TASK FORCE ON EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS
AT JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
Meeting Summary -- October 24, 2000


Members present: Rep. Carol Weston, Joe-Ann Corwin, Dorothy D'Allesandro, Peter Hennessy, Carl Mowatt, Helen Nichols, Lars Olsen, and Karen Rumery.

Staff present: Phil McCarthy and Julie Read Marsh.

1. Review meeting agenda and expectations.
Rep. Shirley Richard called the meeting to order at 9:45 a.m., welcomed task force members and asked them introduce themselves. She then reviewed the agenda and expectations for the meeting.

2. Overview of the Substance Abuse Treatment Programs at the
Maine Youth Center.

Carl Mowatt introduced Susan Lombardo, Program Manager for the Maine Youth Center (MYC) Substance Abuse Treatment Program; and William Lowenstein, State Officer on Substance Abuse, Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services (DMHMRSAS). Ms. Lombardo presented an overview of the MYC Substance Abuse Treatment Programs. Currently a Day One contractor with DMHMRSAS, she has 12 years experience working with MYC juveniles.

A. Statistical Profile of Maine Youth Center Students (MYC). Committed youth assessed between July 1, 2000 through September 30, 2000:

New committals 34 (46%)
Returnees 40 (54%)
74

Substance Abuse Assessment at Intake:

Education 21 (28%)
Brief 16 (22%)
Intensive 25 (34%)
Not yet assessed 12
74

ØOf these 74 committals, 41 were substance abuse committals;
ØCurrently, all youth assessed as needing "intensive" treatment participate in brief intervention groups and additional counseling (twice a week); however, this group is not tailored to meet their needs and these youth need 8 months in treatment under a different type of group programming;
ØThe current arrangement was made in 1996 and intended to be temporary, we are not meeting needs of these "high need" youth;
ØAs of October 23rd, 4 counselors are working with 87 youth in treatment programs; an average case load of 22 youth per counselor.


Task force discussion focused on implementing the integration of mental health & substance abuse services at the MYC:

·Implementing the treatment structure is a work in progress and the full treatment structure - intake, assessment and coordinating services between cottages and counseling staff - isn't completely in place due to issues of scheduling and staff support; MYC plan is to locate substance abuse counselors in the residential units once issues of safety and supervision are resolved;
·MYC also has a capacity issue, it takes time and resources to work in one-on-one intensive treatment situations;
·"Islands of service" have been operating unto themselves and MYC staff are working towards integrating treatment programs through the behavioral health teams; and MYC staff bump up against legal standards (e.g., access to confidential records where unit treatment teams have a need to know about a youth's medical or psychological information);
·MYC is working on implementing a system where youth will receive 8 months of treatment if an assessment and orientation determines placement in intensive treatment program;
·DMHMRSAS will not take responsibility for treatment program effectiveness until all the program components that provide treatment integrity are in place since releasing youth prior to the completion of appropriate treatment presents risks to both the youth and the community;
·DMHMRSAS noted both the high rate of MYC "returnees" and the research evidence that we eventually see the MYC "returnees" in the adult correctional population;
·When MYC establishes a mechanism for behavioral health teams to implement the remaining treatment program components, DMHMRSAS is prepared to beef up the substance abuse staff on July 1, 2001.


B. Statistical Profile of Maine Youth Center Students. Committed youth assessed between January 1, 2000 through June 30, 2000:

New committals 68 (47%)
Returnees 78 (53%)
146

Substance Abuse Assessment at Intake:

Education 35 (24%)
Brief 45 (31%)
Intensive 62 (42%)
No info available 4
146

75% of returnees fall into brief and intensive intervention categories, while 40% fall in intensive intervention.

