University of Memphis
School of Urban Affairsand Public Policy
Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice
Prepared for: Memphis City Schools
Prepared by: Wayne J. Pitts, Ph.D.
Kaelyn Branch
•
In July 2008, Memphis City
Schools (MCS) received grant funding through the Dispropor-tionate Minority Contact (DMC) Pilot Project to implement the School House Adjustment Pro-gram Enterprise (SHAPE).
•
The purpose of SHAPE is to
re-duce the number of minority stu-dents referred to Juvenile Court for minor offenses.
•
Of the three offenses deemed
eligible for referral into SHAPE, students were referred most often for simple assault with no serious injury (39.2%) followed by disor-derly conduct (35.8%) and crimi-nal trespassing (3.3%).
•
SHAPE participants have
exten-sive histories of getting into trou-ble while at school.
•
SHAPE participants have
experi-enced significant exposure to vio-lence at home, at school, and in their neighborhoods.
•
Overall gang involvement among
SHAPE participants is fairly low with only 5.9 percent claiming some membership affiliation.
• Nearly half of SHAPE
partici-pants said they had socialized with someone who was drunk or high on drugs in the past year (41.9%).
• 62.5 percent of SHAPE
partici-pants completed the program suc-cessfully. Successful completion of SHAPE is defined as comple-tion of all curriculum require-ments and no contact with Juve-nile Court while in the program.
• A total of 290 fewer transports to
Juvenile Court from the targeted schools occurred during the 2008-09 school year, a reduction of 29.4%.
August 2009
Beginning in the 1970’s, a large amount of research has been conducted examining bias in the juvenile justice system. This research suggests that mi-nority (or nonwhite) youth are more likely than their white counterparts to come in to contact with the juvenile jus-tice system (Pope & Feyerherm, 1995). In 1988, the Coalition for Juvenile Jus-tice (CJJ) brought the issue of dispropor-tionate minority confinement to national attention in its annual report to Con-gress, A Delicate Balance (Hsia, 2008). DMC is here defined as the overrepre-sentation of minority youth in secure detention facilities, secure correctional facilities, jails, and lockups. In an at-tempt to address this issue, Congress made amendments to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, requiring states to address DMC in their state plans. In particular, Congress made a requirement that each state ad-dress efforts to reduce the proportion of minority youth who are detained or con-fined in detention facilities, correctional facilities, jails, and lockups, if the num-ber of minority youth detained and/or incarcerated exceeds their proportion in the general population (Hsia, 2008). Through the 1990s and into the 2000s, the federal government has increased efforts to reduce the number of minority youth incarcerated and/or detained. They have done so by holding national train-ing conferences for state agencies, estab-lishing initiatives to test approaches to reduce DMC, and establishing a catalog of state DMC reports and assistance
School House Adjustment Program
Enterprise: 2008-2009 Evaluation Report
manuals. In 2002 congress reau-thorized the JJDP Act of 1974. This reauthorization expanded the scope of the 1974 Act by modify-ing the DMC requirement to in-clude the number of juvenile members of minority groups who come into contact with the juve-nile justice system. This modifica-tion mandated the examinamodifica-tion of potential disproportionate minor-ity youth representation at all de-cision points in the juvenile jus-tice system, not just detention and incarceration (Hsia, 2008).Part of the JJDP Act includes authoriza-tion for funding via the Formula Grants Program (FGP). In order to participate in the FGP, a state first hast to determine whether DMC is an issue in that state. Once a state has determined that DMC is an issue, an examination of the treatment of both white and nonwhite youth at various deci-sion points in the juvenile justice system must be conducted in or-der to determine where DMC in-tervention strategies are appropri-ate (Hsia, Bridges, & McHale, 2004). According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), in 2004 twenty-three states and the Dis-trict of Columbia had completed the identification and assessment stages, are currently implement-ing the intervention stage and have submitted data regarding
A Brief History of
S
chools Included in the
SHAPE Project,
2008-2009
•Cordova High
•Craigmont High
•Fairley High
•Frayser High
•Hamilton High
•Hillcrest High
•Kingsbury High
•Kirby High
•Melrose High
•Mitchell High
•Northside High
•Oakhaven High
•Raleigh-Egypt
•Treadwell High
•Trezevant High
•Whitehaven High
ongoing monitoring efforts (Hsia et al., 2004). Tennessee is one of those states.
