NEW COMMITMENT PROFILE
FISCAL YEAR 2003
Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Michael Branham, Interim Director

Research and Development
Juveniles committed to the Arizona
Department of Juvenile Corrections’ (ADJC)
in 2003 were some of the most difficult
teenagers in Arizona. Many were chronic
property offenders and almost all of them had
serious substance abuse problems. While
efforts were made to identify and build on
their personal strengths, many of them had
significant intellectual, educational and
emotional deficiencies.
The New Commitment Profile is a descriptive
review of the characteristics of the juvenile
offenders committed to ADJC throughout
Fiscal Year (FY) 2003. This report is a
compilation of information from Arizona
juvenile court commitment orders, ADJC’s
juvenile database, YouthBase, as well as
other files maintained by the ADJC Research
and Development (R & D) Section.
HIGHLIGHTS:
•

•

ADJC NEW COMMITMENT JUVENILE PROFILE
As shown in Table 1, the profile of the typical ADJC new commitment has
remained consistent since before 2000. The length of stay given to the ADJC
commitments has evidenced an increasing trend going from 6.9 months in FY
1998 to 7.6 months in FY 2003.
Analysis of data and trends enabled ADJC to develop a meaningful profile of
juveniles committed to its custody. A typical new commitment to ADJC:
He was a 17 year-old Hispanic male from Maricopa County. His most serious
commitment offense was a class 6 felony, and it was most likely a theft. He was
committed to ADJC with a court-ordered length of stay of 7.6 months and he was
determined to be a moderate risk. His placement according to both ADJC matrix
and court-ordered minimum was in a secure ADJC facility rather than a
community based placement.
Table 1
Gender
Age
Ethnicity
County
Offense
Class Level
Court Order
Length of Stay
Risk Level
Placement

FY 2000

FY 2001

FY 2002

FY 2003

Male
17
Hispanic
Maricopa
Theft
Misd.
Yes
7.4 mos.
Moderate
Secure Care

Male
17
Hispanic
Maricopa
Theft
Misd.
Yes
7.0 mos.
Moderate
Secure Care

Male
16
Hispanic
Maricopa
Theft
Class 6 Fel.
Yes
7.6 mos.
Moderate
Secure Care

Male
17
Hispanic
Maricopa
Theft
Class 6 Fel.
Yes
7.6 mos.
Moderate
Secure Care

There were 752 juveniles committed to
ADJC in FY 2003, a decrease of 8.6%
from the 823 committed in FY 2002.

•

Monthly commitments ranged from a
high of 78 in August 2002 to a low of
42 in November 2002.

The average length of stay (7.6
months) given to juveniles in FY 2003
remained unchanged from FY 2002.

•

The most common age for a juvenile
committed to ADJC was 17, however,
the most common age of their first
court referral was 13. Fully 42.9% of
the juveniles had between 6 and 10
prior court referrals.

•

Almost all of the juveniles had school
(97.1%), substance abuse (96.9%),
and peer relationship (93.6%)
problems.

•

Many (42%) were committed on
property offenses.

•

The vast majority, (62.5%) of
commitments were composed of three
offender subgroups: first time felons,
second time felons, and
misdemeanants.

Table 2
RACE
Caucasian
African American
Native American
Hispanic
Asian
Other
Mexican National
GENDER
Female
Male
AGE
12 and younger
13 years old
14 years old
15 years old
16 years old
17 years old
RISK LEVEL
Low
Moderate
High
COUNY
Maricopa
Pinal
Pima
Greenlee
Graham
Yuma
La Paz
Mohave
Yavapai
Navajo
Apache
Gila
Coconino
Santa Cruz
Cochise l

FY 2000

FY 2001

FY 2002

369 (37.4%)
90 (9.1%)
62 (6.3%)
433 (43.9%)
6 (0.6%)
1 (0.1%)
26 (2.6%)

347 (38.9%)
82 (9.2%)
40 (4.5%)
380 (42.6%)
2 (0.2%)
2 (0.2%)
40 (4.5%)

284 (34.5%)
86 (10.4%)
44 (5.3%)
377 (45.8%)
2 (0.2%)
30 (3.6%)

243
70
34
352
1
4
48

140 (14.2%)
847 (85.8%)

103 (11.5%)
790 (88.5%)

96 (11.7%)
727 (88.3%)

