Still, she said, she never dreamed

that the levels of DMC were so high, until she saw the Phase I research results.

1.2 Positive Youth Development Project (PYDP)

The Jane Boyd Community House developed a comprehensive approach for

addressing the needs of the Wellington Heights neighborhood residents and,

ultimately, assisting in reducing the disproportionate representation of minority youth

within the juvenile justice system. The Jane Boyd intervention, entitled the Positive

Youth Development Project, seeks to strengthen and support minority youth, their

families, and their community relationships.

The PYDP is based on a "wrap-around" services model. The project is a

comprehensive multi-agency approach to provide a broad array of services to children
IV-4

and families in the Wellington Heights neighborhood in an effort to reduce criminal and

delinquent activity among youth. The PYDP seeks to reduce DMC by providing primary

delinquency prevention to minority youth living in the community, by providing family

services and advocating on their behalf, and by strengthening the neighborhood

through citizen action and collaboration with public providers of family services. The

structure and program components of the PYDP are described below.

2. POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STRUCTURE

The lead agency for the PYDP is the Jane Boyd Community House. This

agency's director coordinated the development of the project application and assumed

a leadership role during the implementation of the project components. A Jane Boyd

satellite facility, entitled the Harambee House, which is located within the Wellington

Heights neighborhood, serves as the project site and hosts many of the project

activities.

PYDP is a holistic service delivery approach to preventing delinquency with the

goal of filling gaps in service, finding ways to make existing services more responsive,

coordinating agencies as they serve families, and finally, integrating families into the

process so that they participate in the development of the service plan with the agency

team. In keeping with the goal of providing coordinated and comprehensive services to

the Wellington Heights youth and their families, Jane Boyd developed a coalition of

Cedar Rapids agencies. Representatives from these agencies are serving as the Task

Force for the PYDP; in addition, many of these agencies are contracted by PYDP to

provide primary project services.

2.1 The Positive Youth Development Task Force

The Positive Youth Development Task Force has 24 member agencies,

including the members who were active at the start of the program: Jane Boyd

Community House; Harambee House; Wellington Heights Neighborhood Association;

and PATCH, which is comprised of representatives from the Department of Human

Services (DHS), Probation, City Housing, Public Health, the Safety Commission, and

the public school system. The Task Force membership agreed to the following:

• Bimonthly meetings

• Records maintenance to document the approach and process for developing

and implementing the interventions
IV-5

• Dissemination of knowledge gained from the project within and outside of

the Task Force coalition
IV-6

• Assumption of advocacy roles on behalf of Wellington Heights community 

• Development and support of the case management approach, which is a

primary project activity.

A list of the Task Force members, who are also the primary project service providers, is

presented in Exhibit IV-1, on the following page. The Task Force has been in existence

since 1992, when the directors of five non-profit agencies started meeting bi-monthly to

discuss ways to collaborate and pool resources to provide better services to youth. 

The Task Force was completing a two-year effort to link services when the opportunity

arose to apply for DMC funds. Jane Boyd was the only agency with the capacity to be

the lead agency; but part of their DMC strategy was to expand the Task Force to

include public youth-serving agencies and to contract with Task Force members to

provide needed program components. The Task Force would continue to meet bimonthly and would serve as a steering committee for the project.

As a new member of the Task Force, the Wellington Heights Neighborhood

Association helped provide neighborhood input into the design of the program. By

contracting for services from Task Force members, PYDP was able to provide a much

greater range of services at a relatively low cost. (Contracts account for $49,000,

approximately 30 percent of the total project budget.)

The Director of Jane Boyd says that the Task Force is now beginning to pick up

leadership of PYDP and other youth service projects and the role of Jane Boyd is

decreasing. The greatest indicator of the success of the Task Force is the commitment

to expand the Community Center concept from the one Wellington Heights location to

the three other quadrants of the City. The Community Center has been a place where

social service agencies have co-located satellite staff in the client's neighborhood. 

This "staff localization" requires staff to work the majority of time in the neighborhood

setting, so they better understand the community and the family's lives. In addition,

they are more accessible and the staff of different agencies can better communicate

among each other as they coordinate services, just as agency administrators

coordinate as members of the Task Force. Several observers said that the

opportunities for both administrators and line staff from different agencies to learn

about each other was a great benefit of the Task Force and the DMC initiative.
EXHIBIT III-3 (Continued)

PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO DMC

IV-7

2.2 Positive Youth Development Project Components

The PYDP represents a comprehensive approach to providing intervention

services for minority youth within a high-risk community. The approach is

comprehensive in that the proposed program components address the needs of the 

EXHIBIT IV-1

TASK FORCE MEMBERS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS TO POSITIVE

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

AGENCY PURPOSE SERVICES

Jane Boyd - Administrative Oversee planning and Primary agency handling

implementation of Positive Youth administrative, financial, planning,

Development Project reporting

Jane Boyd - Programmatic Provide array of services to families Master Teacher Program

and youth to prevent youth from Youth Programs

entering juvenile justice system and Family Programs

divert youth already involved in the

juvenile justice system; increase

functioning of families; and increase

positive community activities and

interactions

PATCH: Provide coordinated services to Recruit/refer potential clients;

DHS families that are responsive to coordinate delivery of services

Juvenile Probation families' needs between/with other agencies; lead

City Housing Inspector development of family plans

Public Health Nurse

YWCA Prevent domestic violence and Provide domestic violence services

remove victims from abusive and support including shelter,

environments counseling, and training

Cedar Rapids Public School Support at-risk and troubled youth in Monitor academic progress of atSystem maintaining attendance in school; risk youth; monitor social behavior

provide educational opportunities for of at-risk youth; provide

youth who have been expelled/ suspended/expelled youth with

suspended educational instruction at

Harambee House

Cedar Rapids Safety Commissioner Increase opportunities for positive Increase police presence in

interaction between police and community; involve police in

community residents community activities

Iowa State University Provide training curriculum for Conduct Master Teacher training

Master Teachers program and provide follow-up

support to Master Teachers

Wellington Heights Neighborhood Represent the needs of the Recruit/refer potential clients

Association community

Identify families and youth who need

services
EXHIBIT III-3 (Continued)

PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO DMC

IV-8
IV-9

Wellington Heights Community, the needs of parents and families, and the specific

needs of young people.

The PYDP provided services in three ways:

• Specific program services were funded by the new resources obtained from

Iowa's DMC grant

• Jane Boyd/Harambee House services targeted to minority youth who were

at-risk for juvenile justice involvement were extended

• Additional services were developed or extended through the PYDP coalition

of agencies (funded by the DMC grant as contract services).

An organizational overview of the PYDP services is presented in Appendix E, and each

of these services is described briefly below.

Community Focus. As previously described, the PYDP has, as a primary

objective, the provision of a holistic approach to strengthening the Wellington Heights

neighborhood by empowering the families and providing prevention and intervention

services to parents and their children. As such, the PYDP is primarily community

focused.

In addition to the specific family and youth services, the PYDP includes a law

enforcement component whereby the Jane Boyd Community House, Harambee House,

and law enforcement personnel are joining forces to enhance law enforcement efforts

so as to make the Wellington Heights neighborhood a safer place to live. Specific

activities include increasing the visibility, accessibility, and accountability of local law

enforcement through the local crisis intervention group, "walking the beat," police

officer coffee breaks at Harambee House, and increased police involvement in school

liaison, student mentoring, and youth activities.

Family/Parent Focus. One of the primary emphases of the PYDP is to

empower the families/parents within the Wellington Heights community so that they can

intervene on behalf of their children with respect to the juvenile justice system. 

Empowerment is accomplished through the provision of training, support, and the

transmission of skills to more effectively prevent juvenile justice involvement and

provide positive, family-based alternatives to delinquent and criminal behaviors. 

Specific services designed to support this program objective include:
IV-10

• The Master Teacher Program, designed to strengthen families within

Wellington Heights and the community itself by teaching decision-making,

communication, and basic parenting skills, and teaching about child

development issues. The program trains resident parents to be trainers.

• The Coffee Break component, which provides master teacher program

graduates with bi-monthly support groups that will continue the training and

empowerment process.

• Home Visitation and Counseling , which benefits families who need

additional and/or more intensive services and support.

• Family Night Out, which provides community-based social events for parents

and their children. These events will provide examples of healthful, familybased recreation, and instruct families in methods to organize their own

family nights out.

