Pima County Juvenile
Court Center
2003 Annual Report

“Blueprint for the Future”

Page 1

Table of Contents
Welcome Statement from the Presiding Judge ..............3
Introducing Our Judiciary ................................................6
Vision .................................................................................7
Mission Statement ........................................................... 8
Message from the Court Administrator ...........................9
Success Stories ...................................................................11
Budget Review ................................................................ 17
Court Filings ...................................................................20
Staff Recognition .......................................................... 24
Challenges for 2004 ...................................................... 25
Key Community Partnerships ....................................... 30
Call to the Public ............................................................ 32

Page 2

T `xáátzx YÜÉÅ bâÜ cÜxá|w|Çz ]âwzx
On behalf of the Pima County Juvenile Court, I want to extend my thanks
and gratitude for your support and interest in our work. This Blueprint for
our Court, while acknowledging our challenges, is an expression of our hope
for our community’s children, families and our court family.

Juvenile Justice: Great news
Juvenile delinquency has significantly declined in Pima County in the past
several years. Our County has enjoyed a 31% decrease in youth referred to
our Court for serious crimes against persons since 1998. All delinquency
referrals to our Court declined by 15.5% during this same time period.
These decreases occurred during a time that our population of youth
increased in Pima County by 17.7%.
In light of these sustained trends, our Court managers and Judges have
assembled to conduct focused retreats to address delinquency in Pima
County. The results have been, thus far, very encouraging.
In calendar year 2003, our Court reduced our commitment rate to the
Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections by 38%. This reduction
occurred before the U.S. Department of Justice released its findings
detailing serious civil rights violations of youth committed to that State
agency.
Our Court is also earnestly addressing the disproportionate minority contact
for our minority youth in Pima County and has engaged the expertise and
advice of the Community Advisory Board to attend to this issue.
Our Juvenile Justice initiatives will continue to develop innovative programs
based on best practices that will allow us to promote positive outcomes for
our youth and our community.

Child Welfare: Not so good news
While many in our community believe that our Court is primarily concerned
with matters of juvenile justice, most of our judges’ time is spent on cases
within the child welfare system.
By state law, juvenile judges are
responsible for overseeing all children who have been neglected or abused.
continued

Page 3

Child abuse and neglect cases have increased by over 50% since Pima
County Juvenile Court implemented the innovative program referred to as
“Model Court” in the late 1990’s. The number of children in foster care has
also skyrocketed. The number of hearings involving the termination of
parental rights, the most difficult variety of cases, has increased by over
150% during this period.
Unfortunately, we have not been able to increase our judicial resources to
match these increases due to our space limitations at our courthouse. On
May 18, 2004, our County electorate will be given the opportunity to
approve a $2,000,000 bond allocation to the Juvenile Court in Question
Number 3, Public Safety. We are hopeful that our voters will allow us to add
four new courtrooms and chambers to our courthouse in order to allow us to
meet these increased demands.
Another challenge facing our court involves the legislation enacted on
December 18, 2003. These far-reaching laws will permit CPS to add 25% to
its workforce in Pima County. The reform legislation also permits parents
to have a jury decide cases dealing with the termination of parental rights.
We do not have the present capacity to offer jury trials in these cases due to
our courtroom design. We expect that the new legislation will add to our
increased caseloads.
We will continue to offer innovative approaches to these very complex
problems of families. Our Family Drug Court, now in its third year of
operation, recently had an evaluation completed that was very encouraging
for the parents who are involved in the program. We will continue to look to
innovative ideas to protect children and, when safely able to do so, to return
children to their families of origin.

Our Court Family:
Our court agency has grown to nearly 600 full time employees. The
challenge facing such a large court is to ensure that we provide respect,
support and opportunities to our court family. We wish to develop a
positive work environment and to ensure that we retain and promote the
best professionals within our community.
Initially, we committed our Court to ensure that our staff is paid an
equivalent wage as is paid at other court agencies in our community. We
undertook an ambitious “pay equity” program in 2003 that culminated in an
continued

Page 4

increase in starting pay for probation officers and a modest pay adjustment
for intermediate probation officers in order to insure that our staff was
being paid the same as their counterparts at Superior Court.
We are committed to continuing this review to ensure that our
compensation is fair and competitive. We will also continue to develop
internal opportunities for our staff.

Conclusion:
It has been my unique pleasure to serve as our Court’s presiding judge for
the past 22 months. I look forward to my remaining 14 months before our
court has the distinction of having the Honorable Patricia Escher become
our presiding judge in June of 2005.
Meanwhile, our Blueprint remains an open, dynamic and working document
to which each member of our community has input.

]âwzx [xvàÉÜ XA VtÅÑÉç

Page 5

Introducing Our Judiciary
Pima County Juvenile Court is fortunate to have an outstanding group
of Judges, Commissioners and Hearing Officers who are all dedicated to the
Vision and Mission of the Court and to service to the children and families
of this community.