93 (12.4%)
659 (87.6%)

13
52
123
240
279
280

3
46
104
193
257
290

2
16
101
197
261
246

4
11
71
161
246
259

(1.3%)
(5.3%)
(12.5%)
(24.3%)
(28.3%)
(28.4%)

(0.3%)
(5.2%)
(11.6%)
(21.6%)
(28.8%)
(32.5%)

FY 2003

(0.2%)
(1.9%)
(12.3%)
(23.9%)
(31.7%)
(29.9%)

(32.3%)
(9.3%)
(4.5%)
(46.8%)
(0.1%)
(0.5%)
(6.4%)

(0.5%)
(1.5%)
(9.4%)
(21.4%)
(32.7%)
(34.4%)

213 (21.6%)
489 (49.5%)
285 (28.9%)

144 (16.1%)
465 (52.1%)
284 (31.8%)

114 (13.9%)
416 (50.5%)
293 (35.6%)

126 (16.8%)
394 (52.4%)
232 (30.9%)

412 (41.7%)
74 (7.5%)
271 (27.5%)
0
6 (0.6%)
48 (4.9%)
3 (0.3%)
41 (4.2%)
24 (2.4%)
19 (1.9%)
12 (1.2%)
13 (1.3%)
10 (1.0%)
15 (1.5%)
39 (4.0%)

395 (44.2%)
72 (8.0%)
219 (24.5%)
0
7 (0.8%)
48 (5.4%)
2 (0.2%)
40 (4.5%)
33 (3.7%)
14 (1.6%)
3 (0.3%)
11 (1.2%)
15 (1.7%)
12 (1.3%)
22 (2.5%)

314 (38.2%)
53 (6.4%)
241 (29.3%)
1 (0.1%)
10 (1.2%)
52 (6.3%)
1 (0.1%)
29 (3.5%)
36 (4.4%)
19 (2.3%)
3 (0.4%)
11 (1.3%)
17 (2.1%)
10 (1.2%)
26 (3.2%)

317
41
195
3
4
36
2
31
30
21
2
17
21
9
23

(42.2%)
(5.5%)
(25.9%)
(0.4%)
(0.5%)
(4.8%)
(0.3%)
(4.1%)
(4.0%)
(2.8%)
(0.3%)
(2.3%)
(2.8%)
(1.2%)
(3.1%)

DEMOGRAPHIC DATA – See Table 2
Hispanics accounted for 46.8% of the
commitments in FY 2003. Caucasians, with
32.3% accounted for the second largest
racial/ethnic category, followed by African
Americans (9.3%), Mexican Nationals
(6.4%), Native Americans (4.5%), and
juveniles from other racial/ethnic categories
(0.6%).
The vast majority of commitments (87.6%)
were male, and 12.4% were female. FY
2003 was the second year in a row that the
percentage of female commitments
increased.
Three quarters (67.1%) of the new
commitments were 16 or 17 years old at the
time of their commitment, and a large
percentage (21.4%) were 15 years old.
Over half (52.4%) of the commitments were
determined to be moderate risk, while
30.9% were determined to be high risk, and
16.8% low risk.

The percentage of commitments from
Maricopa County increased from 38.2% in
FY 2002 to 42.2% in FY 2003. Meanwhile,
decreases were recorded in the percentage of juveniles committed from Pima County (29.3% to
25.9%) and the other 13 Arizona counties (32.5% to 31.9%).
TOTAL

987 (100%)

893 (100%)

823 (100%)

752 (100%)

Case Study
Beth (not her real name) was committed to ADJC on domestic violence, and placed in the Encanto Unit. At
that time she was diagnosed with Conduct Disorder, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and Depressive Disorder.
She had an extreme abuse history including physical abuse and rape. Her family was found to have a
consistently negative influence on her and her decisions. In fact, Beth had been placed in numerous foster
homes and group home settings before her commitment to ADJC.
During her time at ADJC, Beth did very well and earned her release within the 12 month length-of-stay given
by the court. Upon her release from secure care, Beth participated in individual and family counseling and
anger management. Beth has been attending Pima College, and her long-term plans include a degree in
Social Work. She has made progress with her substance abuse problem and she tested negative for drugs for
six months. Beth was enrolled in vocational rehabilitation and she was actively working on her transition plan.
She has held a part-time job while attending school and receiving her required counseling.
Beth has taken her parole responsibilities seriously and she has been completing both short and long term
goals for herself. She became actively involved with her family in a positive way. Beth achieved the highest
level of success at ADJC in May of 2003 when she was awarded an absolute discharge.