The School House Adjustment Program Enterprise (SHAPE)
The Tennessee Commission on Chil-dren and Youth (TCCY) is responsible for monitoring implementation of the federal Juvenile Justice and Delin-quency Prevention Act (JJDP Act) in the state of Tennessee. TCCY is also responsible for administering state funds for juvenile justice activities. In July 2008, Memphis City Schools (MCS) received grant funding through the Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) Pilot Project to implement the School House Adjustment Program Enterprise (SHAPE). The program is a collaborative effort between MCS, the Memphis Police Department, and the office of the Shelby County Mayor, the Public Defender’s Office and Juvenile Court. It began October 7, 2008 in sev-enteen high schools and one middle school across Memphis. The purpose of SHAPE is to reduce the number of mi-nority students sent to Juvenile Court for minor offenses. A student is eligible for SHAPE if they face potential charges of simple assault with no seri-ous injuries, disorderly conduct, or criminal trespass. A student must also meet the following criteria: have no felony adjudications, convictions or pending charges; have no violent mis-demeanor adjudications, convictions, or pending charges; have no other misde-meanor charges within the past twelve months; and be willing to voluntarily participate in the program (with paren-tal permission). See page 10 for a full description of the program criteria.
After being accepted into SHAPE, the student meets with the site coordi-nator at his or her school to fill out an agreement form and an intake form. After the paperwork is complete, the student begins attending afterschool sessions with the site coordinator for approximately nine weeks. While
in-Purpose of this Study
SHAPE was designed to provide an alternative to Juvenile Court for MCS students who have commit-ted one of the aforementioned of-fenses. The University of Mem-phis, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice was con-tracted to conduct a process and outcome evaluation of the SHAPE program. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine how the program has been implemented relative to how it was designed to function, as well as identify the characteristics of the program that should be preserved. The ultimate goal of the SHAPE evaluation pro-ject is to measure the overall im-pact of the SHAPE initiative as a strategy to reduce disproportionate minority contact with juvenile au-thorities. An independent evalua-tion serves to document challenges and opportunities for improvement in the program.
volved in the program, the student receives homework assistance, tutoring, mentoring, and social and life skills training.
While the student is in SHAPE, the site coordinator is charged with monitoring the students progress both in and out of the classroom. Tracking reports are filled out every month that the student is in the program. These are used to report the number of in-school-suspensions (ISS), out-of-school-suspensions (OSS) and absences. The site coordinator is also charged with contacting Juvenile Court to determine whether the student has had any subsequent contact with them. Upon successful completion of the program the student avoids contact with Juvenile Court for the charge that initiated their referral into the program. The student also receives a certification of comple-tion.
Methodology
Data Collection
Eighteen schools (seventeen high schools and one middle school) par-ticipated in SHAPE during the 2008-2009 school year. Site coordinators were assigned to each school and charged with monitoring the students enrolled in SHAPE; implementing the curriculum and documenting the aca-demic and behavioral progress of each of the participants. Site coordinators also obtained the data needed for evaluation through the use of quantita-tive and qualitaquantita-tive structured inter-views conducted on site at the partici-pating eighteen schools over a four month period beginning February 2009 and ending May 2009. The inter-view protocols included: referral forms, intake forms, monthly tracking forms, and exit forms for each student enrolled in the program. These forms were designed by the evaluator and approved by Memphis City Schools officials.
Extreme emphasis was placed on preserving student confidentiality and all methods discussed here were con-ducted in accordance with the written protocols approved by the Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Memphis. Site coordinators were in-structed to utilize a three digit code assigned to each school. This three-digit number corresponds with the three-digit identification number
as-signed the students upon receipt of their information. This was done in order to protect the stu-dents identities. In addition to the individual school code, an evalua-tion ID code comprised of the student’s initials, year of birth, and last four digits of the social security number were utilized to mask confidential data. No ad-dresses, personal identifying in-formation, or other contact infor-mation was stored or received by the evaluation team.