Presiding Judge
Associate Presiding Judge

Hector E. Campoy
Steven Villarreal

Judge

Howard Hantman

Judge

Charles Harrington

Judge

Michael Miller

Judge

Terry Chandler

Commissioner

Suzanna S. Cuneo

Commissioner

Ted Knuck

Commissioner

Elizabeth Peasley-Fimbres

Commissioner

Steven Rubin

Commissioner

Joan Wagener

Hearing Officer

Danelle Liwski

Hearing Officer

Kathleen Quigley

Page 6

The Vision of Pima County
Juvenile Court Center

An Organization Committed to:
●

Community protection

●

Restoring victims

●

Successful youth and families

Page 7

Mission Statement
The Pima County Juvenile Court is charged under the
Federal and State Constitutions, laws, and rules of the
court with jurisdiction over all children under the age of 18
years who are referred for reasons of mental health,
incorrigibility, delinquency and for all families involved in
dependencies, severances and adoptions.
The mission of the Pima County Juvenile Court is to
promote the interest and safety of the community,
promote the rehabilitation of children and families,
facilitate the protection of children who are abused and
neglected, and facilitate the provision of services to
children and families involved with the court all in
accordance with the due process of law.
The Juvenile Court will work actively with and provide
leadership to the community, public and private agencies
to promote justice, education, and the prevention of
delinquency and abuse.

Page 8

T `xáátzx YÜÉÅ à{x VÉâÜà TwÅ|Ç|áàÜtàÉÜ
One of the goals of issuing our Blueprint for the Future is to share our
vision for the future work of the Pima County Juvenile Court, describe
the philosophical framework that drives our efforts, and solicit
understanding and support from a broad range of stakeholders. The
Juvenile Court engages in daily activities that significantly impact the
lives of children and families in Pima County, and it is important that we
periodically review and evaluate our progress. Information sharing and
community awareness is an important part of this process.
Working at the Pima Court Juvenile Court is an awesome responsibility
as well as a privilege. As Director of Juvenile Court Services, I am
reminded on a daily basis of the needs so evident within our community
and the tireless efforts of our staff to meet these challenges in a
professional, productive manner. I also receive constant reinforcement
regarding the value and critical necessity for early intervention in the
lives of our troubled children. History and outcomes tell us that
intervention does work, but gathering adequate resources and
creatively engaging with families remains a principal responsibility of the
Court. We are committed to meeting that responsibility.
I view the philosophical foundation of the Juvenile Court as the road map
for success in working with families. Protection of abused and neglected
children, rehabilitation, community protection, victim restoration,
accountability – these are concepts articulated within our Vision and
Mission statements. They are more than words, however, they are the
actual outcomes our community will realize if we join together in
providing meaningful services at all points within the intervention
continuum. The method of service delivery is also steeped with
philosophical implications. I believe that a
fundamental core value of
the Juvenile Court must be therapeutic engagement with children and
families, no matter what level of involvement we have with them,
whether it be through our Children and Family Services Division,
Probation Division, Judicial Services, Administrative Services, or within
the structured confinement of our Detention Services Division. It is important that we provide, through our contacts, a level of accountability,
education, and relationship-building pertinent to a specific child or
family. Only then will we be truly meeting the fundamental needs within
our community.
continued

Page 9

We have challenges. We must not become complacent or fall into
set routines just because that’s how we do business. We exist
within an ever-changing world, and we must make sure we are
always looking for additional ways to meet needs. We also must, as
a staff group, link our daily activities with the Court’s mission and
long-term vision. It is important that we understand how our work
promotes success and ensure that it does. Finally, we need to
remain receptive as a Court system and as a community. We
already do many things very well, but we must challenge ourselves
to do them even better. We should embrace structured, meaningful
change and recognize that we are only limited by the boundaries of
our creativity.
My personal commitment is directed toward
managing change in such a fashion as to capture the best ideas
from our entire staff group, as well as from our collective
stakeholders.
We also have opportunities. We truly can, as a Court system and as
a community, provide a meaningful influence in the life of a hurt,
confused, desperate child. Life is not always fair, and our children
demonstrate that principle very dramatically. We must be a source
of safety, comfort, and education for these children. We also have
the opportunity to collaborate with other agencies and the
community at large to ensure effectiveness, efficiency, and
outcomes that will benefit individuals and enhance the well being of
Pima County.
Our staff group continues to be the strongest resource within our
Juvenile Court. We perform complex, emotionally draining work. It
is necessary work, and our commitment remains grounded within
the guiding principles of integrity, safety and nurturance, and
respect for each other and the children and families with whom we
interact. We thank you, our service partners and our community,
for your support, and we encourage you to engage with the Juvenile
Court in continuing to provide vital services to the community.

e|~ fv{Å|wà

Page 10

Pima County Juvenile Court Center
Annual Report
2003

Success Stories
Connecting Process with People -- Never lose sight of the fact that we deal with real people
and real issues here at Juvenile Court. We would like to share some of these stories with
you.

Family Drug Court Success Story

Brenda (name changed) has the honor of being one of the Family Drug Court graduates
who was 100% compliant during the program. She made it look easy, but that was just
an illusion. Brenda had a five-year history of heavy methamphetamine and marijuana
abuse. This contributed to her losing several jobs, being evicted more than once, and
having her two children removed by CPS. She has a family history of manic-depression,
paranoid schizophrenia and substance abuse. Brenda’s brother died in a car wreck at
age 16, and she started using drugs after that.
Soon after Brenda’s children were removed by CPS, she observed Family Drug Court
(FDC) as part of her CPS case plan. She had made up her mind to quit using drugs, and
she felt Family Drug Court could help support her in this decision. For the next eight
months, Brenda appeared before the Honorable Hector Campoy, the FDC Judge, to
report on her progress in substance abuse treatment and her sobriety. She appeared
weekly for two months; every other week for two months; and, monthly for four months
before petitioning to graduate. Minute entries of all of her appearances were sent to
her Dependency Judge and her CPS Case Manager so they could track her progress. All
clients who are scheduled to appear at FDC attend their FDC hearings together. This is
to encourage them to support each other during the ups and downs of recovery. Brenda
always seemed open to both giving to and receiving support from her peers.
A substance abuse assessment by her FDC Case Specialist indicated that she needed
residential treatment. She agreed to enter residential treatment, a step many addicts
are unwilling to take. FDC had contracted out with a residential treatment center for
several treatment slots, so a bed was available for Brenda when she was ready to take
this step. She was pregnant when she entered treatment, and while she was there, she
made the very difficult decision to give her baby up for adoption. Her FDC Case
Specialist visited Brenda in the hospital after she gave birth, and she seemed very
grateful for his support.
After diligently addressing her issues of grief, dependence and substance abuse for 10
months, Brenda was successfully discharged from residential treatment. She then
successfully completed an outpatient relapse prevention group.
continued