OFFENSE SUBGROUPS – See
Table 3
Many (42.0%) of the new
commitments were committed on
property offenses. Theft, including
theft of vehicle, represented the
highest percentage of property
offenses with 13.7%, increasing
from 12.3% in FY 2002.
Crimes against persons (CAP)
represented 20.5% of the new
commitments. Aggravated assault
represented the largest type of
CAP, while juveniles committed on
a sexual offenses represented
24.6% of the juvenile offenders
committed on CAP offenses.
Juveniles committed to ADJC on a
drug offense represented 17.2% of
the total commitments. Almost
half (44.2%) of the drug offenses
were marijuana possession
Public order offenses represented
10.8% of the new commitments.
Public order offenses include
disorderly conduct, escape,
resisting arrest, hindering
prosecution, and false reporting to
law enforcement.

Table 3:
Offense Subgroups
Group Total
Crimes Against Persons:
Homicide
Kidnapping
Sexual Assault
Robbery
Aggravated Assault
Assault
Sub Total
Property Offenses:
Burglary 1st Degree
Burglary 2nd Degree
Burglary 3rd Degree
Shoplifting
Theft <$250
Theft $251-$2,999
Theft $3,000-$24,999
Theft of Vehicle
UUMT/Joyriding
Criminal Damage
Forgery/Fraud
Trafficking Stolen Property
Trespassing
Sub Total
Public Order:
Disorderly Conduct
Escape
Resisting Arrest
Contempt of Court
False Reporting to Law Enforcement
Unlawful Felony Flight
Interference Judicial Proceedings
Other Public Order Offenses
Sub-Total
Drug Offenses:
Dangerous Drug Possession/Sell/Use
Drug Paraphernalia Possession
Marijuana Possession
Inhale/Possession Toxic Vapor
Drugs On/Near School Grounds
Marijuana Sale/Trafficking
Narcotic Drugs Possession/Sell/Use
Miscellaneous Drug Offenses
Sub-Total

FY 2000

FY 2001

FY 2002

FY 2003

987

893

823

752

1
46
16
59
68
190

(0.1%)
(4.7%)
(1.6%)
(6.0%)
(6.9%)
(19.3%)

1 (0.1%)
1 (0.1%)
35 (3.9%)
10 (1.1%)
58 (6.5%)
54 (6.0%)
159 (17.8%)

1 (0.1%)
2 (0.3%)
41 (5.0%)
17 (2.1%)
84 (10.1%)
26 (3.2%)
171 (20.8%)

1 (0.1%)
2 (0.3%)
38 (5.1%)
12 (1.6%)
61 (8.1%)
40 (5.3%)
154 (20.5%)

8
49
57
41
28
39
59
36
67
51
10
4
22
471

(0.8%)
(5.0%)
(5.8%)
(4.2%)
(2.8%)
(4.0%)
(6.0%)
(3.6%)
(6.8%)
(5.2%)
(1.0%)
(0.4%)
(2.2%)
(47.8%)

2 (0.2%)
56 (6.3%)
56 (6.3%)
34 (3.8%)
24 (2.7%)
46 (5.2%)
10 (1.1%)
58 (6.5%)
67 (7.5%)
47 (5.3%)
11 (1.2%)
3 (0.3%)
23 (2.6%)
437 (48.9%)

4 (0.5%)
34 (4.1%)
55 (6.7%)
24 (2.9%)
12 (1.5%)
33 (4.0%)
6 (0.7%)
50 (6.1%)
65 (7.8%)
48 (5.8%)
8 (1.0%)
2 (0.3%)
18 (2.2%)
359 (43.6%)

2 (0.3%)
38 (5.1%)
49 (6.5%)
20 (2.7%)
15 (2.0%)
33 (4.4%)
4 (0.5%)
51 (6.8%)
45 (6.0%)
33 (4.4%)
5 (0.7%)
0
21 (2.8%)
316 (42.0%)

43
22
13

(4.4%)
(2.2%)
(1.3%)

31 (3.5%)
16 (1.8%)
8 (0.9%)
21 (2.4%)
7 (0.8%)
4 (0.4%)
87 (9.7%)