Youth Focus. According to the information on substance abuse, delinquency,

and criminality, the Wellington Heights youth are apparently routinely confronted with

unhealthy alternatives to their educational and social development. The socioeconomic climate, coupled with family disorganization, frequently results in school

failures, gang membership, substance use and abuse and delinquent and/or criminal

behaviors. The PYDP provides programs that are specifically targeted to these at-risk

youth as preventive services, and where necessary, interventions. The PYDP

components that focus on youth include:

• Rites of Passage, a prevention program aimed at helping minority girls and

boys to develop inner strength, positive self-esteem, and improved

academic performance.

• Tutors/Mentors, a program that recruits tutor/mentors from the community

and trains them to provide one-on-one attention to neighborhood youth on a

weekly basis.

• The TAFT Alternative Program, a short-term, intensive intervention to

provide an alternative educational program for fifth to eigth graders who

were terminated from school due to behavioral problems.

Each of the PYDP components are further described in the two following sections. 

2.3 Program Components Within the Scope of the Evaluation
IV-11

This section contains a narrative description of each program component, the

objectives and activities, and indicators of the extent of implementation.

Law Enforcement

According to the Wellington Heights Neighborhood Association, two years ago

the neighborhood was volatile and it was most evident in the attitude in the street

towards law enforcement. There was an incident in 1993 where there were 60 people

in the street ready to attack a police cruiser. After that incident, police patrols

dwindled, the Police Department helicopter was more frequently heard overhead, and

the people of the area felt that the police department had either abandoned the area or

had targeted residents for harsh treatment.

Changing perceptions on both sides was a major goal of PYDP. The Director of

Harambee House has been meeting monthly with the Assistant Chief of Police to

increase the presence, visibility, and interaction of police officers in the neighborhood. 

The first thing PYDP offered was the use of Harambee House and its staff as a means

of crisis-meeting in the neighborhood. The program formed an emergency mediation

team that also included the President of the local National Association for the

Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) chapter, a neighborhood pastor, and a few

residents. In return, the Assistant Chief of Police agreed to have police use Harambee

House as a base for an increased number of neighborhood patrols, including walking

patrols. Getting the police out of their cars was an important step in the process of reacquainting the neighborhood and the officers with each other. The Director of Jane

Boyd feels that foot patrols have a stronger deterrent effect, give the police more

opportunity to address small problems, and give both sides the chance to see the other

as a neighbor and a person. The Wellington Heights Neighborhood Association has

started a neighborhood watch with the goal of re-training residents to call the police.

The Director of Harambee House continues to meet weekly with the Assistant

Chief of Police and has developed an interactive relationship with the Police

Department. The standing members of the Emergency Mediation Team have not yet

been called upon to fill their function, which is an indirect indicator of the success of the

law enforcement component. Foot patrols, which were not used in Wellington Heights

before Harambee House, are now performed daily. The latest development in the

improving relationship between the neighborhood and the Police Department is the

advent of a police bicycle patrol. Two officers will patrol the area on bikes from 4 pm to

12 pm daily. The President of the Neighborhood Association says that the bike patrol
IV-12

is already reducing the presence of drugs on some of the most notorious streets in the

area (and that the drug trade is relocating to the rural fringe of the city).

Data on arrests in Wellington Heights are not available. Harambee House and

the police department have been working to establish an automatic tallying process,

but still have not achieved it yet.

PATCH 

PATCH is an experimental multi-agency case management system that was

started in Cedar Rapids by Iowa State University researchers about the same time as

PYDP. The PATCH concept puts a small team of representatives from different

agencies together in a neighborhood-based office with the goals of: 1) providing holistic

social service solutions that draw on all available resources; 2) improving

neighborhood outreach and involving clients in treatment plans; and 3) forming a

conduit between formal social service agencies and informal helping networks. 

The PYDP social worker has been an important member of the PATCH team

since its beginning. He gives PATCH direct access to Jane Boyd's community-based

treatment network, and at the same time, he is able to refer PYDP cases that require

help from the public agencies to the PATCH team. PATCH is staffed by six Department

of Human Services (DHS) income maintenance workers, four DHS protective service

workers, a home economist, a juvenile probation supervisor, a building inspector, and

the Harambee House social worker. Once per week, the team meets to make case

presentations to the group, where they plan a collaborative approach to each client's

needs.

The PATCH goal of connecting with the community has two prongs. The first is

outreach to families in need. The second is working with neighborhood helping

systems. The Harambee House social worker and the PATCH coordinator agree that

Harambee House is helping PATCH meet both goals. Harambee House sends its

clients to the PATCH office located a few blocks away. The neighborhood office is less

intimidating to people in the community than the downtown public agencies. There is

no glass window between the clients and the practitioners, all of the offices are located

together, and clients do not need to make an appointment. The result is that clients

feel that PATCH is responding to their needs. The PATCH coordinator says that

outreach in Wellington Heights has been very successful, with many clients referring
IV-13

themselves to PATCH or coming to PATCH through Harambee House. People in the

community are more aware of public services and more empowered to use them.

As a full-fledged member of the PATCH team, the Harambee House social

worker has gained valuable access to the services and staff of the public family service

agencies. This access helps in the development of alternative or individualized

treatment for clients, when needed.

The partnership between PATCH and Harambee House has given public social

service agencies more direct contact with community-based service providers

(including PYDP and its Task Force partners), as well as the informal neighborhood

networks with which it is designed to connect. PATCH and PYDP are two experimental

collaborative social service projects approaching the ideal of integrated services from

opposite ends. Both projects benefit from each other.

The Juvenile Court is a limited participant in PATCH due to a recent policy

change. The Juvenile Court wanted to maintain a more formal appearance to the

community as a means of deterring delinquency. As a result, the Juvenile Court does

not bring cases to PATCH (although representatives continue to attend staffing

meetings). PATCH and Harambee House have started to work directly with Juvenile

Court judges to arrange referrals to PYDP and other alternative treatment providers,

bypassing the Juvenile Court office. Although PATCH would greatly value the renewed

commitment of the Juvenile Court, this could be seen as evidence of the success of the

PATCH team.

An increase in the number of informal referrals and the informal handling of

cases indicate success on PATCH's goals of integrating public services with each other

and with the community. PYDP files show that PYDP has received 17 referrals from

PATCH and has in turn referred 97 of its own clients to PATCH.

PATCH is in the process of conducting its own outcome evaluation. The

evaluation will analyze: the number of informal referrals, the number of child abuse

reports, the number of informal referrals that do not become DHS cases, the number of

referrals, and improved relationships among agencies.

Home Visiting 

The Harambee House social worker visits families in their homes in order to:
IV-14

• Stabilize emergency needs

• Educate families about available services

• Become an advocate for families

• Learn more about the family context and the origins for specific problems

• Case manage the various services provided to family members

• Provide counseling and skills training.

Referrals for families to receive home visits come from individuals already receiving

other services from Harambee House, PATCH, or from other members of the

community.

When the social worker first visits a family, he begins by getting to know them

and establishing trust. He said that it is important to let the first few sessions flow

without any assessment agenda so that the family opens up and begins to see him as

an advocate. He said that resistance, for various reasons, has been his greatest

barrier and greatest challenge. Some clients are wary of the stigma of receiving help. 

Others see the social worker as a representative of the system. He is in a constant

struggle to get families to give him the opportunity and information he needs to be their

advocate.

As an advocate, the social worker helps families get what they need from both

the community-based Harambee House services and from the formal public system. 

He works to assess families and bring members into various Harambee House

programs. He presents cases to the PATCH team and helps arrange for services from

PATCH agencies. He also helps families as they prepare for court, working with

attorneys and Juvenile Court Officers.

The social worker has a caseload of 62 families that he personally visits (121

individuals). The social worker averages ten completed visits per week, with many

more attempted visits (clients often break appointments). Many of his counseling

activities are more in the realm of advocacy, such as attending court and developing

alternative sanction and treatment plans for juveniles. He also oversees the home

visits of Master Teachers (43 households, 103 individuals). He introduces Master

Teachers to the family and serves as a backup for serious problems that may arise. 

The social worker has built this entire caseload since he joined Harambee House in

April 1994.

Master Teachers 
IV-15

The Master Teacher program trains members of the community to become

informal family counselors, who teach parenting skills, decision-making,

communication, and youth development. The program fills a gap in needed parent

education, while it also improves the connection between the community and

Harambee House by using community members as counselors, and provides outreach

for other Harambee House programs. The program is designed to use community

members to provide assistance, education, and counseling to their neighbors, but the

program also had a surprising effect on the Master Teachers themselves.

To date, Harambee House has provided training for a total of nine community

members to become Master Teachers. The training is conducted by Iowa State

University (ISU) and consists of ten weekly sessions, conducted at Harambee House,

that cover basic counseling skills. The objective of the training is to teach community

volunteers that they can use their natural skills to communicate with others in a

counseling setting. The approach is to openly value their skills during case study

enactments of counseling.