Page 11

Brenda is currently attending 12-step meetings and keeping in regular contact with her
sponsor. When Brenda left residential treatment, FDC provided financial assistance for
transitional housing and utilities for her and her children for eight months. FDC paid
100% of these costs in the beginning, with Brenda gradually assuming total financial
responsibility by the ninth month.
Brenda kept in excellent contact with her Case Specialists during her FDC involvement.
She graduated from FDC several months ago and her dependency case was dismissed.
Brenda continues to do well. She is employed full-time, is working towards her RN
degree, has maintained her transitional housing (which she can keep for up to two
years), and she is enjoying parenting her children again. Judge Campoy and the FDC
staff are very proud of Brenda, and we hope she will be willing to mentor new FDC
clients.

Delinquency Success Story
Demetria was fourteen years old when she was referred for an incident of domestic
violence with her mother in November 2000. Demetria’s stepfather had a history of
domestic violence in the home, and during the period when Demetria came to the
court’s attention, her stepfather was arrested for punching her in the face. Demetria
was gang-involved, using drugs and alcohol, not in school and disruptive in her home.
Demetria was placed on probation and given counseling, and her mother was ordered to
participate in domestic violence counseling.
During the summer of 2001, Demetria violated her probation when she took her
mother’s car without permission. She needed additional help and she was referred to a
30-day residential substance abuse program. Her probation was increased to intensive
probation (JIPS). Demetria ran away and was gone for over nine months. When she
finally turned herself in, probation learned that she had been living with her boyfriend’s
family but that he had recently died. Demetria thought she was pregnant but she
apparently lost the baby. She was angry and grieving and still using drugs and alcohol.
While she was detained in the juvenile detention center, probation provided her with a
psychological evaluation. The psychologist recommended a more intensive residential
program of at least 90 days with counseling for grief and self-esteem issues. The court
paid for further treatment, although Demetria was initially opposed to additional
residential treatment. However, Demetria turned her life around in treatment.
She connected with her therapist there and worked hard in individual and family
counseling. She started attending narcotics anonymous meetings. Her JIPS officer told
Demetria that she would trust her until Demetria proved her wrong. Demetria got a job
after treatment at the Boys and Girls Club working with kids, and she started working
on her GED. She won a local art contest and is entered into a national contest where
she may win a college scholarship. Almost three years after being placed on probation,
she was recently terminated successfully from probation.
continued

Page 12

She will soon be eighteen years old, and she is well on her way to being a successful
adult, thanks to the help of the Juvenile Court. At her final hearing, she thanked the
Judge and her probation officer for believing in her and giving her a chance. She shared
with us that she would like to be a detention officer or probation officer after college.
Her story is a big part of what Pima County Juvenile Court is all about.

Youth Opportunity (YO) and Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
In the year 2000, Pima County received a Youth Opportunity (YO) grant from the U.S.
Department of Labor. Over the next three years, this grant was integrated with the local
formula Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Youth Program in order to create a single
youth service system with the convenience of being accessed through the local One
Stop. The One Stop model is used to coordinate a network of case managers that are
housed in 20 agencies.
I serve as a Probation Officer for Pima County Juvenile Court and case manager for the
Youth Service One Stop funded by WIA and YO. I can testify as to the effectiveness of
these programs in changing the lives of the youths that are involved with the Pima
County Juvenile Court System. The following case study demonstrates this process of
positive change.
A request was made by a Pima County Juvenile Probation Officer to pay a visit to a
16-year-old juvenile female who was being detained on her 9th referral and was about
to go to court the following morning.
I spoke to this youth, and I reviewed her referral history. The referrals ranged from
shoplifting, to alcohol possession, to narcotics possession, to domestic violence. After
the court hearing, it was agreed by the Probation Officer, the girl’s mother (who was
going through cancer treatments, but is now in remission), and the youth herself, to get
enrolled at One-Stop Youth Services Program. I was assigned as her case manager. I
interviewed her and her mother and learned that she had dropped out of high school;
was spending time with gang affiliated youths in her neighborhood; and had no
direction for her life after she left court, except for the conditions placed on her by the
Probation Officer. She was very confused about the direction of her life. Through the
One Stop Youth Opportunity Program, I developed a plan to address her educational
needs and the support services she would need, such as tutoring. I helped her to enroll
in Pace Alternative High School and arranged for tutoring support at Project YES.
This help quickly had a positive affect on this girl’s life, but there was more help to
come. During the summer, she attended a career strategy class given by Pima College.
It was designed to develop the very soft skills that she so badly needed. In the fall she
attended a dance class at the Tucson Home For The Arts (Muse), which added to her
growing self-esteem. She began to feel hopeful about her future. Eventually she
decided to return to her regular high school.
continued