Task force discussion concentrated on "sentencing and program" issues related to integrating mental health & substance abuse services:

·MYC youth aren't completing 8 months of substance abuse treatment since their release is based on a credit-driven system where they must work off a certain number of required credits (e.g., 30 credits takes roughly 6-7 weeks) and complete a number of requirements, including mental health services and substance abuse services which are not currently available; incomplete treatment poses greater behavioral problems for released youth;
·Juvenile sentencing is more or less related to the youth's illegal behavior or criminal misconduct, and is not necessarily associated with their substance abuse, mental health or educational circumstances;
·The number of credits to be achieved is based on: (1) current behavior, (2) past criminal history and (3) severity of crime; in addition, youth are committed until a certain age; after 30 days, youth earn credits for pro-social behavior (e.g., good behavior in cottages and volunteerism);
·MYC is considering eliminating "time" or "credit" as the sole basis for a youth's release and changing to a system based on a youth's release on a set of standards that are established as part of an integrated core program that must work hand-in-hand with a variety of skill-building groups;
·MYC will be piloting a new skills-based program in one residence, with program and treatment objectives based on a collective professional determination made by the unit treatment team after an assessment and orientation program identifies the youth's needs and the unit treatment team works up an individual intervention plan.


C. Three treatment levels. Using a differentiated treatment program established for the MYC, committed youth are assessed within 28 days of their arrival. Screening and formal assessment are conducted by one FTE staff, who also contacts the regional "community corrections officer" (e.g., juvenile parole officials) and completes a risk assessment instrument for the youth.

MYC staff recommends an intervention based on:

The prescription for interventions are based on the following goal:


Intervention Levels

(1) EDUCATION (prevention, not treatment)

ØLow-need youth;
ØNo substance use, experimenting, may use substances but use doesn't impact life in a negative way;
ØDo not qualify for treatment in the community;
ØRefer to health education class in MYC Gould School (lasts a quarter).


(2) BRIEF INTERVENTION

ØMostly moderate-need youth; regular substance abuse that impacts life area(s) in a negative way;
ØResponsivity is low - they lack insight and motivation;
ØPrimarily group intervention, a 20-session Motivation-Awareness group held in Gould School (moved to counselor's office) and scheduled as a "class";
ØEarn ¼ school credit as well as "program" credit towards release; reviewing Learning Results to ensure fit with content standards counselors certified as Ed.Tech III;
ØTransition to community treatment providers - commitments and funds set aside for treatment (i.e., Juvenile Justice Network).


(3) INTENSIVE INTERVENTION

ØMostly high-need youth; chemically dependent and/or abuse substance so that many life areas are negatively affected; likely to re-offend;
Ø50-session cognitive-behavioral group and weekly individual counseling;
ØUses motivational techniques to challenge youth to change behavior;
ØTransition to community treatment providers - higher in risk to community and re-offending.


Task force discussion pondered the following issues related to screening, assessment and treatment components of the differentiated treatment program:

·Since youth self-reporting may "under-report" and since families are also in denial, community corrections officer may need to obtain risk assessment information from school officials as well as juvenile court;
·Are the intervention levels appropriate for the profile of MYC juvenile population and how effective are the motivational techniques in challenging, raising awareness and leading them to consider their inappropriate behavior?


D. What Maine Youth Center needs to do to provide effective treatment for Maine Youth Center students. Ms. Lombardo proposed the following recommendations to maximize substance treatment effectiveness and integrity:

ØSubstance abuse needs to be regarded as a primary treatment issue for identified youth;
ØAttendance and completion of treatment needs to be mandatory; and clients need to finish the prescribed course of treatment prior to release from facility;
ØThe intensive intervention program needs to be implemented as it was designed; distinct from other courses of treatment for a minimum of 8 months;
ØAn additional full-time counselor is needed for the female unit in order to better address gender-specific issues;
ØSubstance abuse treatment staff need to be involved in transition planning for their clients;
ØAdditional funds for client workbooks for brief & intensive programs;
ØCounselors need to be involved in the clients daily programming in the units; and they need to be notified of problems that have treatment relevance - abuse of medications, drug use on home visits, etc.;
ØAnother staff is needed to respond to the number of clients identified needing treatment services;
ØNeeds to be a facility-wide effort to understand and adhere to the conditions required regarding Federal confidentiality regulations in the course of disseminating and storing client information.