22 (2.6%)
17 (2.1%)
10 (1.2%)
17 (2.1%)
7 (0.9%)
3 (0.4%)
5 (0.6%)
81 (9.8%)

31 (4.1%)
22 (2.9%)
10 (1.3%)
0
12 (1.6%)
0
1 (0.1%)
5 (0.7%)
81 (10.8%)

11 (1.2%)
29 (3.2%)
73 (8.2%)
7 (0.8%)
3 (0.3%)
9 (1.0%)
16 (1.8%)
2 (0.2%)
150 (16.8%)

10 (1.2%)
31 (3.8%)
72 (8.7%)
7 (0.9%)
5 (0.6%)
4 (0.5%)
15 (1.8%)
2 (0.2%)
146 (17.7%)

13 (1.7%)
31 (4.1%)
57 (7.6%)
5 (0.7%)
6 (0.8%)
1 (0.1%)
16 (2.1%)
0
129 (17.2%)

18
4
3
2
105

(1.8%)
(0.4%)
(0.3%)
(0.2%)
(10.6%)

7
38
76
7
10
5
17

(0.7%)
(3.9%)
(7.7%)
(0.7%)
(1.0%)
(0.5%)
(1.7%)

160 (16.2%)

Weapons Offenses

30

(3.0%)

22 (2.5%)

28 (3.4%)

30 (4.0%)

All Other Offenses
Alcohol Offenses
Domestic Violence
Other Misc. Offenses
Sub Total

18
1
12
31

(1.8%)
(0.1%)
(1.2%)
(3.1%)

23 (2.6%)
15 (1.8%)
38 (4.3%)

28 (3.4%)
10 (1.2%)
38 (4.6%)

28 (3.7%)
3 (0.4%)
11 (1.5%)
42 (5.6%)

The number of ADJC
commitments with alcohol
offenses has been steadily
increasing between FY 2000 (31) and FY 2003 (42).
DELINQUENCY DATA – See Table 4

Thirteen (20.9%) was the most common age of first juvenile court referral, however, one-fourth of the
commitments (25.9%) were 11 or younger at their first referral.
Many juveniles (43.4%) had 11 or more prior court referrals at the time of their commitment to ADJC.
Only 13.7% had fewer than five referrals.
Most juveniles (62.5%) had two or more petitions for felony offenses before being committed to
ADJC. Thirty juveniles had five or more prior felony petitions

Juveniles with four or more prior
adjudications represented 73% of
all juveniles committed to ADJC.
Only 4% of the juveniles had one
adjudication before their
commitment to ADJC.
CRIMINOGENIC NEEDS – See
Table 5
While having individual strengths,
most juveniles committed to
ADJC had serious substance
abuse, school behavior,
emotional, and other needs.
These needs affect the juveniles’
ability to be law abiding and
respond appropriately to ADJC
treatment programs.
Almost all of the juveniles had
school (97.1%), substance abuse
(96.9%), and peer (93.6%)
problems.

Table 4:
DELINQUENCY
AGE AT FIRST REFERRAL
7 years and younger
8 to 10 years old
11 years old
12 years old
13 years old
14 years old
15 or older
NUMBER OF REFERRALS
1 referral
2 referrals
3 to 5 referrals
6 to 10 referrals
11 to 15 referrals
16 & more
PETITIONS FOR FELONY
OFFENSES
0 petitions
1 petition
2 petitions
3 petitions
4 petitions
5 & more petitions
NUMBER OF ADJUDICATION
1 adjudication
2-3 adjudications
4-5 adjudications
6-7 adjudications
8 & more

FY 2000

FY 2001

FY 2002

FY 2003

1 (0.1%)
160 (16.2%)
127 (12.9%)
173 (17.5%)
215 (21.8%)
146 (14.8%)
165 (16.7%)

1
161
116
159
188
138
130

(0.1%)
(18.0%)
(13.0%)
(17.8%)
(21.1%)
(15.5%)
(14.5%)

7
150
115
150
174
124
103

(0.8%)
(18.2%)
(14.0%)
(18.2%)
(21.1%)
(15.1%)
(12.5%)

3 (0.4%)
110 (14.6%)
82 (10.9%)
134 (17.8%)
157 (20.9%)
138 (18.4%)
128 (17.0%)