Page 13

This same youth is now enrolled as a senior at Pueblo High School and is involved in the
After School Works Program with Chicanos Por La Causa and will be a student at Pima
College in the summer of 2004.
“A Blessing In Disguise “ is how this youth and her mother explained the youth’s
involvement with the Juvenile Court system. They never would have been able
financially to afford the services with which the Workforce Investment Act and Youth Opportunity provided her, nor would they have ever known how to access those
services through the ten different agencies that offered what she needed. Without this collaborative intervention, she would have continued on the same self-destructive path.
She is now well on her way to becoming a productive citizen.
Ruben Suarez
Probation Officer/ Youth Specialist

A Dependency Success
Lacey was removed from her mother's care in September 2001 -- due to her mother's
serious mental health issues. Within weeks of Lacey's removal, her mother was found
dead in her home of a probable suicide overdose. The whereabouts of Lacey's father are
unknown. Lacey was placed in a group home by CPS, and she has remained in group
home care for the past 2 1/2 years. Lacey has been offered therapy, but she was
resistant initially. Her CPS case manager has maintained a positive relationship with
Lacey. Lacey does well at school and in her group home. Lacey was provided with a
Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) and she has been referred to the "In My
Shoes" program to receive a mentor who was a former foster child. Lacey has really
blossomed since coming into CPS care and this is not always the case with teenagers in
out-of-home placement. Her CPS case manager nominated Lacey for one of the annual
Pima Foundation for Youth awards and Lacey received the award. Her CASA has helped
Lacey apply for a scholarship from the CASA program and Lacey is one of six finalists.
Lacey manages several sports teams at her high school, and she wants to study sports
medicine at NAU.
All court hearings for Lacey are set in the late afternoon so that she can attend without
missing school. Her judge always talks to her about her future plans and goals and how
she can achieve those goals. At her last court hearing, her judge asked the CPS case
manager to arrange a trip for Lacey to Flagstaff where she can visit the college she
hopes to attend. CPS arranged a trip for Lacey to visit her maternal aunts back east
where she helped pick a gravestone for her mother. With the involvement of a
dedicated CPS worker, good group home staff members, a supportive CASA and an
involved judge, Lacey has been surrounded with people who care about her and her
future, and she feels it and is blossoming. Lacey will be someone to watch and her
future is brighter because she has the Court and CPS in her life.

continued

Page 14

Detention Mentor/Step Up Pilot Project
In 2003, Pima County Juvenile Detention launched a pilot project in the girls’ detention
area. The goal of the project is to focus on the individual needs of the minors, to raise
competency, empathy, restoration and accountability levels and to reduce recidivism.
We began with the fastest growing population of detention, being the female population
and have expanded the gender specific programming. Following is a brief description
of the program. For a full program description, please see the PCJCC web page at
www.pcjcc.pima.gov.
1.

What is “podular direct supervision”?
Podular direct supervision is best architecturally described as detainee cells
centered around several common multipurpose spaces.

2.

What is the difference between using podular direct supervision as opposed to
podular remote supervision?
Podular remote supervision limits an officer’s interaction with detainees while
detainees mostly remain locked in their cells. Podular direct supervision
subscribes to detainee/officer interaction throughout the day, with detainees occupying the common areas along with the officers.

3.

What is the philosophy behind podular direct supervision?
It is several fold. First, research does not support the use of excessive lock-downs
in curbing delinquency, nor does it create a safer detention facility for detainees
or staff while the detainee is detained or for the community once the detainee is
released. Research does support providing education and appropriate programs to
the detainees to help them learn new ways of responding to triggers and distorted
thought patterns which are inextricably linked to their challenges to become
productive, law-abiding and healthy community participants. Second, children are
still developing and should be afforded meaningful opportunities to replace
non-law abiding behaviors with law-abiding behaviors in an effort to change the
course of their life. They should be benefiting from officers, as well as all court
staff who are modeling respectful, decent, fair and caring behaviors, which
supports the detainee’s successes and are committed to work with the detainee to
help them learn from their failures.

4.

Which philosophy does the Pima County Juvenile Court pledge to institute?
Since 1995, the court and detention facility has worked toward the transition of a
fully operationalized podular direct environment.

5.

How would you describe the rate of success?

continued

Page 15

Since that time, many dedicated individuals have committed themselves to this
mission. Many research based programs such as cognitive skills, anger
management, drug and alcohol awareness, yoga, life and self-sufficiency skills,
cultural appreciation, victim empathy and health care programs are conducted
with the detainees. Special individualized behavior plans have been written and
administered in order to fairly work with our growing population of detained
children with mental health issues.
Kim Chumley
Program Coordinator

Page 16

Pima County Juvenile Court Center
Annual Report
2003

Budget Review

The Court operates on a total budget of $32.6 million dollars derived from a variety of
funding sources including the Pima County general fund, the State of Arizona, federal
grants and special revenue funds.
The majority of the state funding comes through the Administrative Office of the Courts
(AOC) and supports a variety of probation functions including intensive probation,
standard probation, diversion, family counseling and treatment for court involved youth.
The AOC also provides funding for the Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA)
program and the Court Improvement Project. The Court also receives state funds
administered by the Arizona Department of Education via a collaborative effort with five
school districts. This allows placement of 27 probation officers directly in local schools.
Federal funds provided by the Justice Department in the form of Juvenile Accountability
Block Grants and the Health & Human Services Department under the Substance Abuse
Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) also help the Court provide valuable
services. The SAMHSA funds have been foundational in establishing and maintaining
the Family Drug Court program.
Special revenue funds are comprised of probation and diversion fees as well as a
separate fund for victim restitution. The probation and diversion fees are used to
enhance the operations of the probation department. The victim restitution fund
provides resources for the Restitution Accountability Program (RAP). This program
allows youth who are too young to work an opportunity to earn money towards
restitution they owe while performing valuable services to the community such as
graffiti abatement.
The Court, with the leadership of the management team and the diligent efforts of all its
employees, is committed to making both efficient and effective use of its financial
resources in order to provide quality services to the families of Pima County.

continued

Page 17

FY 2004 Funding by Source
General Fund

20,536,282

State Grants

10,681,286

Federal Grants

891,569

Fees

455,000

Total

32,564,137

33%

63%

3%
General Fund

1%

State Grants
Federal Grants
Fees

Page 18

The Court provides a wide variety of services to Pima County families through its five
functional areas. The following is a breakdown of the combined financial resources by
functional area.