The ISU trainer said that the first class of five Master Teachers (who began in

February 1994) had a surprising response to the training. At first, they found it hard to

believe that they had anything to offer their neighbors. But as the training progressed

the Master Teachers started to build their own group strengths and reinforce each

other. They started coming earlier to the Saturday classes and staying later. All of

them completed training; none of the subsequent trainees has dropped out either. The

training increased their self-esteem and motivation to cope with their own difficulties. 

The ISU trainer said they were awakened to a knowledge of their own skills. The

Master Teachers themselves said that the training taught them to understand others'

needs, not just their own. It trained them to listen and not be "short with someone

else's problem."

All of the students in the first Master Teacher class made significant life

changes. One man was unemployed and had recently been discharged from an

alcohol treatment center. After the Master Teacher training, he was appointed to a citywide committee on early childhood development and found a full-time job as a printer. 

Another started the only Girl Scout troop in Wellington Heights and now has over 100

girls participating. This woman recently began work toward a college degree. Another

of the original five Master Teachers was a single mother of two who overcame her lack

of self-confidence and now is training to become a physical therapist. Another female
IV-16

Master Teacher, who had been receiving public assistance, is now training full-time at

the community college to become a social worker. The result of the experience of the

first class of Master Teachers was a reconception of the program to recognize the

potential impact on the Master Teachers themselves. The Director of Jane Boyd said

that people in the community see Master Teacher training as a way to change their

lives and find jobs.

None of the original five Master Teachers is currently active in the program, but

their personal change and increase in leadership and community service is seen as a

success by the trainer and Harambee House. The current group of three Master

Teachers have experienced the same type of personal change and have also remained

active with Harambee House, providing important service to PYDP. All three of the

current Master Teachers are employed part-time by Harambee House.

The Harambee House social worker credits the help of the Master Teachers with

identifying 12 new families for home visits, as well as making it possible for him to

maintain a larger case load. Without their help, he says, his time spent with families

would have to decrease from 40 to 15 minutes. The Master Teachers have completed

a set of 10 home visit sessions with 46 families, providing family skills. They continue

to counsel many of the 46 families. The social worker said that coming from the

community is a rare quality in a counselor. Many professional social workers do not

really understand the lives and needs of those in the community as well as the Master

Teachers.

One of the current Master Teachers operates the Wellington Heights van that

provides transportation to jobs after the city bus system stops running at 6 pm. (She

meets with three to five families weekly.) Another has temporarily been operating the

Right of Passage program for girls, filling in until a full-time worker is hired. She has

also started a support group for older women who meet weekly at Harambee House. 

She also meets with 19 families weekly. The other current Master Teacher has started

a spiritually-based alcohol recovery and support group that is quickly becoming an

important part of Harambee House. Eighteen youth and 12 adults meet twice weekly

and have an additional drop-in recreation session on Saturday night. He has his own

caseload of 31 families with which he has been meeting since November 1994.

PYDP has learned that to help overcome the Master Teachers' fears of

counseling families who might not be receptive, the social worker has had to maintain a

large presence with all counseling activities. He introduces the Master Teachers to the
IV-17

family, conducts the initial assessment, and visits the family himself periodically. With

this method he provides continuing education to the Master Teachers and helps them

overcome the common fear of being seen as "snooping."

Another lesson was that the classes should have four to five participants for

optimal learning dynamics. The first class of five drew self-confidence from each other. 

The last round of training for one Master Teacher did not work as well.

Coffee Breaks

Coffee breaks are informal support group meetings intended to continue the

process of empowering and educating consumers who are brought into Harambee

House by the Master Teachers. Coffee Breaks provide the opportunity for residents

who feel isolated in their circumstances to support each other and provide confidence

to cope with similar problems. The groups also serve as a forum for educating

consumers about skills and available services. The social worker found that starting

the group was difficult. Several times he attempted to start groups around issues

common to his clients, without success. Family Night Out proved to be the catalyst for

starting the first groups. Parents who had not responded to the initial invitations to

come to Harambee House for Coffee Breaks, did attend the social event after which

they were ready to come back for the group meeting.

Currently there are three coffee break groups, although only two meet weekly. 

The first group formed around the issue of male parenting and gaining access to

children living apart from their fathers. The social worker ran the group around the idea

of satisfying the fathers' needs and helping them understand their rights. Sometimes

he would bring outside experts to talk about custody and legal rights. Other times he

would let them express their anger and frustration. The Fathers group is currently

suspended because all of the fathers are more satisfied with their access to their

children. Two other groups are currently meeting: a female parent group, and one for

mature women. Harambee House staff hope to start a group for children in foster care.

The original goal for participation in Coffee Break was 90 percent of the 50

Master Teacher families. The number of participants is not as high as the original goal,

nor is the target group the same. Each of the three current groups have a membership

of about eight. One of the groups is not currently meeting.
IV-18

The need for Coffee Break remains high, but not among the planned target

population. The social worker has found that it is critical to allow participants to define

their own area of need. His failed attempts to start the groups according to the planned

schedule demonstrate this lesson. Again, he was ultimately successful in starting the

groups when clients were given the opportunity to come to Harambee House socially in

connection with Family Night Out (described below), instead of having to "admit" they

had a problem that required group therapy. He says that another key factor was having

a core of participants who served as "sales people" to draw in others.

Family Night Out 

Jane Boyd planned to sponsor six Family Night Out events to bring together

community youth and parents and improve family functioning by providing an

opportunity for interaction and communication. Family Night Out provides a healthy

environment for parents and youth to leave everyday stress behind and enjoy social

activities such as picnics and dancing. Family Night Out also provides an opportunity

for community residents to interact socially in a positive manner and strengthen

community relationships. 

One of the principles of Family Night Out is that the community residents choose

the activity and plan the event. Before each event there are at least four planning

meetings with Harambee House staff and members of client groups.

PYDP originally planned to hold six events but they have actually averaged one

per month since June 1994 for a total of eleven events. As Exhibit IV-2 on the following

page indicates, the events have been widely varied. The events have included a tour

of the public library, a tour of the art museum, arts and crafts at Harambee House, a

panel discussion about delinquency at Harambee House, a trip to the pool, a night at

the theater, and a dinner at a steak house. Attendance at the events has averaged

about 30. Clients have reported returning to the site of the event on their own, which is

one indicator of success. Another successful aspect is that families, and especially

first-time clients, are more comfortable with the social atmosphere than with the

everyday service-oriented environment around Harambee House. The events have

given a lot of people the opportunity to get to know Harambee House staff and what is

available.

Lessons learned about planning the events include reinforcing the original idea

that it is important to make the clients themselves responsible for choosing the event
EXHIBIT III-3 (Continued)

PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO DMC

IV-19

and making sure it happens. Clients plan how to advertise the event, divide tasks, plan

activities, and plan transportation needs. At the same time, the staff have had to stifle

the urge to correct them or take charge. PYDP staff have noticed that events chosen

by clients sometimes lack broad appeal (such as the puppet show which had very low

participation) or have the potential to get out of control (such as when 80 people

arrived for the free steak dinner). But learning how to correct those problems has been

a valuable part of the process for clients.

Client reaction to family nights stressed the neighborhood qualities of bringing

people together for a good time, seeing families out together, and the opportunity to

have a good time with their own family. Food at the events was popular; keeping the

events free was another key to success, and educational discussion was also

appreciated.
IV-20

EXHIBIT IV-2

FAMILY NIGHT OUT EVENTS

Event Date Attendance

Bender Pool June 24, 1994 74

Barbecue July 15, 1994 76

Play Station September 9, 1994 30

Theater Cedar Rapids September 30, 1994 24

Ryan's Steak House October 30, 1994 76

Harambee House Family Night February 10, 1995 40

Public Library February 23, 1995 3

Museum of Art March 23, 1995 27

Arts and Crafts April 21, 1995 30

Celebrate with Care May 19, 1995 25

Juneteenth June 19, 1995 143

Tutors/Mentors

PYDP planned to recruit and train neighborhood residents and extended family

members as mentors to interact with neighborhood youth each week on a one-to-one

basis. Their mentoring philosophy is to try to find adults who already are within the

child's family network. They also planned to recruit educators and business

professionals to tutor youth in basic reading, writing and math skills. Tutoring would

extend the school-work component of Rights of Passage (ROP youth have time set

aside for homework every day) for youth who were interested or who need more

assistance.