The data was transferred to the UM evaluation team in three ways: (1) a site visit to the SHAPE schools in which inter-view protocols were copied by the site coordinator and given to a member of the evaluation team; (2) the requested information was sent to the project facilitator and picked up by a member of the evaluation team; (3) the informa-tion was sent to the University of Memphis, Department of Crimi-nology and Criminal Justice via
Data Analysis
The sample used for this study includes 120 students who partici-pated in SHAPE during the 2008-2009 school year. Records for each student were entered into the evaluation database upon recep-tion. After all of the students re-cords were entered into the data-base, analyses were done on the demographics of the sample, stu-dent’s grades before, during and after the program, as well as the behavioral conduct of the students while in the program. All of these Analyses were done using the statistical package, SPSS 17.0™.
Findings
2008-09 Demographic Summary
With the exception of one middle school, 2008-2009 participants in SHAPE were high school aged stu-dents. Participants ranged from 12-19 years old with a mean age of 16. Boys made up just over half of the SHAPE participants. African American students made up the ma-jority of the sample at about 86 per-cent followed by Hispanic students at2.5 percent. One White student was involved in the SHAPE pro-gram. The remaining participants chose not to identify their racial/ ethnic identity. At lease five female students reported having a baby. Students were most com-monly living with their biological mother only (42.5%), with an-other 10 percent living with their biological mother and step father. Slightly less than one-quarter (22.5%) reported living with both
fax or mail. As data was received from the site coordinators, each form was entered into a password protected Microsoft Access™ 2007 database, sepcifically designed to house SHAPE data. This process took approximately four months.
In addition to the data obtained by the individual MCS site coordinators, data regarding student’s grades and behavioral infractions for the 2008-2009 school year was obtained from the MCS Office of Evaluation, Department of Research, Evaluation, and Assessment by the evaluation team. This information was also entered into the SHAPE database.
of their biological parents. The mean number of persons reported per household was four . It should be noted however, that more than 10 percent of partici-pants had six or more people liv-ing at their residence. At the time of their intake into the SHAPE program, 15 percent had already changed residence at least once during the school year.
Minor Serious
Cell phone Assault against student w/minor injuries
Class cutting B&E- burglary/theft $500+
Excessive excused/unexcused tardiness Under the influence of drugs/no possession Miscellaneous run/hall/thro/pen Abusive language towards school personnel Uniform/dress code violation Sexual harassment – gender base
Continue/engage – level 1 Threat against student (non-serious) False accusations against a student Threaten to explode/burn/damage
Gambling Aggravated assault on teacher or staff
Insolent/insubordinate Aggravated battery on teacher or staff
Leave campus without permission Assault teacher or staff
Shove/stud/ball/no injury Drugs – possession/use/distribute illegal Rx Obscene/offensive material, behavior, language Fight- serious injuries/weapons/gang Possession/use of match, light, firework Gang related – middle/high school
Profanity towards student Other major incident with potential serious injury Unauthorized material/post or display Threats against school personnel
Continue/engage- level 2 Threats against student (serious)
Fight- minor injuries/non-gang Weapons
Trespass and loitering
Electronic device: pager, beeper
Bullying or harassment
Continue/engage – level 3
Disruptive behavior w/prior unsuccessful intervention Of the three offenses deemed
eli-gible for referral into SHAPE, stu-dents were referred most often for simple assault with no serious injury (39.2%) followed by disorderly con-duct (35.8%) and criminal trespass-ing (3.3%). Approximately 3 per-cent of the sample indicated they had been charged with some other offense while 18 percent of the data collection forms failed to identify which charge facilitated the stu-dent’s referral into the SHAPE pro-gram.
Offenses
Attitudes about Education
Once students are referred to the program and agree to participate, a rather lengthy intake assessment is completed. The primary purpose of this assessment is to guide the site coordinator in making case manage-ment decisions. Completed as a face-to-face interview, this assess-ment allows the case manager toobtain pertinent information about a variety of risk factors.