Funding by Division
Child & Family Services

1,508,874

Judicial Services

1,748,977

Administrative Services

4,380,921

Detention Services

8,468,081

Probation Services

16,457,284

Total

32,564,137

5%

5%
13%

51%

26%
Child & Family Services
Judicial Services
Administrative Services
Detention Services
Probation Services

Page 19

Pima County Juvenile Court Center
Annual Report
2003

Court Activity

Total Dependency Petitions Filed 1997 - 2003
1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

January

43

43

47

61

55

62

78

February

34

40

37

67

56

46

62

March

59

69

54

75

52

64

62

April

41

51

57

41

45

72

73

May

59

45

49

62

49

69

59

June

38

48

47

48

57

55

68

July

40

49

45

35

52

58

68

August

46

63

52

44

59

80

64

September

40

60

58

48

51

64

86

October

49

55

38

59

53

64

79

November

39

43

41

50

63

56

67

December

41

60

25

37

51

63

82

Totals

529

626

550

627

643

753

848

continued

Page 20

Mediation information
From 1999 through 2003, the court mediator spent over 3000 hours in direct,
hands-on conflict resolution endeavors with court-involved families, case
managers, attorneys and service providers. The following statistics serve to
highlight the growth and success of mediation services. Success is defined
and translated into court time saved as well as percentage of agreements
reached by those involved in mediation.

Number of Cases Referred for Mediation
1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

116

259

220

230

256

Resolution Averages
1999

2000

2001

2002

2003 Average

Agreement on some of all issues:

77%

79%

76%

74%

72%

76%

No agreement on any issue:

18%

17%

20%

16%

16%

17%

No shows:

14%

15%

10%

10%

13%

12%

Average length of session: 2h 19m 2h 23m

2h 9m

2h 8m

2h 0m

CASA Statistics
The recruitment of males and minorities has been the focus of this year’s efforts. Although we will not turn down any qualified volunteer, the attempt
to match the make-up of our dependency cases to our volunteer pool is truly
ideal.
Number of Active CASA’s
214
Number of Children Served

382

Number of Hours Served by CASA’s

1,628 /month

Number of Miles driven by CASA’s

13,835/month

continued

Page 21

DELINQUENCY HISTORY 1999 - 2003
1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Pima County Population of Juveniles Ages 8 to 17 *

109879

117399

121137

123884

126750

Total Number of Referrals

17216

16538

16801

15477

15237

Total Number of Juveniles Referred

9,693

9,514

9,689

9,280

9372

Violent Crimes Against Persons Plus Percent of
Yearly Totals

512
3.0%

409
2.5%

413
2.46%

383
2.48%

338
2.22%

Grant Theft and Crimes Against Property plus Percent of Yearly Totals

980
5.7%

913
5.5%

1021
6.08%

798
5.16%

853
5.6%

Obstruction of Justice Probation Violations plus Percent of Yearly Total

1810
10.5%

2118
12.8%

2250
13.39%

2037
13.16%

1831
12.02%

Fights, Including Assault & Domestic Violence plus
Percent of Yearly Total

1826
10.6%

1862
11.3%

1921
11.43%

1726
11.15%

1689
11.08%

Drug Offenses plus Percent of Yearly Total

1817
10.6%

1948
11.8%

2009
11.96%

1925
12.44%

1992
13.07%

Peace Offenses, Including Disturbing the Peace, etc.
plus Percent of Yearly Total

4178
24.3%

3661
22.1%

3738
22.25%

3422
22.11%

3495
22.94%

1757
10.2%
4336
25.2%

1870
11.3%
3755
22.7%

1875
11.16%
3572
21.26%

2069
13.37%
3114
20.12%

1999
13.12%
3036
19.93%

City Ordinance plus Percent of Yearly Total

0

2

2

3

4

Transferred to Adult Court

18

19

17

9

9

Mandatory Adult Filing

81

85

84

65

54

Misdemeanor Theft plus Percent of Yearly Total
Status Offense plus Percent of Yearly Total

* Population based on estimated census information

continued

Page 22

Adoptions/Guardianship Statistics
As a service to our community, an adoption can be processed at a reasonable fee for
those families who earn under $50,000. Families whose income exceeds $50,000 must
contract services through a private attorney or agency to process their adoption. This
system helps children of families who otherwise could not afford an adoption, to achieve
permanency in their lives. Common scenarios include a stepparent who wishes to adopt
their spouse’s children or guardians who want to adopt the children they have been
caring for. Certifications are completed for prospective parents wishing to adopt
children. Guardianship reviews are completed on those cases where the Court continues
to review the stability of placement.
2002