Currently two youth who participate in ROP are also being tutored on an

individual basis by volunteers, and one youth is being mentored. As with any tutoring

or mentoring program, PYDP has to devote more time to volunteer recruitment in order

to more fully implement these promising program components. Recruiting and

coordinating volunteers is a task that would potentially fall to a Master Teacher, when a

new class is trained and available. (Current Master Teachers seem to be working at

their capacity.)
IV-21

2.4 Program Components Outside the Scope of the Evaluation

This section describes program components outside the scope of the evaluation

in order to provide a complete picture of program activities.

Rights of Passage 

Harambee House has two 4-year-old programs for minority youth in the sixth

through eight grades, one for boys and one for girls, aimed at helping develop inner

strength, positive self-esteem, and improved academic performance. Youth attend

afterschool sessions daily from 2:30 to 6:00 pm. In both programs, students maintain a

diary of daily experiences. The program stresses cultural education, understanding of

immediate family (family history, genealogy), community service, career exploration,

discipline, responsibility, and preparation for passage. Harambee House has recently

added programs for non-minority youth. There is also the Rights of Passage (ROP)

program for mature males, which meets in the evening twice per week. Three full-time

staff operate ROP. There are approximately 51 African American males and 20

Caucasian males along with 23 girls of all races.

Most ROP participants live in Wellington Heights and go to McKinley Junior

High. The Principal of the school says the Harambee House staff are constant visitors

at the school. They check with the students early in the morning and immediately after

school. They also act as liaisons with parents, bringing them to the school to discuss

their children. They have acted as mediators with difficult youth. After school, it is not

uncommon to see a crowd of students around the Harambee House van talking to the

counselors. This has had a very positive effect on the perception of children and

parents, who find that PYDP staff are accepted by others in the community.

TAFT Alternative Schooling

TAFT is a short-term intensive intervention to provide an alternative educational

program for fifth to eighth grade youth whose educational rights are about to be

terminated because of behavioral problems. Youth attend three hours of class

instruction each day at the Harambee House. As part of the program, youth must also

address the situation that led to their expulsion by setting personal behavioral goals. 

The goal of the program is to continue the educational process of youth during an

expulsion, while also fostering behavior modification and enabling youth to eventually

re-enter the public school system. TAFT serves six to eight youth at a time during the
IV-22

school year. Teaching is provided by a Cedar Rapids public school teacher. All but

one of the TAFT participants have been boys, and the majority of participants have

been Caucasian.

TAFT is an important component in the dynamic relationship between PYDP and

the neighborhood schools. The program is well utilized and fully accepted by

counselors at the nearby junior high schools. It forms the basis of the youth services

that PYDP can provide to help deal with behavior problems in the school. At-risk youth

who are selected by school officials for TAFT services often enter other PYDP

programs voluntarily, once they come to know the staff. The Director of Jane Boyd

says that being involved in educating the most severe behavior cases in the school has

helped increase contact with the youth who most need PYDP services. Youth who are

at-risk tend to know the other students and youth in the neighborhood who are likely to

engage in unhealthy behavior. Counseling some of these youth has created a conduit

to the others.

2.5 PYDP Family Results

PYDP not only served a significant number of families and individuals in the year

between June 1994 and July 1995, but there is evidence that they also achieved their

goals of treating families rather than just individuals, and referring family members for

needed services both within PYDP and to outside agencies. The "wrap-around"

philosophy behind PYDP is designed to go beyond the treatment of individuals to

recognize the family context, and treat individuals as they relate to their family,

empowering parents to deal with their children, and addressing the roots of children's

problems found in family dynamics. The wrap-around approach accomplishes this in

two ways: first, it provides access to a continuum of services to treat many facets of

family needs; second, it relies on a family-based case management system that gives

family members input into the treatment plan for youth, and involves them in nontherapeutic program activities (such as Family Night Out).

PYDP tracked program clients and their families using a unique system that

counted "points of service" to families. A point of service is a direct connection by any

family members with one of the formal PYDP program components. For example, if a

family of three was introduced to PYDP when a youth was referred to ROP by the

school, then the social worker would visit the home to talk to all three family members

and ask them to attend a Family Night Out. The tracking system would show that the
IV-23

family had 7 points of service (1 for ROP, 3 for home visiting, and 3 for Family Night

Out). 

Exhibit VI-3, below, shows the summary of tracking information from PYDP

records. The 80 adults and 172 children who received PYDP services between June

1994 and June 1995 belonged to 105 families. (The numbers only reflect family

members who participated in services. Some PYDP "families" are individual children

whose families did not participate in any program.) The table also shows that each

PYDP family received an average of 4.4 points of service in therapeutic program

components. This significant result demonstrates that families were being served as

units, rather than just as individuals. It also indicates the success of referring PYDP

participants to other programs within Harambee House to help solve family problems.

EXHIBIT IV-3

PYDP CASES

Families 105

Adults 80

Children 172

Total individuals 252

Services

Social Worker Home Visit Clients 121

Master Teacher Home Visit Clients 103

Coffee Break Clients 18

Family Night Out Customers 137

New Day (Drug Treatment) Clients 24

Rights of Passage Clients 94

Therapeutic Points of Service 

(not including Family Night Out) 457

Points of Service per Family 4.4

Exhibit IV-4 below illustrates PYDP referrals to and from agencies outside

Harambee House. As the exhibit shows, the PYDP social worker referred 97 clients to

PATCH agencies (primarily DHS). The table also shows the source of PYDP referrals. 

Not surprisingly, school referrals and walk-in/self-referrals were the most common,

demonstrating the effectiveness of the PYDP connection with both the school and the

community.

EXHIBIT VI-4

PYDP REFERRALS
Referrals to PYDP from: Referrals from PYDP to:

6th Judicial District PATCH 97

Juvenile Court

Schools

PATCH

Master Teachers

Other Agencies

Walk-in

2

2

37

17

6

8

29

V. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED
V-1

V. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED

This section summarizes comments made during the Phase I and II evaluation

data collection concerning the impacts and lessons learned by stakeholders in the

DMC initiative. Section one discusses DMC impacts at the state level and at the

neighborhood intervention site. Section two discusses the lessons learned at the state

and the local levels. Section three provides a summary of lessons learned from the

Iowa DMC Initiative that can be generalized to the national level. 

1. DMC IMPACTS

The Iowa DMC Phase II evaluation team inquired of the CJJP staff, Minority

Over-Representation Task Force members, and the county and community

representatives as to the impacts of the DMC demonstration and the lessons learned

as a result of their involvement. The responses to these questions are summarized

below.

1.1 DMC Statewide Impacts

The first major impact of the DMC initiative, according to the evaluation

interviews, was on the level of awareness of the DMC issues among state, county, and

local representatives. Most of the interviewees reported that their own level of

understanding was greatly enhanced by the Phase I data and the subsequent research

and planning efforts. A few respondents reported an increased level of awareness of

DMC among other colleagues, other agencies, and even the public at large.

A second major impact of the DMC initiative was on the collaborative process,

both among the Task Force members and within the DMC communities. Evaluation

respondents spoke enthusiastically about the motivation and willingness to commit to

the DMC issue and the "synergy" around the issue among Task Force members and

within community forums. The fact that the Task Force was representative of state and

local interests and inclusive of all ethnic minority groups was viewed positively by the

interviewees. Also, this heterogenous mix of interests and ethnicities was seen as

contributing to a stronger and more effective collaborative process.

Several respondents also credited the DMC initiative with affecting change

within the juvenile justice system. Interviewees reported an increase in the hiring of
V-2

minority staff, and an increase in the provision of cultural sensitivity training within

juvenile justice system agencies.

The DMC initiative also reportedly had a direct positive impact on the

participating communities. The planning activities within the DMC counties had a much

higher level of quality, and there was an increase in agency collaboration at the

community level. According to the interviewees, the DMC project also encouraged the

development of community-based services for delinquent youth.

1.2 DMC Community Initiative Impacts

The Director of Jane Boyd says that the last year has been a breakthrough for

them in influencing youth and family services in Cedar Rapids, and receiving the DMC

grant marked the beginning of the process. Public and private agencies are more

unified than ever, both in mission and in practice, and the results are evident in

effective programs. The following paragraphs discuss the impacts the DMC grant had

on Jane Boyd House and Cedar Rapids.

The first major impact was the eventual growth of truly effective collaboration

with other agencies and organizations to plan and implement family services around

DMC and the PATCH project. The Director of Jane Boyd said that the agencies came

together for the first time, building mutual trust and learning to work together. Once the

relationship began to be established the collaboration was effective because of its

mutually involved qualities:

• Agencies co-located services in a new type of office without barriers

between different providers. They share work in new ways, crossing

boundaries; for example, workers from different agencies take turns

handling the walk-in clients.