A variety of questions are asked about the student’s opinions and attitudes towards education. There are also some baseline questions that provide some in-sight into the student’s school situation. More than one-third of SHAPE participants in 2008-09 (34.5%) had previously repeated at least one grade. Graduation aspirations were very high. Nearly all students said they wanted to finish high school and nearly all (99.0%) thought that indeed the would. Many aspire to go to college (84.6%). About three-fourths of the students (73.3%) believed that their grades were about the same as their peers while 20.0 percent thought their grades were better than their peers. Only 5.7 percent perceived their academic performance lower than their peers. Overwhelm-ingly, students reported that get-ting good grades was important to
Student behavior prior to SHAPE participation was also considered. Three-fourths of SHAPE partici-pants reported that the had previ-ously been suspended from school. In fact, many had been suspended multiple times. The data show that 27.6 percent had suspended only once before while 22.4 percent had two prior suspensions, 19.0 percent had three, while the largest category had four or more prior suspensions (31.0%). Additionally, nearly one-fourth (22.9%) of SHAPE partici-pants had prior expulsions from school. In summary, SHAPE par-ticipants have extensive histories of getting into trouble while at school.
Behavior before SHAPE
Parenting Rules
One area of the assessment intake form asks students about rules their parents or caretakers have regarding their behavior. Inevitably, the issue of parental responsibility and ac-countability is raised when juveniles become involved in delinquent be-havior. In this study, the data show some interesting facets of parental expectations. First however, we sought to understand a bit more about family dynamics. We asked, for respondents to identify “what person is most like a mother to you?” Less than three-fourths (72.5%) reported their mother as this person. Leading responses other than mother included: my aunt (6.4%), my older sister (5.5%), some other person (5.5%),or my grandmother (4.6%). When the same question was asked about the father role, only 53.6 percent identi-fied their father. Leading responses were: I don’t have anyone who is like a father to me (11.8%), my uncle (9.1%), my step-father (9.1%) my older brother (7.3%), or some other person (5.5%).
The assessment includes question about the students perceptions re-garding parents’ real knowledge about what is going on the kid’s life. Most SHAPE participants report that their parents really do know a lot about what they are doing. Most report that their parents do know who they hang out with (84.2%) and
Does your family have rules about:
When you do homework?
Yes: 53.6%
Dating?
Yes: 50.5%
Drinking alcohol?
Yes: 87.2%
Using drugs?
Yes: 89.8%
Fighting?
Yes: 84.0%
Skipping school?
Yes: 91.7%
Who your friends are?
Yes: 52.5%
Church attendance?
Yes: 56.1%
where they are after school hours (86.1%), and on the weekends. (91.1%). See Box 1.
Most SHAPE participants re-ported that they do not have a pay-ing job (85.9%) but that they are responsible for doing regular chores around the house (85.9%). The as-sessment also considers other re-sponsibilities. On average, SHAPE participants report spending 3.0 hours a week on homework while they spent an average of 12.1 hours a week hanging out with friends.
Prior Delinquency Factors
One of the best predictors of fu-ture delinquent behaviors is past delinquency. Based on the student’s self-reported information, 34.3 per-cent had previously been arrested by the police or taken into custody for an illegal or delinquent offense at some time in their life. Over one-fifth had been arrested within the twelve months prior to the intake into SHAPE (20.6%). The effect of negative peer influences is widely recognized as a risk factor for youth. SHAPE participants reported that over half of their friends had been arrested within the past twelve months (55.1%). A number of kids had run away on a least one occa-sion in the past year (9.4%) and another 12.8 percent reported that they had taken something from astore in the past year without paying for it.
Box 1: Family Rules
Violence Exposure
SHAPE participants have signifi-cant exposure to violence at home, at school, and in their neighbor-hoods. Perhaps it is not surprising that they are also participants in violence. Nearly three-fourths say they have been in a fight in the last year (71.3%). SHAPE participants also carry weapons and are exposed to those who use weapons. In the past year, 14.8 percent reported car-rying a knife or razor while 5.6 percent reported carrying a gun. Of those who carried weapons, half said they carried them “in their neighborhood”, followed by “at home” and then “at school”.
Witnessing violent crimes has an impact on children and youth. An alarming 14.3 percent had seen someone being cut, stabbed or shot. Another 8.2 percent said that some-one had pulled a knife or gun on them personally in the past twelve months and some had been shot at (4.0%). Nearly one-third of SHAPE participants reported that a friend or someone in their family had been shot or stabbed in the past twelve months. One-quarter of re-spondents said they had attacked someone in the past with the idea of seriously hurting them (24.5%).
Violent and Criminal Behavior
SHAPE participants have also demonstrated a penchant for violent behavior. In the past twelvemonths, SHAPE participants reported that they have: told someone they were going to cut, stab or shoot them (7.1%), pulled a knife or gun on someone (2.8%), cut or stabbed someone (0.9%), or shot at someone (0.9%).
