Florida Statute 985.125 refers to pre/post arrest diversion programs. This statute should be
amended to mandate that all non-violent felonies that are a juvenile’s first offense be sent to post
arrest diversion programming with the exception of cases that the state attorney deems fit for com-
mitment. However, if less than 85% of diversion-eligible juveniles are sent to diversion programs,
state funding should be reduced for that jurisdiction.
Costs
There are federally-funded grant opportunities that can be used to pay for additional services
that the SAO wants to add to diversion programming. For example, funding through Medicaid has
the potential to be used as a source for mental health counseling or drug assistance programs (OJJDP,
2017). In addition, utilizing students as unpaid volunteers for diversion services could save money
on staffing (OJJDP, 2017). For Florida’s Fourth Circuit, JDAP could be expanded to include first-time,
non-violent felonies within the program’s eligibility requirements.
Recidivism rates could be recorded (measured as a felony adjudication within one year of
successful JDAP completion) and compared to the previous year’s recidivism rates for the
nonviolent felony offenders serving time in commitment from circuit four (measured as a felony
adjudication within one year after the youth’s sentence completion).
Execution and Resources Needed
The Juvenile Diversion Guidebook identifies “six key elements for planning, implementing
and improving a juvenile diversion program”: 1) a clear and specific program purpose, 2) deciding the
agency responsible for program oversight including program design, operation, and
funding 3) clear and concise eligibility criteria and referral process, 4) operation policies,
including services provided, consequences of a youth’s program incompletion, etc., 5) legal
procedures and guidelines, and 6) program implementation monitoring and outcome evaluations
(Farn, 2018).
The eligibility criteria and referral process should utilize the graduated sanctions model,
which requires four main elements that are essential to apply an evidence-based decision-
making framework: 1) risk assessment, 2) needs/strengths assessment, 3) a disposition matrix and 4)
a protocol to evaluate program effectiveness (Farn, 2018). Risk assessment includes
matching the level of supervision and service to the juvenile’s risk of reoffending (Farn, 2018). The
needs assessment targets the juvenile’s dynamic risk factors in treatment (attitudes and behaviors,
for example) (Farn, 2018). The disposition matrix involves modifying interventions to the juvenile’s
specific characteristics (for instance, learning style, motivations and mental health) (Farn, 2018). The
professional discretion principle uses professional judgments to consider
factors that reflect the legal and ethical implications of youth placement and treatment, and
considers programming availability (Farn, 2018).
The success of the program would also be measured as improvement of “youth’s dynamic risk
factors, the rate of successful completion of case plan conditions, and youth’s risk of
recidivating” (Farn, 2018). These measures would confirm that the diversion program’s service de-
livery is consistently focused on the appropriate risks and needs of each juvenile (Farn, 2018). JDAP
meets these requirements and would ensure that public safety needs are being met using the risk
assessment.
Staff Needed
There are JDAP programs in every Florida circuit, so the amended legislation would only
require the expansion of existing programs to meet the needs of the newly-eligible population. Any
additional funding needed would be for staffing and training purposes – ensuring there are enough
case workers and counselors available to meet the needs of the newly-eligible juveniles with first-
time, non-violent felony convictions. It is estimated that each JDAP caseworker can have a maxi-
mum caseload of twenty juveniles at any given time. If half of the 620 youth that were committed
on felony vandalism, drug, auto theft or burglary charges for Florida’s 2016-17 fiscal year were sent
to a local JDAP program instead, this is estimated to add an additional 31 caseworkers statewide
(OJJDP, 2018).
59