Task force discussion considered the following issues related to the effectiveness of MYC substance treatment programs:

May need to review communication and involvement of those who determine release for youth (Director of Collateral Services, Unit Social Worker, Project Impact, etc.) and those involved in intake, assessment and treatment of MYC youth;

·DMHMRSAS noted that youth are committed to Department of Corrections (DOC) as "wards of the state" and we face a tremendous liability for a class action lawsuit for the failure to provide protective custody services;
·Substance programs should be integrated into the school day, but with the implementation of the "5-hour requirements" last year, there isn't enough time for the substance program to access clients for individual counseling sessions since students are in school from 8:00 am - 2:30 pm; teacher contracts and other scheduling also conflict with treatment;
·Approximately 50% of the of the 74 MYC youth were enrolled in school prior to their committals and only 4 of the 40 "returnee" committals were enrolled in school prior to their re-committal;
·If a student isn't able to learn -- due to significant substance abuse, mental health circumstances, etc. -- then neither a conventional public school program nor the best alternative program can help that youth learn until they have finished a prescribed course of treatment;
·The legislative intent of establishing an annual "Basic School Approval" review for the MYC was based on the judgment that standards for the MYC review should be aligned with public school standards; however, with these data, it appears that we need to write a specific set of educational standards for this population since these students aren't in school before they are committed and they aren't able to learn without appropriate treatment;
·MYC youth released on aftercare need a "transitional" re-entry program instead of directly re-entering the home and school environment where they have already failed.


3. Data Profile of MYC Committed Juvenile Population

Lars Olsen, MYC Superintendent, presented data on the Gould School faculty and on the committed juvenile population served by MYC. The complete data presented are attached to this meeting summary (see Exhibit 1); highlights of the data profile are presented below:

A. Qualifications for faculty, administration, recruitment and retention

8 hold a Bachelor's degree plus 30 credit hours;
5 hold a Master's degree;
3 hold a Master's degree plus 15 credit hours;
4 hold a Master's degree plus 30 credit hours; and
11 hold a special education endorsement;


B. Type of student served by MYC

Avg. daily attendance is 155 students in committed school, including 135 males (87%) and 20 females (13%), with 64 students (or 41%) designated as special education students;

4. Accreditation of Educational Programs.

Karen Rumery, Maine Department of Education, and Jim Keeley, Bureau Chief of Juvenile Correctional Education for Pennsylvania, briefed the task force on accreditation programs offered through the New England Association of Schools & Colleges (NEASC) and the Correctional Education Association (CEA).

A. Accreditation programs of the New England Association of Schools & Colleges (NEASC). Ms. Rumery provided an overview of the NEASC program:

ØNEASC has 7 accreditation standards -- based on teaching and learning, focus on depth, not breadth and student alignment:

ØNEASC accreditation is a 12-18 month self-study process every 5 years - establishes a level of acceptable quality; review costs $10,000;
ØNEASC Commission on Independent Schools -- a private school accreditation standards project that doesn't go into the depth that public school standards do, but can work for private schools.

B. Accreditation Programs of the Correctional Education Association (CEA).
Mr. Keeley provided an overview of the CEA program:

ØCEA developed standards in 1980s, with the standards set up as benchmarks and designed with state and federal laws in mind;
ØOverall, there are 78 standards, of which 39 are core, 24 are required, 54 are not required (correctional education programs can miss up to 10% of non-required standards):

·Administration and Governance;
·Staff;
·Students; and
·Program;

ØStandards were published in 1988 and revision started in 1995, republished standards in 1997;
ØCEA standards established for both adult and juvenile correctional education programs and also have postsecondary education standards;
ØStandards used by 17 states and in public and private, juvenile and adult and international correctional facilities;
ØStandards set high expectations and are measurable and quantitative, policy-based and seek evidence for implementation;
ØCEA uses correctional educators as auditors since they have expertise from the field; auditors come from outside state of audited program;
Ø nitial certification and then a one-year cycle followed by 3-year cycles; self-review for CEA audit takes 12-18 months and review costs $3,000.

Task force discussion focused on the following issues related to the accreditation programs offered through NEASC and CEA:

·From 1978 through the end of 1999, 50 programs were accredited under CEA standards; since January, 2000, CEA has accredited 50 more correctional education programs;
·States with all correctional facilities meeting CEA standards include West Virginia, Kansas and (by 2001) Pennsylvania;
·The "square peg, round hole" issues of applying public school standards to a correctional facility educational program - CEA standards provide an appropriate framework which considers state laws regarding teacher certification, special education and recognizes alternative education waivers; CEA employs an assessment, diagnosis and prescription system and is tied to curriculum; auditors review documentation and also meet with program staff;
·Nationally, only 5% of committed juveniles stay in home school after release; 60-65% have math and reading skills at or below 8th grade level and aren't able to succeed in academic side of school;
·The exception in correctional education programs is a standards-based curriculum where individual programs are provided for each student;
·Traditional public schools often don't have the capacity to address the needs of habitual truants; we must realize that behavioral issues are primary and we lack after-care and wrap-around programs and services; we should tailor educational program standards to their environment;
·College preparation programs are almost non-existent for correctional education teachers - we're behind in providing teachers to meet the need;
·While the philosophy and goals of all students achieving high standards are laudable, we must be realistic; correctional education programs should focus on teaching skills, using content to prepare for GED and using content to prepare for life;
·MYC should provide basic literacy, develop life skills and address cognitive and other developmental deficits, make learning a positive experience;
·Public school student assistance teams (SAT) should be employed to assist transition of re-entry students and DOE can play a meaningful role in this effort in a well-planned, longitudinal approach;
·While SATs are wonderful, they require spirit and sustained effort; to be effective, transition planning needs to start once the youth is committed at the institution, not when they leave;
·Recent JAMA report on health discussed "connectedness" as an important factor; Maine's children's cabinet has done a good job working out the hospital re-entry process.


5. Alternative Education Programs.

Helen Nichols introduced Emanuel Pariser of the Community School in Camden and Al LaPlante of the Opportunities Alternative School in Rockland. She also presented an overview of alternatives education titled, "Relevant Academic Learning Experiences." Alternatives educators believe that relevant academic learning experiences are journeys that require perseverance with vision for revision. They travel where learning leads and curriculum is the map to find the destination. They are:

ØReality-based;
ØProcess-oriented;
ØThematic/"big picture" thinking;
ØTimely with connections to history, literature, art, science and mathematics;
ØRelevant to the individual;
ØReflective and flexible;
ØCooperative; and
ØA group effort that values all experiences as equal learning opportunities.

A. Emanuel Pariser, The Community School, Camden. Mr. Pariser described his alternatives education program:

Ø Similar to MYC, we have a residential program;
Ø 15% of our students have been committed to MYC;
Ø We promotes alternatives;
Ø Our program uses a competency-based model and allows youth to complete the program in 6-months and receive a competency-based diploma;
Ø Students must choose in to program; and we contract with student;
Ø Students get credit for everything they do
Ø Our program uses block scheduling; we focus on project-based subject matter - a narrow slice, one subject at a time; lots of one-on-one work;
Ø Students work during day and classes are held at night;
Ø We see a high correlation between substance abuse issues and at-risk youth;
Ø 60% of our students go on to postsecondary education.


B. Al LaPlante, Opportunities Alternative School, Rockland. Mr. LaPlante described his alternatives education program:

Ø As experiential educators, we profile student and their learning styles; school is driven by learning needs of the students;
Ø Problem-solving orientation draws in math, science, social studies and English arts;
Ø We are "blessed" with students under judges or court order; and we have expertise in working with students with learning disabilities.


Task force discussion focused on the following issues related to the alternatives education programs offered through the Community School in Camden and the Opportunities Alternative School in Rockland:

·MYC needs to define program goals and philosophy; we are not going to replicate a K-12 public school inside a correctional facility and then determine how to best meet needs; may need modification to state standards;
·Alternatives educators could mentor MYC teachers in crafting individual alternative plan within alternative education program to help MYC get from where they are to where these alternative schools are;
·MYC is not just a school, but rather a small community for these youth;
·Also need to bring MYC educators them along; can't threaten their financial, emotional or psychological security;
·Assessment must be aligned with different alternatives and can include: review of all available documentation, which varies from very little to a great deal; demonstration of knowledge and skills is the important factor, not when and where learning took place; reading level assessment to find out their skill level; a 2-hour interview on life experiences and (with permission) talk with other people in their life, then revisit within a 2-week period and seek mutual consent to go forward with a program.


6. Issues for Task Force discussion.

Rep. Richard and task force agreed that a request for an additional meeting and an extension request would be made to the Legislative Council. The task force made tentative plans to hold the next meeting on Wednesday, November 11th from 9:00 am to noon (which has since been postponed until Thursday, November 30th from 9:00 a.m. to noon and Thursday, December 7th from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.).

7. Adjournment.

The task force meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.


Respectfully submitted,


Phil McCarthy,
Legislative Analyst