Nearly one-quarter reported they had purposely damaged or destroyed property (24.1%), stolen something worth under fifty dollars (21.1%), stolen something over fifty dollars (1.8%), other property crimes (7.8%).
Overall gang involvement among SHAPE participants is fairly low with only 5.9 percent claiming some membership affiliation. However, 36.3 percent of students reported that they regularly hang out with gang members. When asked to clarify where they hang out with gang mem-bers, the percentage who said “at school”(39.0%) closely mirrored the percentage who said “in my
neighborhood” (39.7%). Students were asked to estimate the percentage of their friends who were involved in gangs. Most (63.7%) reported that fewer than 10 percent of their friends belong to a gang. Another 10.1 per-cent mentioned that approximately 25 percent of their friends had gang af-filiations. The remaining 15.4 per-cent believe that half or more of their friends pertain to a gang.
Gangs and Gang Involvement
Substance Use
SHAPE participants were also asked about their use of tobacco, al-cohol, marijuana, and other drugs. Purchasing and possessing tobacco and alcohol is illegal for minors. Tobacco use is fairly low and only 5.6 percent said they have smoked within the past year. Most of their friends don’t smoke either. In fact, participants report that more than three-fourths of their friends mostly abstain from smoking (76.3%).
Alcohol is more widely used. When asked if they had drunk alco-hol in the past year, 16.5 percent re-ported that they had. Binge drinking, drinking five or more alcoholic drinks on the same day, occurred among 3.8 percent of SHAPE partici-pants. Drinking was also more popu-lar among the friends of SHAPE par-ticipants. When asked, 18.0 percent said one-quarter or more of their friends get drunk at least once a month. In general, respondents per-ceive that their friends drink even more often than themselves. Nearly half of SHAPE participants said they had socialized with someone who
was drunk or high on drugs in the past year (41.9%).
Marijuana use was higher than alcohol use with 18.9 percent re-porting that they had used mari-juana on at least one occasion in the past year. They also perceive that their friends are also using marijuana commonly. Nearly forty percent believed that more than one-quarter of their friends use marijuana.
Other drug use was less common but not absent. Two respondents reported using crack or cocaine in the past year. Most people
simi-What percent of your friends skip school?
Almost none (less than 10%)
61.5%
About 25%
20.9%
About half (50%)
8.8%
About 75%
1.1%
Almost all (more than 90%)
5.5%
Box 2: Perceptions of Skipping School
Outcome Study Results
The evaluation team collected data from at least three main sources in order to provide some insight into how the SHAPE pro-gram is affecting participant out-comes. These data sources in-clude: information collected by the site coordinators (intake, monthly reports, and exit forms), informa-tion supplied by Juvenile Court, and official summary data from Memphis City Schools. Outcome studies ordinarily require a sub-stantial amount of data in order to make sound conclusions about a
program. This report includes data for one school year only and thus, conclusions will need to be strength-ened by future research.
The implementation of the SHAPE project has had the desired effect. Transports to Juvenile Court from the targeted eighteen schools dropped by 29.4 percent in the 2008 -09 school year compared to trans-ports from the previous school year from those same schools. This duction in transports is a direct re-sult of the SHAPE project imple-mentation. It should be noted how-ever, that the reduction in transports not only resulted from SHAPE par-ticipants themselves not being trans-ported. This reduction can also be attributed to additional scrutiny be-ing placed on all Juvenile Court transports from these schools. Per-haps, school administrators are more aware of disproportionate minority contact issues. Similarly, law en-forcement authorities and Juvenile Court personnel are increasingly recognizing the benefits of a juve-nile summons rather transports. These collateral effects of the SHAPE initiative will continue as SHAPE gains more support in the schools and the community.
Transports to Juvenile Court from the
targeted eighteen schools dropped by
29.4 percent in the 2008-09 school year
compared to transports from the
previ-ous school year from those same
SHAPE Attendance
Successful SHAPE participation requires attendance. The SHAPE curriculum includes nine weeks. Typically students are required to attend two to three sessions every week. During the 2008-09 school year, there were some fluctuations in implementation and sessions were not offered equally at all schools. This may also in part ac-count for some of the variations in outcomes. SHAPE participants attended an average of 17.2 ses-sions and missed an average of 5.2. Across all sites, the average num-ber of sessions offered per nine weeks was 22.4. Well over three-fourths (84.1%) of students at-tended at least half of the required sessions.