• Referrals between agencies were more open than ever before.

• Treatment plans were prepared and reviewed in common planning sessions.

• At the same time that the administrators of the agencies were getting to

know each other in meetings concerning policy and planning, the staff got to

know each other in the field.
V-3

The expansion of the Family Resource Center—the facility in Wellington Heights

housing PATCH—to new locations in the rest of the city, represents a large

commitment to the future of collaboration by all of the agencies involved. The Director

of Jane Boyd credited the DMC project as an important catalyst in this new project, that

will use over half-a-million dollars in state funds to replicate the collaborative structure

and the successful grass-roots approaches begun by Harambee House under the DMC

grant. 

The second major impact of the DMC community initiative was that it enabled

Harambee House to foster effective community outreach. Harambee House was new

to the Wellington Heights neighborhood at the beginning of the DMC grant. Harambee

House established a presence as a part of the neighborhood and an advocate for its

residents. This was accomplished by involving clients in the planning, and ultimately

the provision of services (such as the Master Teacher program or the Mentor/Tutor

program). Harambee House benefitted from client involvement in terms of its credibility

as an institution that represents the neighborhood's wishes, ideas for approaches from

the people who are expert in the problems facing residents, and increasing the

ownership clients feel toward the program and the facility, which translates into

continued participation.

2. SPECIFICATION OF LESSONS LEARNED

Iowa's DMC initiative provided the opportunity for state agency administrators,

state and local Task Force members, and local community representatives to gain a

better understanding of public policy analysis and problem-solving. Information

provided during the evaluation interviews is summarized below.

2.1 Statewide DMC Lessons Learned

Ultimately, the CJJP staff reported learning that the solutions to the DMC

problems rest largely at the local community level. During the Phase II DMC

demonstration, several state agencies were involved with juvenile justice system

problem-solving. Initial state efforts were focused on coordinating state agencies and

"speaking to the local communities with one voice." As state and local agency staff

gained experience and knowledge, the emphasis shifted to coordinating and

collaborating at the local, rather than at the state-level.
V-4

A second important lesson reported by CJJP staff was about the interrelationship of DMC causes and contributing factors with other juvenile justice system

issues. Initially, all of the emphasis was on DMC; state and local task force meetings

and other planning forums focused strictly on minority youth and confinement. As the

key staff gained experience, there was recognition that DMC issues were integral to

most other public policy and program development initiatives. As a result of this

realization, CJJP pursued opportunities (e.g., conferences, training sessions, planning

groups) to share the public policy platform. As a result, the "DMC voice" is being heard

among the Title V grant recipients, the Des Moines 42-agency consortium, and other

more broad-based community collaboration efforts.

From the Iowa Title V experience, CJJP also reported learning of the importance

of providing technical assistance during the grant development process. Having

assisted with the highly successful Title V grant development effort, CJJP reported their

perception that early technical assistance might have better facilitated the community

demonstration project development and resulted in less anger and frustration among

the unsuccessful grant applicants.

Several other "lessons learned" were identified by the CJJP staff, Task Force

members, and community representatives, including:

• Understanding DMC issues: Iowa's experiences suggest that

communicating DMC understanding cannot be rushed; time is needed to

"bring people along." Also, one staff person cautioned "Don't take for

granted that people know what DMC is."

• Task Force experiences: Several Task Force members commented that

the Task Force, itself, provided an education in DMC and community

collaboration; but it must be inclusive of all minorities and levels of

government to have credibility.

• DMC resources: To be effective, the DMC initiative must develop other

resources through other agencies and programs. The combined

discretionary and formula grant funds were insufficient to meet all resource

requirements.

• Full-time DMC Coordinator: This position was essential to the successful

completion of the demonstration project. By supporting statewide cultural

diversity training programs, providing technical assistance to the grantees,

and facilitating collaboration at the community level, the DMC Coordinator

greatly energized the project and introduced balance between the state and

community representatives.
V-5

Finally, Iowa learned that the Task Force approach was, in general, highly successful

in (1) bringing together diverse representatives, (2) introducing and supporting the

rational planning process, (3) facilitating community-based problem-solving and

program development, and (4) synergising state, county and local ideas, resources and

DMC activities. The Task Force floundered, however, at the conclusion of the planning

process, once the grant awards were made. CJJP and Task Force members learned

the importance of redefining Task Force roles and responsibilities when shifting from a

program planning to a program implementation mode. The DMC 2000 strategy

appears to provide a model structure and focus for on-going DMC Task Force

activities.

2.2 DMC Neighborhood Initiative Lessons Learned

The DMC neighborhood-based initiative provided participating individuals and

agencies in Cedar Rapids the opportunity to learn about building consensus to deliver

family services to at-risk youth. Participants comments from Phase II data collection

are summarized in the following paragraphs.

The Director of Jane Boyd House said that the DMC project taught her about

collaboration with agencies and with her clients. One lesson was that collaboration

required that she keep her personal values in check. For example, her own work ethic

caused her to expect that once the first class of Master Teachers were trained they

would want to work in Harambee House 40 hours each week. Instead, she found out

that they often missed work for what seemed like trivial reasons. Her frustration gave

way to an eventual realization that the Master Teachers, none of whom were previously

in the work force, had to be given the time to develop their own work ethic.

She found that working with other agencies required the same discipline. She

learned to keep her individual ethics and beliefs in check and not demand what the

agencies were not ready to give, even if the situation obviously required it. This is

especially true for coalitions working on the consensus model, such as the PYDP Task

Force.

Another lesson was that consensus building takes more time than just dictating

the program to other agencies. The Director of Jane Boyd worked on educating the

directors of other agencies about the Jane Boyd style of community-based intervention,

while her assistant, the Director of Harambee House, worked with the staff of those
V-6

agencies. When Jane Boyd's director started to hear the others referring to prevention,

cooperation, and client involvement, she knew the group was close to where it had to

be. She also said that committing to collaboration meant that even as the CJJP applied

outside pressure for the group to stay on schedule, the Task Force sometimes had to

wait to move to the next phase of the project together. Sometimes it was difficult for

Jane Boyd, as the primary grant recipient, to maintain the discipline of consensus

under those conditions and not just move forward alone, without the rest of the Task

Force.

One crucial partner, the Juvenile Court Office, eventually declined to participate

as a matter of policy. The Director of Jane Boyd said that the situation was difficult and

threatened the outcome of the project, but they were able to work with their other

partners to overcome the barrier. Now, Juvenile Court Judges send some juveniles

directly to Harambee House as an alternative to traditional probation. PYDP was able

to achieve success in juvenile justice even without the help of the key agency by

expanding their contacts with the rest of the system—the judges on one end, and the

schools on the other. Harambee House refined their programs to provide the

alternatives that the court and the school were looking for by collaborating and

responding to their interests. 

Jane Boyd learned other lessons about transformative community-based

planning including the following:

• Program planners do not have to invent everything. Jane Boyd was able to

find other models and existing, under-utilized alternatives already in the

system (such as the Family Resource Center).

• Plan on flexibility for the inevitable cases in which program plans do not

work as intended. Needs change from year to year, and consumers can

demand change as well.

• If possible, build that flexibility into the grant contract.

• Establish clear understanding of reporting systems and requirements; agree

on a reporting form.

• Technical assistance providers should be given a clear role when they are

utilized. Establish their time commitment and number of site visits. 

Establish what products are expected from them and when. Otherwise, their

responsibility might remain vague, limiting their usefulness.
V-7

• The project needs to start looking for the next source of funds on the first

day. Grants should be structured to phase out funding so that the whole

amount does not need to be replaced at one time.

Finally, the Jane Boyd staff and their partners agree that DMC is more complicated

than it looks. It requires that families be strengthened and empowered in many

different ways, for the sake of preventing delinquency and for supporting youth who

have been involved with the juvenile justice system. They learned that even the rules

of the court and probation are set up to favor youth who have a stable home. The

reduction of DMC requires working with systems to recognize non-traditional family

strengths, while working with families to foster healthy environments for children. 

3. LESSONS FOR THE NATIONAL EVALUATION

Aside from the specific lessons learned during Phase I and II, the Iowa DMC

initiative demonstrates several general aspects of the process that are particularly

transferrable to other DMC initiatives. These observations are based on the framework

provided by William Feyerherm's paper, Disproportionate Minority Confinement:

Lessons Learned From the Pilot State Experiences.

Research on Juvenile Justice Decision-Making is an Investment in Consensus.