18
17
124
412
267
149

(1.8%)
(1.7%)
(12.6%)
(41.7%)
(27.1%)
(15.1%)

18
20
89
348
255
163

(2.0%)
(2.2%)
(10.0%
(39.0%)
(28.6%)
(18.3%)

5
8
78
342
212
178

(0.6%)
(1.0%)
(9.5%)
(41.6%)
(25.8%)
(21.6%)

8
13
82
323
201
125

106
293
271
185
83
49

(10.7%)
(29.7%)
(27.5%)
(18.7%)
(8.4%)
(5.0%)

101
252
251
189
60
40

(11.3%)
(28.2%)
(28.1%)
(21.2%)
(6.7%)
(4.5%)

84
251
234
154
56
44

(10.2%)
(30.5%)
(28.4%)
(18.7%)
(6.8%)
(5.4%)

71 (9.4%)
211 (28.1%)
214 (28.5%)
163 (21.7%)
63 (8.4%)
30 (4.0%)

53
266
357
191
120

(5.4%)
(27.0%)
(36.2%)
(19.4%)
(12.2%)

47
180
316
213
137

(5.3%)
(20.2%)
(35.4%)
(23.9%)
(15.3%)

24
165
262
255
117

(2.9%)
(20.1%)
(31.8%)
(31.0%)
(14.2%)

30
173
263
174
112

(1.1%)
(1.7%)
(10.9%)
(42.9%)
(26.7%)
(16.6%)

(4.0%)
(23.0%)
(35.0%)
(23.1%)
(14.9%)

A few gender-based differences were present in the commitments. More females (47.8%) than males
(14.9%) had sexual problems; more females (91.3%) than males (75.3%) had emotional problems;
and more females (22.8%) than males (7.8%) experienced intra-family sexual abuse. More males
(67.3%) than females (40.2%) had education/ employment problems; and more males (96.8%) than
females (67.4%) had intellectual or educational problems.
Table 5: CRIMINOGENIC NEEDS
TREATMENT SERVICE FACTORS
Substance Abuse
Sexual Behavior
Emotional Stability
Theft Behavior
EDUCATIONAL/SOCIAL SKILLS FACTOR
Life Skills
Youth’s Parenting Skills
Education/Employment
Living Situation-Finances
Intellectual/Educational Deficits
Peer Relationships
School Behavior/Adjustment
MEDICAL & MENTAL HEALTH FACTORS
Health/Hygiene
History of Abuse/Neglect as Victim
Intra-Familial Sexual Abuse
FAMILY ENVIORNMENT FACTORS
Conflict in Home
Parenting Skills
Substance Abuse – Family
Family Criminality
Disabilities of Caregivers

MALE

FEMALE

TOTAL

96.7%
14.9%
75.3%
86.0%

98.9%
47.8%
91.3%
84.8%

96.9%
19.0%
77.3%
85.8%

12.3%
6.4%
67.3%
31.2%
96.8%
93.8%
97.6%

8.7%
14.1%
40.2%
32.6%
67.4%
92.4%
93.5%

11.9%
7.3%
64.0%
31.4%
93.2%
93.6%
97.1%

37.9%
35.3%
7.8%

30.4%
63.0%
22.8%

37.0%
38.7%
9.6%

63.2%
77.0%
62.9%
68.9%
7.3%

71.7%
79.3%
67.4%
66.3%
12.0%

64.2%
77.3%
63.4%
68.6%
7.9%

DISTRIBUTION BY FELONY CLASS
AND LENGTH OF STAY
The average length of stay (7.6 months) given
to juveniles in FY 2003 remained the same as
it was in FY 2002. The average length of stay
given to juveniles in FY 2003 was higher than
the ADJC matrix guideline length of stay.

include shoplifting, disorderly conduct and
marijuana possession.
All together, 86.6% of the FY 2003
commitments had a court-ordered minimum
length of stay, as compared to 91.4% of the
commitments in FY 2002.