The weakly defined SHAPE cur-riculum and the fluctuations be-tween sites during the 2008-09 school year has been addressed at several meetings since the end of the school year and a new strategy, and curriculum, has been adopted. In 2009-10, the SHAPE program has selected a curriculum based on work compiled by the Mendez Foundation, an innovative leader in prevention education and a recog-nized best practices model.
Grades
Improving academic performance is an important goal and helps to direct future opportunities for stu-dents. As previously mentioned in this report, many SHAPE partici-pants have experienced serious aca-demic challenges. Recall that more than one-third reported that they had previously repeated a grade. The mean GPA for all SHAPE partici-pants at the point when they entered the SHAPE program was 2.4 (on a 4.0 scale) - essentially a “C” aver-age. At the conclusion of the SHAPE program the mean GPA for all students had dropped slightly to 2.3. While grades decreased
School Behavior
Memphis City Schools provided the evaluation team with a summary of behavioral infractions for SHAPE participants during the the 2008-2009 school year. For purposes of this report, infractions were separated into two groups: minor incidents and serious incidents. These incidents are defined in Table 1 on page 4.
In general, SHAPE participants are students who have posed significant behavioral challenges while at school often for years. Self-reported behav-ior as measured by suspensions and expulsions reflect fairly serious in-fractions. Recall that three-fourths reported prior suspensions and one-fourth reported prior expulsions. SHAPE program participation did not curb this trend significantly. After admission into the SHAPE program, participants experienced an average of 2.8 behavioral incidents (both mi-nor and serious). Most were mimi-nor incidents with mean of 2.4 events although some were for more serious occurrences. Approximately one out of every three SHAPE participants had a serious incident (again, see The primary goal of the SHAPE
project is to reduce the number of minority juveniles who come into contact with Shelby County Juvenile Court. The previous section demon-strates considerable success in this regard. Some additional outcome measures for the SHAPE program were also considered. Each child referred and accepted into the SHAPE program is required to par-ticipate in an after school curricu-lum. A challenge of the project is to achieve attendance compliance for the full nine week program. Addi-tionally, the evaluation team consid-ered academic performance and school behavior as additional out-come measures. Finally, the report considers whether or not SHAPE participants received subsequent referrals to Juvenile Court after en-tering the SHAPE program. Each of these is discussed below.
Table 1 on page 4 for a list of seri-ous incidents). Two things could account for this number of inci-dents. First, most SHAPE partici-pants were accepted during the first half of the school year. Their ex-posure time, the number of months remaining in the school year, was lengthy. Second, the same factor as mentioned under grades. We do not know how many incidents they may have had if the SHAPE inter-vention had not occurred. How-ever, based on prior incidents, we can assume that many of the seri-ous incidents would have likely ended in at least a suspension. The suspension/expulsion rate dur-ing the current school year was in fact lower.
slightly, this should necessarily be taken to indicate a negative outcome as a result of SHAPE participation. How much lower would their overall grades have dropped if they had been transported to Juvenile Court? Even so, additional emphasis on academic improvement during the coming SHAPE school year is recommended.
In 2009-10, the SHAPE
program has selected a
curriculum based on
work compiled by the
Mendez Foundation, an
innovative leader in
prevention education
and a recognized best
Recommendations
•
Create a standard criteria for those eligible for enrollment in the program. Originally,
indi-viduals who were first time, non-violent offenders who had committed simple assault,
disor-derly conduct, or criminal trespass were eligible for intake. However it was found that some
individuals either had previous contact with Juvenile Court or had not committed one of the
offenses mentioned above.
•
Create a clearly stated screening process for individuals referred into the program
•
Standardize the curriculum. The curriculum for each school should have the same objectives
and method of delivery.
•
Make staff training mandatory. This training will ensure that individuals are committed to
the mission and direction of the program.
•
Allow members of the evaluation team to conduct training for the site coordinators. This
training will include: the process from referral to exit, how to fill out paperwork, and any
other issues that may arise.
