```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3170 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3170

To amend the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to 
   provide incentive grants to promote alternatives to incarcerating 
                         delinquent juveniles.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 12, 2011

 Mr. Murphy of Connecticut (for himself and Mr. Platts) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and 
                             the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to 
   provide incentive grants to promote alternatives to incarcerating 
                         delinquent juveniles.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Promoting Alternatives to Truancy 
and Incarceration by Encouraging New and Comprehensive Efforts 
(PATIENCE) Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. PROMOTING ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION.

    Section 222 of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act 
of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5632) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(e) Incentive Grants.--
            ``(1) Incentive grants funds.--The Administrator shall make 
        grants totaling at least 5 percent of the funds appropriated 
        for this part in each fiscal year as incentive grants to 
        States. The Administrator shall make such incentive grants 
        consistent with the provisions of subsection (a) and shall 
        condition such grants upon--
                    ``(A) the State's support for evidence-based or 
                promising programs, prioritizing programs that address 
                the mental health treatment needs of juveniles;
                    ``(B) the State's support of reforms that reduce or 
                eliminate the State-supported use of dangerous 
                practices;
                    ``(C) the State's support for reforms that ensure 
                that seclusion in secure detention or correctional 
                facilities is limited to situations in which seclusion 
                is the least restrictive measure sufficient to address 
                a youth's danger to self or others, used only for the 
                amount of time necessary and is terminated when there 
                is no longer an immediate danger to the youth or 
                others, or imposed only after applicable due process; 
                and
                    ``(D) the demonstration by the State of an 
                improvement of public safety and rehabilitation of 
                delinquent and at-risk youths.
            ``(2) Demonstration required.--The State shall make the 
        demonstration required by paragraph (1)(D) by using accurate 
        and reliable data reported annually showing both--
                    ``(A) a reduction in either recidivism or offenses 
                by youths under age 18, using arrest data; and
                    ``(B)(i) an increase in the use of least 
                restrictive placement for juveniles as appropriate for 
                community safety;
                    ``(ii) an increase in the safety of youths in the 
                delinquency or criminal justice system; or
                    ``(iii) a decrease in racial and ethnic disparities 
                in the delinquency system.
            ``(3) Expenditure of grant.--Of the amount of a grant 
        received under this subsection by a State--
                    ``(A) not less than 30 percent shall be used to 
                fund implementation efforts described in subparagraph 
                (1)(A); and
                    ``(B) not more than 20 percent shall be used to 
                conduct research to evaluate reforms described in 
                paragraph (1) that are evidenced-based programs.
            ``(4) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
                    ``(A) the term `evidence-based' means with respect 
                to a program that the program is demonstrated with 
                relevant evidence, normed and validated for a diverse 
                population, to be either--
                            ``(i) exemplary, such that it is 
                        implemented with a high degree of fidelity and 
                        demonstrates robust empirical findings using a 
                        conceptual framework and an experimental 
                        evaluation design of the highest quality (a 
                        random assignment control trial); or
                            ``(ii) effective, such that it is 
                        implemented with sufficient fidelity that it 
                        demonstrates adequate empirical findings using 
                        a sound conceptual framework and a quasi-
                        experimental evaluation design of high quality 
                        (comparison group and quasi-experimental 
                        group); and
                    ``(B) the term `promising' means with respect to a 
                program that the program demonstrates effectiveness 
                using reasonable, limited findings, and that has 
                underway a more appropriate evaluation that meets the 
                criteria for determining evidence-based programs.''.
                                 <all>
```