2003

127

136

Certifications

11

17

Guardianships

26

36

164

189

Adoptions

Total

Family Drug Court Statistics
Family Drug Court serves adult clients, specifically, parents whose children are in CPS
custody due to the parents’ substance abuse issues. These clients initially appear
weekly in front of the Family Drug Court Judge (currently, Hon. Hector Campoy) to
receive additional judicial oversight of their progress in substance abuse treatment and
recovery.
Parents with CPS (Dependency) court cases have only one year to remedy the problems
that brought them into the system. This is a very short time period in which to stabilize
in recovery.
Navigating the network treatment system takes persistence and
support. The four FDC Case Specialists and two Case Aides are grant-funded court
employees who help the clients overcome barriers to treatment and provide intensive
case management with frequent field visits. Clients in FDC also receive an array of
services provided through contracts with community agencies, including detox,
residential treatment, specialized parenting classes, job training and placement, health
education, and extra visits with their children.
Engagement
In
Treatment

Enrolled in
Residential
Treatment

Enrolled in
Outpatient
Treatment

Completion
of
Treatment

Reunification Permanency
within one
year

CPS

66%

36%

45%

31%

30%

49%

CATS

69%

14%

60%

26%

39%

75%

FDC

97%

67%

85%

48%

52%

79%

Page 23

Pima County Juvenile Court Center
Annual Report
2003

STAFF—The Strength of our Organization

Pima County Juvenile Court Center is approaching 600 employees who perform
wonderful acts as part of their daily responsibilities. The Court could not function as
well as it does without each and every one of their daily contributions, and for that we
give recognition and thanks to all.
The list of employees below are representative of the exceptional staff that we
have here and are award recipients for the year 2003:

Employees of the Month:
JAN Brenda Musgrove

JUL

Doug Simmons

FEB Rudy Dominguez/Erica Scheeren

AUG Art Corral/Andrew Lopez/Tony Saucedo

MAR Carol Casebier

SEP

APR Rosemary Schiefer

OCT Daniel Carmona

MAY Chris Skipworth

NOV Anthony Lopez/Pauline Nanez

JUN Ann Schutt

DEC Julie Auvil

Nancy Adam

The Pima Foundation For Youth – Youth Workers of the Year awards:
Aaron Rulewicz--Detention Officer Of The Year
Becky Jorgenson-- Behind The Scenes Worker Of The Year
Jeanne Kirchner--Youth Worker Of The Year

The Arizona Chief Probation Officers’ Association (ACPOA) Awards
The following staff were nominated to represent Juvenile Court in the statewide competition.

Daniel Aguilera Line Officer of the Year Yvonne Jackson Detention Officer of the Year
Stacey Draves

Employee of the Year

Martin Carrillo

Supervisor/Manager of the Year

We are very proud to announce that Yvonne Jackson was chosen Detention Officer
of the Year for the State of Arizona.
Page 24

Pima County Juvenile Court Center
Annual Report
2003

Challenges for 2004
Disproportionate Minority Contact
The Pima County Juvenile Court is committed to the equitable treatment of all children
and families. There is historic evidence of racial disproportionality across the nation, as
well as in the State of Arizona. Several studies have both revealed evidence of
disproportionate minority (D.M.) contact in Pima County and recognized the complexity
of the issues and reasons behind these findings. In 1993 the Arizona Juvenile Justice
Advisory Council issued “The Equitable Treatment of Minority Youth: A Report on the
Over-Representation of Minority Youth in Arizona’s Juvenile Justice System”. This
report used 1990 census data to describe the presence of D.M. Contact within the
justice system.
In December, 2002, the National Center for Juvenile Justice (NCJJ) prepared a report, at
the request of the Pima County Juvenile Court, entitled “Pima County Juvenile Court
Overrepresentation of Minority Youth On-Site Technical Assistance Report”. This report
was intended to clarify relevant issues that will help the juvenile court identify and
implement effective strategies for dealing with minority overrepresentation. The report
included descriptions of three programs from other areas of the United States that were
intended to address minority overrepresentation, particularly in terms of
Disproportionate Minority Confinement (DMC). Most significantly, the report included
seven recommendations specific to Pima County Juvenile Court that were intended to
help the court as it moves toward development and implementation of plans to
effectively address minority overrepresentation.
The court administration recognizes the need to establish a research component to
evaluate our efforts at reducing D.M. Contact. This will require a commitment of
resources as well as intent.
The issues to be addressed are as follows:
1.
2.
3.

Minority youth continue to be overrepresented within the juvenile justice system.
Differential outcomes occur at any stage of processing and can be cumulative in
effect.
D.M. Contact is the result of complex circumstances and influences with no one
fixed cause or solution.

continued

Page 25

4.
5.
6.

Efforts to reduce D.M. Contact must include assessment at all decision points in the
system, covering process and outcome evaluation, and include quantitative and
qualitative analysis.
Collaboration is required between all points in the juvenile justice continuum to
effectively implement interventions.
Adequate resources must be allocated if meaningful progress is to be made.