•
Have site coordinators create a monthly report due to both the project facilitator and the
members of the evaluation team at a specified date each month during the 2009-2010 school
year. In each monthly report the site coordinators will describe the students enrolled in their
respective program as well as the progress of each student in terms of absences,
suspen-sions, and grades.
•
Create a data collection protocol. There should only be one method in which the evaluation
team collects/receives data. There should also be one method in which site coordinators
ob-tain data (i.e. filling out paperwork themselves as opposed to having the student or student’s
parent fill it out).
•
Have site coordinators check with Juvenile Court periodically (preferably at breaks in the
school year such as Winter vacation, Spring break, and the end of the school year) to
estab-lish whether or not the students enrolled in their program have had subsequent contact with
Juvenile Court.
•
Add SHAPE program materials to Memphis Police Department Policies and Procedures.
Include clear direction that MPD officers will complete the Pending Document Form. This
will effectively communicate to non-school officers the importance and priority of the
SHAPE program.
•
Obtain clear standards for including school principals and other administrators in SHAPE
training. Confirm that principals are aware of the program and hold them accountable for
adhering to SHAPE student transport directives.
•
Determine effective strategies for continuing SHAPE initiatives beyond the current
Tennes-see Commission on Children and Youth
funding cycle. Pursue opportunities to
ex-pand the program into all middle and high
schools in Memphis City Schools.
•
Conduct monthly case reviews of juveniles
transported to Juvenile Court on SHAPE
eli-gible offenses and seek resolutions.
•
Ensure that summonses are filed for
non-compliant SHAPE participants. Without
consequences, the program model looses
in-tegrity.
Program Completion
Successful completion of SHAPE is defined as completion of all cur-riculum requirements and no contact with Juvenile Court while in the program. Almost two-thirds (62.5%) of the sample completed the program successfully. Of the remaining options for program exit; approximately 11.7 percent had an unsuccessful discharge—were non-compliant, and had a summons filed on the original complaint. Four juveniles received a new delinquent charge, two students absconded and one student legally withdrew (dropped out) from school. Consid-ering the risks and needs of the youth involved in the SHAPE pro-gram, based on their prior social and criminal histories, a 62.5 percent completion rate is an especially strong performance.
Conclusion
SHAPE was designed to reduce the number of minority youth re-ferred to juvenile court for minor offenses. Ultimately, the goal would be to reduce the number of minority youth who have any juve-nile record at all. After one year of full implementation of the SHAPE program, this study has identified a 29.4 percent decrease in the number of transports to Juvenile Court from the targeted schools. The academic performance of SHAPE participants decreased slightly but likely far less than it would have had the student been transferred to Juvenile Court.
References
1. Hsia, H.M. (2008). A disproportionate minority contact chronology: 1988 to date. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office Of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
2. Hsia, H.M., Bridges, G.S., and McHale, R. (2004). Disproportionate minority
Confinement 2002 update. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
3. Pope, C.E., & Feyerherm, W. (1995). Minorities in the juvenile justice system. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Behavioral problems at school, while still present, did not worsen. There is some evidence to suggest that the severity of the behavioral problems in fact may have creased as shown by an overall de-crease in the suspension/expulsion rate. There are certainly opportuni-ties for improvement, especially in the curriculum and standardized delivery of the curriculum. The new curriculum adopted for the 2009-10 school year should meet this short coming. The evaluation team has developed a number of recommen-dations for consideration.
Memphis City Schools - SHAPE Program
Program Participation Criteria
The Memphis City School SHAPE Program is designed to reduce the number of juveniles being referred to Juve-nile Court. Participation in SHAPE is voluntary but students and parents are strongly encouraged to take advan-tage of the benefits of this program. There are some eligibility criteria guiding program admission decisions.
Program Participation Criteria The student must:
• have no felony adjudications, convictions, or pending charges;
• have no violent misdemeanor adjudications, convictions, or ending charges;
• be facing a current charge of either simple assault with no serious injury, criminal trespassing, or
dis-orderly conduct;
• have no other misdemeanors within past twelve months (prior simple assault, criminal trespassing, or
disorderly conduct charges are eligible); and,
• be willing and able to voluntarily participate in all the requirements of the SHAPE program (this
in-cludes having an acceptable transportation plan to participate in afterschool activities).