Iowa's Phase I planning demonstrated the consensus-building value of investing

in quality research. The Phase I research provided the DMC Committee a platform for

discussing the status of DMC in the state, not just in confinement, but in the systemic

structure that leads to confinement as well. The three components of Iowa's research

could provide an outline for all such efforts: 

• Examine the status of all youth in confinement

• Analyze a sample of case processing histories examining each decision

point in the system

• Collect community input about the status and causes of DMC (including

input from juveniles in the system).

The data should be carefully presented to the state DMC committee, as it was in Iowa,

to avoid blaming individuals. The Iowa planning group had very little disagreement on

the "status" of DMC in the state (which was at high levels), most saying that the data

were clear—there was a problem. Without clear data about each decision point,
V-8

committee members with conflicting interests could pass the blame, wasting time and

creating dissension. 

The Search for Causes of Systemic DMC is a Separate Challenge for Consensus. 

In Iowa, Phase I committee members held different beliefs about the causes of

high levels of DMC that generally ranged between two competing explanations. One

explanation was that the causes of DMC are chiefly due to the juvenile justice system

reflecting the racism of the community at-large to the disadvantage of minority youth. 

Holders of this view felt that the justice system could be reformed to reduce DMC, and

that if racism were to somehow disappear, so would DMC. The other explanation was

that DMC is caused by socio-economic factors beyond the control of the juvenile justice

system and government. Holders of this view felt that delinquents are in the system

because of what they do, not because of their race. Many of them felt that if racism

were to disappear, youth from the lowest economic class would continue to be

disproportionately confined. The Phase I participants in Iowa held views about the

causes of DMC that could be characterized as one of these two simplified explanations,

or some combination. 

The debate remained active among stakeholders at the time of the Phase I data

collection, almost two years later. We also found a tendency for some stakeholders to

underestimate the extent of disagreement among the committee members over causes

of DMC. The disagreement is significant because the two explanations imply very

different solutions. The first explanation requires that the juvenile justice system

change the way it operates and invest in cultural sensitivity and diversity. It requires a

re-examination of practices including "objective" processes and guidelines. It also

implies the need for family advocacy for minority youth dealing with a system where

race impacts outcomes. The second explanation implies the need for prevention

before the youth engage in the behaviors that leads to the juvenile justice system. 

Holders of this view emphasized family strengthening, measures to keep youth in

school, and parent skills training for families of at-risk minority youth. Aspects of both

policies can be, and usually are, pursued simultaneously. However, it is important to

recognize that different explanations of the causes of DMC can co-exist and persist in

the midst of collaborative action.

Even Small Community Programs Can Effectively Pursue Different Approaches

Simultaneously.
V-9

Jane Boyd's community DMC initiative shows how a small program can work on

the causes of DMC on different levels simultaneously. The PYDP multiplied the impact

of their effort by pursuing all three of the following approaches:

As advocates the community-based program must be prepared to adopt an

adversarial position relative to the juvenile justice system in order to be credible

representatives of community interests. As advocates the program:

• Provides support and empowerment for minority youth, families, and

communities with respect to the juvenile justice system

• Influences the system to change policies and practices that lead to DMC

(e.g., revising decision-making guidelines, adjusting existing services to

better serve minority youth).

Collaborative approaches stress cooperation between the community-based

initiative and the juvenile justice system to achieve the following:

• Address cultural sensitivity and personal change for professionals within the

system

• Create synergy between juvenile justice agencies (law enforcement, case

management, courts, treatment, detention), other public agencies (schools,

libraries, recreation, income support, housing), and community non-profit

organizations (churches, national organizations, grass-roots organizations)

to address factors leading to DMC and minority delinquency.

Jane Boyd developed the following alternative resources outside the traditional

juvenile justice system:

• Culturally sensitive versions of traditional delinquency treatment

• Prevention program components within the minority community.

This continuum of approaches recognizes the complex causes of DMC and is designed

to take advantage of every opportunity to address solutions.
APPENDIX A - GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS
A-1

APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS

CCC - Cultural Competency Coalition

CJJP - Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning

DHS - Department of Human Services

DMC - Disproportionate Minority Confinement

DORMSF - Disproportionate Over-Representation of Minority Youth in

Secure Facilities

ICIS - Iowa Court Information System

ISU - Iowa State University

JJAC - Juvenile Justice Advisory Council

JJDP - Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Colored

People

OJJDP - The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

PYDP - Positive Youth Development Project

ROP - Rites of Passage

S.T.E.P. - Sisters Together Empower People

UCR - Uniform Crime Report
APPENDIX B - IOWA DMC EVALUATION INTERVIEW GUIDE
B-1

IOWA DMC EVALUATION

INTERVIEW GUIDE

Name: Phone No.: ( ) 

Position: Interviewer: Date: 

I. BACKGROUND

1. Please describe your role and responsibilities:

2. What is your connection to juvenile justice?

3. When, and in what capacity, did you become involved in Iowa's DMC

initiative?
B-2

4. Had you been aware of, or involved with, any other DMC reduction efforts

previously? Please describe.

II. DEFINING THE DMC PROBLEM 

5. What is your understanding of the DMC status in Iowa?

6. How did you come to this understanding? What information, sources,

processes informed you about DMC?
B-3

7. What do you perceive as being the causes or contributing factors to DMC?

8. What do you think would be appropriate solutions or responses to DMC?

• Juvenile Justice System

• Community

• Schools

• Family
B-4

III. MONITORING

9. What mechanisms are being used for on-going assessment of DMC? Please

assess the adequacy of these mechanisms.

IV. OUTCOMES/IMPACT

10. Has DMC been reduced in Iowa? Please describe.

11. Has the DMC initiative had any other impact (positive or negative) on the

juvenile justice system?
B-5

12. What strategies were most effective in bringing about change?

13. What lessons were learned about how to create change?

14. Do you have any other comments, information, or questions about the DMC

evaluation?
APPENDIX C - POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND

PROCESS EVALUATION INTERVIEW GUIDE AND FOCUS GROUP

GUIDE FOR PARENTS
C-1

IOWA DMC EVALUATION

POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND PROCESS EVALUATION

INTERVIEW GUIDE

Program Management 

Name: Phone No.: ( ) 

Position: Interviewer: Date: 

I. BACKGROUND

1. Please describe your role and responsibilities

1.a Generally:

1.b With respect to the PYDP:
C-2

II. DEFINING THE DMC PROBLEM

2. What is your understanding of the DMC status in Iowa?

3. How did you come to this understanding? What information, sources,

processes informed you about DMC?

4. [If interviewee is aware of Phase I data, ask:] [If not, skip to 5]

Did the data that were collected help define the DMC status and its causes?
C-3

5. What do you perceive as being the causes or contributing factors to DMC?

6. [If the interviewee has knowledge of the Advisory Group, ask:] 

[If not skip to 8]

Did the Advisory Group address the juvenile justice system itself as a source

of DMC? Please describe.
C-4

7. Please describe your perceptions of whether the Advisory Group correctly

defined the causes of DMC in Iowa.

III. DESIGNING THE INTERVENTION

8. How did Cedar Rapids identify potential interventions? Please describe the

process through which you learned about the state grant, developed the

grant application, and encouraged community involvement. [Use the

following questions as prompts.]

9. Please describe your role in designing/deciding on the interventions for

Cedar Rapids' DMC problems.
C-5

10. To what extent did Cedar Rapids develop interventions via community

collaboration?

11. What was the selection process/level of concurrence among county and

community staff?

IV. EVALUATING THE INTERVENTION

12. The following questions address the specific program components of the

PYDP. For each program component, please describe the implementation

status, indicators that the program is working as designed, indicators of the

program component's success, and any problems encountered.
C-6

12. Program Components

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION SUCCESS PROGRAM SUCCESS PROBLEMS, BARRIERS, ETC.

IMPLEMENTATION

Task Force

Law Enforcement

PATCH

Master Teacher

Program
12. Program Components (Continued)

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION SUCCESS PROGRAM SUCCESS PROBLEMS, BARRIERS, ETC.

IMPLEMENTATION

C-7

Coffee Break

Home Visitation and

Counseling

Family Night Out

Youth-In-Action
12. Program Components (Continued)

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION SUCCESS PROGRAM SUCCESS PROBLEMS, BARRIERS, ETC.

IMPLEMENTATION

C-8

Rites of Passage

Tutors/Mentors
C-9

13. Overall, what benefits have occurred that have resulted from PYDP? Provide

examples, as follows:

• Youths

• Parents

• Harambee/House

• Jane Boyd
C-10

14. If you could start over, how or what would you do differently? Provide

specific examples.

15. What additional activities/events do you think could have assisted the

DMC/PYDP project?
C-11

V. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

The PYDP initiative was designed to encourage community involvement and draw

upon other agencies and resources within the community. The following

questions are designed to assess the level of community involvement.