Despite a series of reports and recommendations, the Court has not successfully
implemented strategies to reduce D.M. Contact. There is strong will within the Court to
effectively address this issue, but a specific plan must yet be developed and fully
Implemented.
The court’s strategic plan must include identification and support of several core values:
1.
Community Protection – In order for the restorative justice model to work
effectively, it must be applied equally. Communities that are over represented via racial
or ethnic distribution within the justice continuum will continue to struggle due to an
absence of resources and the presence of perceived or real discriminatory practices. The
juvenile offender may be less accepting of personal accountability and responsibility to
the victims and community due to this disproportionality. The end result is continued
risk of delinquent activities within the community.
2.
Competency Development – The juvenile justice system must be increasingly
responsive to the need for innovative methods of intervention designed to reduce D.M.
Contact. This requires recognition, analysis, and interventions aimed specifically at the
direct and indirect causal factors.
3.
Program Accountability – The court must lead the way in measuring compliance
and evaluating progress in implementing action plans to reduce D.M. Contact.
Collaboration with Stakeholders – The juvenile justice components, community agencies
and members, and families must be involved in policy development, planning, and
service delivery.
Pima County Juvenile Court accepts the notion that minority overrepresentation within
the juvenile justice continuum is wrong and the community needs to begin corrective
action immediately. The juvenile court must exercise its authority and responsibility to
provide leadership and collaborate effectively with its community partners. Most
importantly, the Juvenile Court needs to work closely with the children and families of
Pima County in ways that reflect caring, sensitivity, and equality in the application of
justice.

continued

Page 26

The Impact of CPS Reform
On December 18, 2003, the Arizona legislature addressed many issues regarding Child
Protective Services by passing HB2024. Many applaud the passing of the bill, as it
focuses on safety for children. Who could argue that is not a good thing? However, many
of the provisions of the bill will have significant impact to the court. The increase in both
time and resources for the judicial bench, as well as the court staff that support the
dependency process is predictable. The highlights of the bill that will affect the courts
include:
• Jury Trials in Severance Matters (parent’s right to trial by jury)
• Open Hearings (5-10% of hearings shall be open to the public)
• In Home Intervention petitions
• Open Records
Along with these four main categories, there are many other provisions in the bill that
have the potential to increase the number of petitions filed. Some include the expansion
of the abuse and neglect definition, joint CPS and law enforcement investigations,
clarification of the CPS mandate, and removal of children due to drug or alcohol
manufacturing on premises.
A section of the bill allows funds to hire more CPS caseworkers as well as increase
salaries for experienced caseworkers. District II CPS (Tucson’s district) anticipates the
hiring of 43 new CPS Specialists, 6 CPS supervisors, 6 parent aides, 7 secretaries and 2
Assistant Program Managers. It is anticipated that 1/3 of these positions will be hired for
investigation of all cases, which will ultimately translate into more petition filings.
Last year 848 petitions were filed involving 1,500 children. This translates into a 17%
increase from the prior year and a 50% increase over a 5-year period (see chart on page
20). With the new CPS reform, it is estimated that 1,000 petitions will be filed this year.
Currently the court spends approximately 65-70% of bench time on dependency cases.
The complexity of these cases often takes its toll on all parties involved. However, none
can be more telling than the statistics of our children. On December 31, 2003, there were
2,790 children under the jurisdiction of the court. Of those 2,790, a staggering 2,476
were in out-of-home placements. Only 458 children received permanency as a result of
reunification.
Although it still remains to be seen, the new director of DES, David Berns has a vision
with hopes of outcomes that do not include an increase in petition filings. Mr. Berns’
vision includes utilizing time and-resources for kids and families long before they
become involved with CPS. Front-end preventative services such as Family Builders
would be enhanced and utilized to keep petitions from being filed. Collaborative efforts
within the DES system such as having programs like JOBS and unemployment work
closer together to get parents back to work quicker, are some of the solutions he offers
as ways to help families at risk. Mr. Berns does not necessarily feel that an increase in
CPS staff, specifically investigators, will mean an increase in petition filings. What he
does envision is a plan to work more efficiently and proactively. We all hope that Mr.
Berns sees something that many of us can’t quite see yet.
continued

Page 27

Coordination of Case Management and Supervision of Dually
Involved Children
In recent years, a new and growing body of research has established the long suspected
link between child maltreatment and later juvenile delinquent conduct. This conduct
includes violence, academic failure, mental illness, substance abuse, and teen
parenthood. In a 2002 study sample in Arizona, close to 50% of all children eight-years
of age and older (with a juvenile court referral) had prior or concurrent court
involvement on a delinquency and a dependency petition. In Pima County (2002)
approximately 40% of the age eligible children with a dependency petition filed had
prior delinquency or status referrals.
These studies highlight the need for a systemic approach. Dually involved children
(those with involvement in the juvenile court for dependency and delinquency matters)
often require multiple agencies to become actively involved in the case management of
these cases. These agencies include, at a minimum, the juvenile court, CPS and the
regional behavioral health authority. Coordinating efforts among these individual
entities create major challenges for the juvenile justice, child welfare and heath service
systems.
This challenge is increased with the recent sweeping legislative changes in the manner
Child Protective Services will operate. The Pima County Juvenile Court Center (PCJCC)
has experienced dramatic growth in the number of dependency court petitions filed.
For the PCJCC these challenges also create opportunities to establish innovative ways to
case manage and case supervise children in dually involved cases. Currently, the
Children and Family Division and the Probation Division provide coordination of these
cases with other stakeholders, while the Detention Division provides custody supervision
and services. This coordination must be improved to maximize the positive impact on
these children and their families. While community programs have been implemented to
service youth in multiple systems, the challenge for PCJCC is to implement an internal
project to increase the coordination of these cases both within the court system and
among other community programs.
In the coming year, PCJCC will assess its interagency procedures and strengthen the
coordination between its three divisions: Children and Family, Probation and Detention.
Collectively, these three divisions are charged with providing direct services to children
under the Juvenile Court’s jurisdiction. This coordination is necessary to address the
unique needs of children involved in multiple systems, specifically the many dually
involved children in the Pima County Juvenile Court. These efforts will focus on:

continued

•
•
•
•
•

Increase collaborations among the three divisions.
Share resources where appropriate.
Explore specialized services, especially in mental health services.
Augment coordination with network providers assigned to PCJCC.
Assimilate consist levels of children services across the three divisions
Page 28

The end result of successfully integrating and establishing a coordinated approach to
dually involved youth among the three divisions will be a more efficient, comprehensive
and coordinated level of services for these children. Furthermore, it will enable PCJCC to
maximize the opportunities to evaluate the current and future collaborations with other
stakeholders.