While having extensive delinquency histories,
the majority (60.3%) of juveniles were
committed to ADJC on the least serious
offense categories. In fact, many juveniles
were committed for offenses that are classified
under Arizona law as either class 6 felonies or
misdemeanors. Some of the more common
Class 6 felony offenses included petty theft and
unlawful use of means of transportation
(UUMT). Common misdemeanor offenses

Table 6

Actual Length of
Stay Given
11.2 months
9.1 months
7.8 months
7.4 months
7.3 months
6.7 months

Class Level
Felony Class 2
Felony Class 3
Felony Class 4
Felony Class 5
Felony Class 6
Misdemeanors

ADJC Matrix
Guidelines
12 months
9 months
7 months
7 months
6 months
6 months

ADJC New Commitments Average Length of Sentence
by Level of Most Serious Commitment Offense
59.2

12.813.1
11.9

11.311.111.2

8.7

9.3

9.0

8.7

9.1
7.8 7.8
7.5 7.6 7.6
7.3 7.4 7.6 7.4 7.4

7.2 7.3
6.3 6.4 6.2

Class 1

Class 2

Class = Felony class as defined by A.R.S. 13-601

Class 3

FY99

Table 7: ADJC NEW COMMITMENTS
FELONY CLASS LEVEL
2000
Felony 1
0
Felony 2
51 (5.2%)
Felony 3
142 (14.4%)
Felony 4
141 (14.3%)
Felony 5
94 (9.5%)
Felony 6
253 (25.6%)
Misdemeanor
306 (31.0%)
987 (100%)
Total

Class 4

FY00

FY01

2001
1 (0.1%)
34 (3.8%)
137 (15.3%)
109 (12.2%)
90 (10.1%)
249 (27.9%)
273 (30.6%)
893 (100%)

Class 5

FY02

6.1

Class 6

6.5

6.9 6.7

Misdemeanor

FY03

2002
1 (0.1%)
35 (4.3%)
108 (13.1%)
114 (13.9%)
75 (9.1%)
255 (31.0%)
235 (28.6%)
823 (100%)

6.1

2003
0
30 (4.0%)
102 (13.6%)
108 (14.4%)
59 (7.9%)
243 (32.3%)
210 (27.9%)
752 (100%)

COMMITMENT PROFILES FOR SB1446 OFFENDER SUBGROUPS
Table 8: SB 1446 OFFENDER SUBGROUPS INCLUDING ALL FELONIES
Concerned about
violent juvenile
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
offenders, Arizona
1. Age 15+ Specified Violent
0
0
0
4 (0.5%)
Felonies (Mandatory Exclusion)
voters passed
2. Age 15+ Legislatively Defined 15 (1.5%)
23 (2.6%)
28 (3.4%)
18 (2.4%)
Proposition 102 in
Violent Felonies (Mandatory
1996. Senate Bill (SB)
Exclusion)
3. Age 15+ Chronic Felons
168 (17.0%)
124 (13.9%)
124 (15.1%)
153 (20.3%)
1446 was passed by
(Mandatory Exclusion)
the Arizona
4. Felons with Prior Transfers
2 (0.2%)
1 (0.1%)
0
1 (0.1%)
Legislature, signed by
(Mandatory Exclusion)
5. Age 14+ Accused of Selected 33 (3.3%)
93 (10.4%)
91 (11.1%)
84 (11.2%)
the Governor and it
became Arizona law in Offenses (Discretionary)
6. Age 14, Chronic
27 (2.7%)
13 (1.5%)
9 (1.1%)
10 (1.3%)
1997. These two
(Discretionary)
related initiatives
7. First Time Felons
198 (20.1%)
166 (18.6%)
179 (21.7%)
127 (16.9%)
required violent and
8. Second Time Felons (>14
199 (20.2%)
155 (17.4%)
149 (18.1%)
139 (18.5%)
chronic juvenile
years old)
offenders over 15
9. Misdemeanants
304 (30.8%)
273 (30.6%)
227 (27.6%)
204 (27.1%)
years old to be direct10. Under Age 14 Chronic
18 (1.8%)
5 (0.6%)
5 (0.6%)
3 (0.4%)
filed into an adult
Felons
court, thereby making
11. Under Age 14 Second Time
16 (1.6%)
16 (1.8%)
3 (0.4%)
5 (0.7%)
them ineligible for
Felons
commitment to the
12. Under age 15 Violent
3 (0.3%)
5 (0.6%)
5 (0.6%)
1 (0.1%)
ADJC. The analysis on Felonies
this page is related to
13. Violation of Probation
4 (0.4%)
19 (2.1%)
3 (0.4%)
3 (0.4%)
the categories
TOTAL
987
893
823
752
contained in SB 1446.
The numbers are
Table 9: Pre and Post SB1446 Offender Subgroups
unduplicated counts and are
With Probation Violators Identified
organized hierarchically with
FY 2003 Cohort
juveniles placed in the highest
Total
VOP
%
group for which they qualify. Thus,
1. Age 15+ Specified Violent Felonies 4
2
50.0%
a juvenile committed for a violent
(Mandatory Exclusion)
felony (category #2) would be
2. Age 15+ Legislatively Defines Felonies 18
9
50.0%
(Mandatory Exclusion)
placed in that category and would
3. Age 15+ Chronic Felons (Mandatory 153
29
19.0%
not appear in the first time felon
Exclusion)
category (#7) even if s/he also
4. Felons with Prior Transfers (Mandatory 1
0
0
qualifies for it.
Exclusion)