16. What other community agencies/individuals have been involved in the

PYDP? Please describe:

• Agency/individual

• Role

• Frequency/level of involvement

• Advantages/disadvantages of involvement
C-12

17. Please describe the process through which community involvement was

achieved.

18. What are the barriers to community involvement? What factors facilitate

community involvement?
C-13

VI. LESSONS LEARNED

19. What are your recommendations for:

• Program improvements

• Enhancing community involvement

• Solving problems of DMC
C-14

20. What lessons have been learned about:

• Designing a DMC intervention

• Obtaining/managing a state grant

• Starting a grass-roots, community-based program

• Enlisting community involvement/support

• Other
C-15

21. What are your predictions for the future of the PYDP as 1) a DMC

intervention and/or 2) a youth program?

22. Are there any other plans to redress DMC in your county? Please explain.

23. Do you have any questions or final comments?
C-16

MASTER TEACHER PROGRAM

FOCUS GROUP GUIDE FOR PARENTS

(40 parents who received training from the five neighborhood residents):

I. Selection of the Participants

1. How were they selected to participate in the Masters Teachers Program?

2. Who first contacted them? What information was presented?

3. What was their initial reaction to the idea/program? Has this changed over time? 

Why/Why not? Describe what caused the change, if any.

II. Perceptions of the Master Teachers

4. What did the group participants think of how well trained (prepared for each

lesson, organized, a good listener, enthusiasm and responsiveness, practiced

what preached?) the group facilitator was? Strengths? Weakness? 

Improvements to how teacher could have been improved?
EXHIBIT III-3 (Continued)

PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO DMC

12. Program Components (Continued)

C-17
C-18

III. Master Teacher Program

5. What is the purpose of the program? How is participation in the program

supposed to help you?

6. How are the meetings structured? How often meet, when/at what times of day--is

this convenient? Would you like to meet more or less?

7. Where do meetings occur? Is transportation provided, childcare?

IV. Master Teacher Program Content

(Life information and skills to help friends, neighbors, and relatives to improve their

quality of life)

8. What kinds of information did you receive/are receiving in their session?

Life skills (describe, examples)

Child/youth development (describe, examples)

Basic parenting skills (describe, examples)
C-19

Decision-making

Communication/interaction with children

9. How did you receive it? Written materials, verbal discussions, type of format

(group/individual)

10. What do you like the best? Describe reasons why? How useful in real life are

these lessons, give examples

11. Are the training materials appropriate, can you relate to them, do the examples fit

with what they have experienced?

12. What do you like least? Describe reasons why? How could it be changed to be

better?
C-20

13. Describe other activities associated with the program. Describe types of

referrals? Describe helpfulness of counseling? How are they followed-up (who,

when, purpose, helpfulness)

V. Community Support for Masters Teacher Program

(To develop grass-roots support from within the community to affect positive long-term

change in Wellington Heights and strengthen families)

14. How do you get information/knowledge about the program to other families in the

neighborhood? Types of outreach (written, verbal, church, social workers, leaders

in community?) and who provides outreach.

15. How do you describe the program to others in the community, and its goals?

16. What does the community think about the program? Evidence of support, lack of

support?

VI. Overall Perception of Program

17. What is the future of this program? Any changes participants would like to see?
C-20

18. What are the strengths of program? What are weaknesses?

19. What advice would you give to other neighborhoods who wanted to try something

like this? Describe any difficulties in getting it going, or what really helped to get

people interested in it.

20. Do you have any other comments or questions?
APPENDIX D - PHASE II CLIENT SURVEY
D-1

MASTER TEACHERS PROGRAM

PARTICIPANT SATISFACTION SURVEY

We would like to have your opinions about the MASTER TEACHERS PROGRAM. Our

goal is to determine how the program is doing, and to see if we are meeting your needs. 

Please do not put your name on this survey. 

INSTRUCTIONS: For each statement please circle which number most closely fits with your opinion.

Strongly Strongly

Disagree Disagree Medium Agree Agree

1. This program has helped me with my 1 2 3 4 5

communication skills.

2. I knew what to expect about the 1 2 3 4 5

program before I came.

3. I understand the information provided to 1 2 3 4 5

me about the program.

4. I feel that the program's goals are 1 2 3 4 5

important.

5. The meeting time is convenient. 1 2 3 4 5

6. We meet too often. 1 2 3 4 5

7. We meet the right amount of time. 1 2 3 4 5

8. The Master Teachers explain things 1 2 3 4 5

9. I can relate to my Master Teacher, she 1 2 3 4 5

has had similar life experiences.

10. The Master Teachers are well prepared 1 2 3 4 5

for each group.

11. The Master Teachers have helped me 1 2 3 4 5

to understand my children better.

12. Since coming to these groups I feel 1 2 3 4 5

better able to handle things.

13. I would recommend this program, to my 1 2 3 4 5

family and friends.

14. I have shared some information I 1 2 3 4 5

learned with family and friends.

15. This type of program should be started 1 2 3 4 5

in other neighborhoods.

16. Programs like this can help make the 1 2 3 4 5

community safer.
MASTER TEACHERS PROGRAM

PARTICIPANT SATISFACTION SURVEY

We would like to have your opinions about the MASTER TEACHERS PROGRAM. Our

goal is to determine how the program is doing, and to see if we are meeting your needs. 

Please do not put your name on this survey. 

D-2

17. How did you first hear about this program/service?

 1. Friends/family 6. Television program/ad 

 2. Work 7. Newspaper 

 3. Clinic/doctor 8. Poster 

 4. School 9. Other: 

 5. Radio program/ad 

18. What was the most helpful part of the program for you? (Check all that apply)

 1. Program location 7. Medical help

 2. Program hours 8. Social services

 3. Availability of childcare 9. Legal aid

 4. Availability of transportation 10. Classes/education

 5. Program fee (affordable/free) 11. General information

 6. Staff could speak my language 12. Other: 

19. What was the least helpful part of the program for you? (Check all that apply)

 1. Program location 8. Needed more social services

 2. Program hours 9. Needed more legal aid

 3. Lack of childcare 10. Needed more classes/education

 4. Lack of transportation 11. Needed more general information

 5. Program fee (too expensive) 12. Other:

 6. Staff could speak my language

 7. Needed more medical help 

20. In what way could the program or service have been more helpful to you?

Please fill in the following information about yourself.

RACE AGE GENDER

African American

Caucasian years female

Hispanic male

Asian

Other 
D-3

RITES OF PASSAGE—YOUTH IN ACTION

PARTICIPANT SATISFACTION SURVEY

We would like to have your opinions about the RITES OF PASSAGE or YOUTH IN ACTION Program. Our goal is to

determine how the program is doing, and to see if we are meeting your needs. Please do not put your name on this survey. 

INSTRUCTIONS: For each statement please circle which number most closely fits with your opinion.

Strongly Strongly

Disagree Disagree Medium Agree Agree

1. This program has helped me with my 1 2 3 4 5

communication skills.

2. I knew what to expect about the program 1 2 3 4 5

before I came.

3. I understand the information provided to 1 2 3 4 5

me in the program.

4. I feel that the program's goals are 1 2 3 4 5

important.

5. The meeting time is convenient. 1 2 3 4 5

6. We meet too often. 1 2 3 4 5

7. We meet the right amount of time. 1 2 3 4 5

8. The teacher explains things well. 1 2 3 4 5

9. I can relate to my teacher, they have had 1 2 3 4 5

similar life experiences.

10. The teacher is well prepared for each 1 2 3 4 5

group.

11. The teacher has helped me to understand 1 2 3 4 5

my parents better.

12. Since coming to these groups I feel better 1 2 3 4 5

able to handle things.

13. I would recommend this program, to my 1 2 3 4 5

family and friends.

14. I have shared some information I learned 1 2 3 4 5

with family and friends.

15. This type of program should be started in 1 2 3 4 5

other neighborhoods.
RITES OF PASSAGE—YOUTH IN ACTION

PARTICIPANT SATISFACTION SURVEY

We would like to have your opinions about the RITES OF PASSAGE or YOUTH IN ACTION Program. Our goal is to

determine how the program is doing, and to see if we are meeting your needs. Please do not put your name on this survey. 

D-4

16. How did you first hear about this program/service?

 1. Friends/family 6. Television program/ad 

 2. Work 7. Newspaper 

 3. Clinic/doctor 8. Poster 

 4. School 9. Other: 

 5. Radio program/ad 

17. In what way did the program help you most? 

18. In what way could the program have been more helpful to you?

Please fill in the following information about yourself.