Page 29

Pima County Juvenile Court Center
Annual Report
2003

Key Community Partnerships
The Pima County Juvenile Court Center could not help the children and families of this
community without strong collaboration. Our sincere appreciation goes out to those
governmental and community organizations whose partnerships are key to our success:
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)
Juvenile Justice Svcs & Dependent Children’s Svcs

Arizona Children’s Association

Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections

Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission

Attorney General’s Office

Ashford Disbrow, Inc.

AVIVA

Cactus Counseling Services

CAPE for Educational Services

Child Protection Services (CPS)

Children’s Action Alliance

Center for Juvenile Alternatives (CJA)

CODAC
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)

Community Justice Boards - in cooperation with Pima
County Attorney's Office
Compass

COPE

Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)

Crime Reduction Task Force

First Correctional Medical

Governor’s Division for Children

Governor's Community Policy Office

La Frontera

New Beginnings

Old Pueblo Community Foundation

Pima Community College

Pima County Administrator

Pima County Attorney’s Office

Pima County Board of Supervisors

Pima County Clerk of the Court

Pima County Facilities Management

Pima County Fleet Services

Pima County Parks and Recreation Dept, Graffiti
Abatement Program
Pima County Sheriff’s Office

Pima County Public Library

Pima Foundation for Youth

Pima Prevention Partnership

Providence

Public Defender

Superior Court Adult Probation

Superior Court Administrator’s Office

SMART Programs - School, County Attorney,
Law Enforcement, Probation collaborations
Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities (TASC)

Substance Abuse Mental Health Service Administration
(SAMHSA)
Tucson Police Department (TPD)

Arizona Department of Education (ADOE)
Pima County Public Schools
University of Arizona

Tucson Urban League

Pima County Youth Opportunity (YO)

University of Phoenix

Victim Offender Mediation Program (VOMP)

Page 30

Pima County Juvenile Court Center
Annual Report
2003

Community Advisory Board (CAB)

The purpose of the (CAB) is to enhance the effectiveness of the Court by
communicating the community’s needs, providing feedback on the
effectiveness of programs and policies, and advocating on behalf of the
court. This is accomplished by educating the community on the importance
of prevention and intervention in addressing juvenile crime and by
promoting the creation of community partnerships.
Karen Abman, Director
Division for Children Juvenile Justice Programs
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth and Families

Angela Bell, Guidance Counselor
Cienega High School

Kathleen Brennan-Glinn, Captain
Pima County Sheriff’s Office
Neal Cash, Chief Executive Officer
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)

Ruth Canada, Development Director
St. Augustine Catholic High School

Hector Estrada
Attorney at Law

Richard Fimbres, Director
Governor's Office of Highway

Larry Haynes, Principal
Jefferson Park Elementary School

Pete Hochuli, Supervising Attorney
Pima County Attorney

Wendell Hunt, Lieutenant
Tucson Police Department

Ricardo Jasso, CEO
Luz Social Services

Andrea Kartch, President
Reigns of Change, LLC

John Leavitt, Assistant Chief
Tucson Police Department

William A. (Bill) Lofquist
Social Worker

James Neeley
Educator (Retired)

Arnold Palacios
Pima County One Stop Adult/Youth Services

Esther Sharif
Community Organizer/Activist
Dr. Alan Storm
Asst Superintendent of Student Srv.
Sunnyside School District
Hon. Gilbert Veliz (Retired)
Board Chair

Clint Stinson
Private Attorney
Bob Tucker, Liaison
AZ Dept of Juv. Corrections (ADJC)

Ray Clarke, CEO
Tucson Urban League

Karen Wilson
Probation Supervisor (Retired)

Page 31

Pima County Juvenile Court Center
Annual Report
2003

Call to the Public
The Pima County Juvenile Court is requesting your “yes” vote for the Public Safety bond
on May 18, 2004. This proposal will allow us to complete four new courtrooms to add to
our existing courthouse.
Our Court is in desperate need of these additions. Since state law was changed in 1997
to require much more judicial oversight of child abuse and neglect cases, our caseloads
have skyrocketed. Since 1997, we have increased our child abuse and neglect cases by
50%. We have also had a 100%+ increase in the number of hearings on Motions/
Petitions for Termination of Parental Rights since 1997.
The changes made by our State legislature, effective December 18, 2003, will add to this
increase. For example, parents are now entitled to have jury trials on Motions/Petitions
for Termination of Parental Rights. Jury trials take much longer than trials by judges.
CPS was also given a much-needed increase in its budget, which will allow CPS to
increase its workforce by 25% in Pima County. With more CPS caseworkers in Pima
County, we expect more child abuse and neglect cases to be filed at our court.
Despite these increased child welfare cases, we have only increased our judges by 11%
since 1997. We won’t be able to add any judges to the Court until the four unfinished
courtrooms that were started in 1999 at our building are completed. We need your support to receive the $2,000,000 to add four courtrooms and chambers to our facility.
Without your yes vote, we won’t be able to exercise the type of effective judicial
oversight that our laws mandate. More significantly, we won’t be able to exercise the
effective judicial oversight that our abused and neglected children deserve. Please
approve the Public Safety Bond Request.
Judge Hector E. Campoy
Presiding Judge
Pima County Juvenile Court

Page 32