In FY 2003 the vast majority
(62.5%) of commitments were
composed of three offender
subgroups: first time felons,
second time felons, and
misdemeanants.
First time felons decreased from
21.7% in FY 2002 to 16.9% in FY
2003. Second time felons
increased slightly from 18.1% in FY
2002 to 18.5% in FY 2003.
Misdemeanants remained
consistent throughout Fiscal Years
2002 (27.6%) and 2003 (27.1%).

5. Age 14+ Accused of Selected Offenses
(Discretionary)
6. Age 14, Chronic (Discretionary)

84

39

46.4%

10

0

0

7. First Time Felons

127

72

56.7%

8. Second Time Felons (>14 years old)

139

49

35.3%

9. Misdemeanants

204

80

39.2%

10. Under Age 14 Chronic Felons

3

0

0

11. Under Age 14 Second Time Felons

5

3

60.0%

12. Under age 15 Violent Felonies

1

0

0

13. Violation of Probation

3

3

100%

TOTAL

752

286

38.0%

CASE STUDY
After completing ADJC reception activities in the Fall of 2001 Hector (not his real name) was assigned to Catalina Mountain
School (CMS). Since Hector had an adjudication for felony drug possession he was placed in the ADJC Recovery program for
substance abusers. Things did not fare well for Hector. He was referred to separation 10 times between February and July 2002
because he was involved in frequent fights with peers and staff. Hector was strongly motivated by gang influences. By the Fall
of 2002, CMS staff believed that Hector would spend the rest of his juvenile years with ADJC.
Because Hector had become increasingly aggressive and violent with others he was referred to the ADJC Crossroads program
at CMS in the hopes of decreasing his aggressive outbursts and getting to the root cause of his difficulties. Crossroads was not
an easy adjustment for him as the program directly addressed his aggressive habits. When Hector became angry and
threatening, Crossroads staff moved closer to him and asked him questions. Their intent was to address his image of himself as
someone who was “dangerous and incorrigible”. The Crossroads staff did not get mad at him; they encouraged him to examine
himself. When he complained that his treatment was unfair, Crossroads staff encouraged him to submit grievances and utilize all
legitimate outlets.
Over time, Hector became aware that when he participated in the programming at Crossroads the days went faster, and life
became more enjoyable. He laughed more and threatened others less. Hector began to talk more in groups, and he talked about
his family, his hopes and his hurts. Hector progressed within the ADJC level system for the first time by displaying nondelinquent behaviors, and in turn, he received greater privileges. Eventually, Hector did so well that Crossroads staff selected
him to represent them in team sports and in Student Council. He even participated in CMS meetings with staff in which he
explained to them what he thought they did to help him change his delinquent habits.
It took over a year for Hector to make these changes. He learned to trust adults, to see his family in a new light, and to salvage
and rebuild his character. Indeed, at one time Hector thought that he would always be “bad” or “wrong”. His release from ADJC
secure care was a celebration, not just for Hector and his family, but also for the staff who had patiently worked with him. Today,
if you walk into a few CMS offices you will find a photo of Hector proudly wearing a high school football uniform grinning widely
through his facemask. The photo is a reminder to CMS staff of what they helped one troubled youth achieve.

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
The mission of the Research & Development Section is to provide
ADJC management, staff, and Department stakeholders with
accurate, timely, and meaningful information that supports
Agency goals.
This report was prepared by
Kathie Putrow, John Vivian, Ph.D., Stella Vasquez, and Vira Meza of
Research and Development as well as Terri Rahner, of the Catalina
Mountain School.