RACE AGE GENDER

African American

Caucasian years female

Hispanic male

Asian

Other 
D-5

APPENDIX E - INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS FOR

POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT COMPONENTS
E-1

APPENDIX E

INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS FOR POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM COMPONENTS

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STATUS INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS PROBLEMS/BARRIERS

Law Enforcement - Beat cops cruise and stop in Have 2 bike cops on 4pm-12pm shift. Currently maintain

police car, bike, & foot the area. Have 1-2 cruisers on all shifts. neighborhood arrest

patrols within the Bicycle brigade makes Foot patrols 8am-4pm at least once a day. data manually. This is

Wellington Heights rounds in neighborhood, Have 1 officer being trained as bike patrol. Soon expected to change in

neighborhood, some stopping to chat to residents to get 2 more with community grant funds. the next 2-3 years when

around the clock. Police and children. Residents more positive about police & presence. a new police department

staff presentations to the Availability of Quick Tip cards Residents taking more of a helping role with police building is constructed

community at Harambee for residents to anonymously vs. an adversarial role. and new computer

House on topics of report crimes. Neighborhood turning in crack/drug houses. equipment is purchased.

interest. Formation of Crisis Mediation Team is Zero incidents of community violence since

Crisis Mediation Team. functional. Harambee House opened.

PATCH - component of Fully functional. Meet Reduced duplication of services. Initially did not involve

the Family Resource weekly to discuss cases &/or Clients receiving more collaborative services non-profits, which has

Center. Multi-agency issues. "under one roof." increased their

service to perform case Family Night Out event There have been 97 individuals from the resistance.

management., service, & invited community in to Wellington Heights area who have had their case Initially, collaborating

referral. Harambee House to talk presented to PATCH by the Harambee House parties were resistant to

about PATCH; how it is social worker. case management, but

funded, what services it Cedar Rapids currently expanding PATCH and the now they see benefits.

provides. Family Resource Center to three new sites in the

remaining quadrants of the city.
APPENDIX E (Continued)

INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS FOR POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM COMPONENTS

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STATUS INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS PROBLEMS/BARRIERS

E-2

Master Teachers Have 3 master teachers who After completing training, the master teachers Turnover of four of

Program - outreach have completed their training wanted to continue meeting as their own support original seven master

program that provides and are doing outreach work group. teachers.

training for community in family homes within the Obtained van via United Way to drive Wellington

volunteers to serve as community. The three are Heights residents to work during after-hours when

outreach workers for the part-time employees of city bus stops service (50¢/ride).

social worker. Aspects Harambee House. Training of master teachers was so effective in

of training deal with self- terms of self-improvement among master teachers

esteem, communication, that four of the original seven master teachers left

and counselling. Harambee House for higher education and paid

employment.

Master teachers are involved with approximately

70 families and 103 individual cases.

Master teachers have completed 10 sessions with

46 families.

Master teachers have developed to a point where

they can actually assist or fill in for program staff

that are sick or on vacation.

Coffee Break - informal There are currently three There are approximately 18 consumers of this Lack of interest in the

support groups that different support groups that program (as of June 1995). groups originally and the

meet regularly to discuss meet: male parents, middle- There tends to be a common core of participants first attempts to form

issues of concern. aged females, and mature in each group indicating returning consumers and groups failed. As word

Groups are facilitated by females (i.e., >40 years of abiding interest. of mouth spreads, it is

the social worker. age). Feedback indicates that participants enjoy the expected that more

sessions. support groups may

Male parents have suspended coffee break arise and attendance will

meetings because they had resolved family issues increase.

such as visitation rights.
APPENDIX E (Continued)

INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS FOR POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM COMPONENTS

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STATUS INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS PROBLEMS/BARRIERS

E-3

Home Visitation - service

offered by the social worker

to obtain initial assessments

and provide follow-up

counseling and family

advocacy.

Social worker has successfully Social worker visits 62 families (121 individuals), Potential clients that are

increased the number of homes Master Teachers visit another 43 families (103 being elusive and not

served (by himself and with the individuals). allowing social worker

additional outreach and Social worker reports many individual success stories of entry into the home.

counselling provided by master advocacy. Lack of legal advocacy

teachers). which can limit

effectiveness of overall

advocacy.

Some clients wait too long

before asking for help, in

these cases it may be too

late to provide effective

solutions.

Family Night Out -

organized outings with

youth & their families to

theaters, plays, libraries,

amusement parks, etc. The

goal is to provide

opportunities for positive

family interactions.

Originally program staff assisted Have conducted 11 Family Night Out events since June Residents sometimes select

with planning functions. of 1994. very specific topics that

Community residents have Averaged approximately 30 attendees. lack broad appeal and

developed & coordinated the Clients continue to participate in planning. reduce attendance.

following events. Families enjoy the functions. Social aspect of gatherings

is popular.

Tutors/Mentors - The goal

of tutors is to assist kids

with particular types of

school work after school. 

The goal of the mentors

program is to assign a

community role model (e.g.,

grandfather, grandmother,

aunt, uncle, friend of the

family) from the

neighborhood to serve as a

mentor to each youth. 

Although both programs There are currently 26 mentors, 14 of which are Recruiting mentors and

currently have participants, continuing in the program from the previous year. tutors, and providing the

neither is fully utilized. 2 youth are receiving individual tutoring staff to coordinate the

programs are areas that

needs improvement.
APPENDIX E (Continued)

INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS FOR POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM COMPONENTS

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STATUS INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS PROBLEMS/BARRIERS

E-4

Rights of Passage (ROP) -

male-oriented program

originating with African

American community. 

Currently, the program is

divided according to race

(minority and nonminority). African

American program

emphasizes cultural

training.

Have had this program in Has increased school grades, attendance, & relationships Starting with kids in the 6th

operation before the OJJDP with parents. grade (i.e., at 11 years of

grant funds. There are 60 consumers being served by this program. age) which is probably too

Will be combining non- late. Would like to get the

minorities with the African kids in the program earlier

Americans in the future. than this.

Youth referred by schools for

behavior problems.

Rights of Passage for

Girls (formerly Youth-InAction) - female-oriented

Rights of Passage program. 

Have been meeting for several Have increased the perception that it is a truly Recent staff turnover has

years. neighborhood approach. reduced the number of

Have changed name to Rights of Now have a non-minority group of females that are currently active girls.

Passage and will be combining friends with the minority group of females.

non-minorities with African Seeing the greatest improvement with the females. They

American girls in the future. are better attendees because they are all friends and they

do things together.

There are 34 participants in the Youth-in-Action

program.

Task Force - currently

operates under a 12-agency

group. May be folding

under an Association Board

in the future.

Limited use of the Task Force to Quadrupled initial membership to diversify needs,

this point, but it is beginning to interests, services.

be more active in PYDP Mobilized to expand the Family Resource Centers to the

administration and planning. rest of the City.
APPENDIX E (Continued)

INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS FOR POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM COMPONENTS

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STATUS INDICATORS OF PROGRAM SUCCESS PROBLEMS/BARRIERS

E-5

Domestic Violence

Program - a program

offered by the YWCA to

increase awareness of

protective services and

counseling to victims of

domestic violence within

the minority community. 

The program serves to

build self-esteem and

coping skills. (This is a

program subcontracted to

the YWCA.)

Six-week sessions were YWCA recently opened a shelter for victims of domestic

conducted: Four with youth to violence. From January to June, 1995, the shelter served

prevent them from becoming 808; 2,644 points of service to the daytime program; and

involved in abusive 1,253 total nights of stay at the shelter. Minorities

relationships, three with parents, represented 37% of those served. (These numbers

and two with service providers. represent the total caseload for the shelter, not just

The YWCA also offers a day Wellington Heights).

drop-in program for mothers

and children to receive

individual and group counseling.

TAFT Alternative

Program - a 45-day

program for behaviorally

troubled kids (5th - 12th

grades) who are suspended

from school. Program

emphasizes attendance,

attentiveness, and

controlled behavior. 

Students do school work at

Harambee House for three

hours a day. Counseling is

also a component.

Served 14 kids during 1995. Of Of the 14 kids served, three worked their way back into

the 14 kids, two were of color. the school system by the end of the program.

Started another similar program at the Jane Boyd

Community House using this program as a model.

New Day - a multicultural

support group for

recovering alcohol and drug

addicts. Comprised of a

seven-step program that

emphasizes spirituality.

This is the newest of the 18 youth and 12 adults participate.

programs offered as part of the Attendance has grown very quickly in the first two

Positive Youth Development months of operation, indicating a strong interest in the

Program. program.