San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department Monthly Statistics

San Francisco Juvenile Probation

Department Monthly Statistics

Through June 2024

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

MonthlyDataReport

• The Juvenile Probation Department is engaged in efforts to generate more comprehensive,

accurate, and meaningful metrics.

• This report compiles data through the month before last (June 2024).

• A recent daily snapshot of the Juvenile Hall population will be included for the Commission meeting.

• Starting on page 5, each chart slide is preceded by a definition/methodology slide explaining the

chart's content.

• Time periods range depending on data availability and are noted on each chart.

• An Executive Summary for the month has been added to slide 3, with headings that hyperlink to

relevant graphs in the report.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

Executiv e Summary‐ June

• Referrals: There were 75 referrals, 11% lower than the 2023 average of 84 referrals a month. 18 of the referrals were

for 707(b) offenses (24%).

• Admissions: There were 38 admissions, 27% higher than the 2023 average of 30 admissions a month.

• Population: The average daily population was 28 youth, 8% higher than the 2023 average of 26 youth. The peak

population was 25 youth.

• Length of Stay: The median LOS for releases was 7 days, longer than the 2023 average of 6 days.

• Caseload: There were 389 youth on active caseload, 3% higher than the 2023 average of 379 youth on active caseload

a month.

• Diversion: 38% of pre-adjudicated cases were being handled through various types of diversion.

• Programs: 75% of youth on active caseload were active in programs, 5 percentage points higher than the 2023 average

of 70%.

• Placements: There were 48 youth in alternative placements, 60% higher than the 2023 average of 30 youth.

• Warrants: There were 42 youth with active warrants as of the last day of the month, 20% higher than the 2023 average

of 35 youth.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JuvenileHallSnapshot:8/11/2024(N=21)

Notes: SYTF = Secure Youth Treatment Facility; JH = Juvenile Hall

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JHCharts1.1&1.2:Admissions,Releases,&Population

• Description

• Chart 1.1 displays Juvenile Hall admissions and releases by calendar month.

• Chart 1.2 displays the average daily population (ADP) by month - the average number of youth

in custody per day for each month, & the peak population by month - the highest population

count reached each month.

• In June,

• There were 38 admissions and 28 releases.

• The ADP was 28 youth and the peak population was 37 youth.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH1.1:Admissions&Releases

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH1.2:Average&PeakPopulat ion

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JHCharts2.1‐ 2.4:ADPbyDetails

• Description

• Charts in this section display Average Daily Population (ADP) of youth in Juvenile Hall by

gender (2.1), race/ethnicity (2.2), age (2.3), and status (2.4).

• Note: Due to rounding errors, ADP by demographics may differ from overall ADP.

• In June,

• The gender breakdown of the ADP in Juvenile Hall was 4% girls and 96% boys.

• The racial/ethnic breakdown of the ADP in Juvenile Hall was 56% Black youth, 44% Latinx

youth, and 4% AAPI youth.

• The age breakdown of the ADP in Juvenile Hall was 33% young adults ages 18 and older.

• The status breakdown of the ADP in Juvenile Hall was 68% detained youth and 32% committed

youth.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH2.1:ADPbyGender

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH2.2:ADPbyRace/Ethnicity

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH2.3:ADPbyAge

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH2.4:ADPbyStatus

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JHCharts3.1&3.2:AverageLengthofStay

• Description

• Charts 3.1 & 3.2 present the mean and median length of stay (ALOS) for: (3.1) detained youth

released each month and (3.2) detained and committed youth in custody on the last day of the

month.

• Due to small numbers, average length of stay for committed youth released will be

reported on in annual reports.

• In June,

• For detained youth released from Juvenile Hall throughout the month, the mean LOS was 11

days and the median LOS was 7 days.

• For detained youth in custody on the last day of the month, the mean LOS was 39 days and the

median LOS was 17 days.

• For committed youth in custody on the last day of the month, the mean LOS was 736 days and

the median LOS was 597 days.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH3.1:AverageLengthofStayforDetainedYouth

Released

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH3.2:AverageLengthofStayforYouthinCustody

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JHChart4.1&4.2:AdmissionsbyDetails

• Description

• Chart 4.1 displays Juvenile Hall admissions by the percentage that were mandated by state law. Chart 4.2

displays admissions by primary detention reason.

• Law mandates that youth brought into custody for the following must be detained until they can appear

before a judge:

• Youth at least 14 years old, arrested for personal use of a firearm in the attempt or commission of a

felony; or any offense listed in Welfare and Institutions Code section 707(b).

• Youth brought into custody pursuant to a court order, bench warrant, or arrest warrant.

• Youth transferred in custody from another jurisdiction.

• Non-mandatory detentions include felony firearm offenses, other jurisdiction holds, situations where there

are no non-secure options available to release a young person to, or a detention with supervisor approval.

• In June, there were 38 admissions to Juvenile Hall.

• 68% were mandatory: 15 new law violations and 11 warrants/court orders

• 32% were non-mandatory: 9 felony firearm offenses and 3 due to no non-secure option available

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH4.1:Admissionsby%Mandatory

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JH4.2:AdmissionsbyPrimaryReason

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JHChart5:JuvenileHallSnapshotbyStatus

• Description

• Chart 5 provides a snapshot of youth in Juvenile Hall on the Monday before Commission meetings (as

represented in Slide 3) by case status.

• Pre-adjudicated/Pre-disposition represents detained youth. Additional categories reflect youth who have

been committed to out-of-home placement and are awaiting placement, committed to Juvenile Hall, and

committed to Secure Track

• On the Monday before the June Commission meeting,

• 48% of youth in custody were committed to either Juvenile Hall or Secure Track and 14% were awaiting

placement.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

JHChart5:JuvenileHallSnapshotbyStatus

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSChart1:ReferralstoProbation&DivertedReferrals

• Description

• PS 1 provides statistics about the number of referrals to Probation and the number of diversion referrals each month. As of

January 2024, diversion measurement now reflects referrals to diversion programs rather than intakes.

• Some referrals are not diverted because they are counseled/referred & closed. Those are reflected on this chart.

• Diversion referrals include CARC Diversion, JPD/SFDA 654 Diversion, and SFDA Pre-Filing Diversion. Diversion

definitions and eligibility criteria can be found on the following slide.

• Counseled/referred & closed referrals and diverted referrals are included in the total number of Probation referrals.

• In June,

• There were 75 referrals to Probation:

• 41 were for felonies (56%), 18 of which were for 707(b) offenses (24%)

• 20 were for misdemeanors (26%), 14 of which originated in another county

• 14 were for warrants/probation violations (19%)

• 1 referral was counseled/referred & closed & 5 were diverted to CARC.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS1:ReferralstoProbation&DivertedReferrals

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

DiversionGlossary

• Diversion is an alternative to the normal juvenile justice system. There are diversion opportunities at every stage of the juvenile justice process.

Probation may divert a young person rather than investigating the case. The District Attorney may divert a case rather than filing a petition. The Court

may divert a case rather than adjudicating the case. If a young person's case is diverted, they will have the opportunity to complete a program. If

successful, the young person may avoid going to court, or getting a petition or a disposition.

DefinitionDiversion

JPD counsels the youth and their caregiver, takes no further action on the case, and the case is closed. This is

distinct from diversion because there is no expectation to meet in order to close the case. Only certain cases

referred to JPD are eligible to be counseled and closed. This can include misdemeanors cases for out-of-county

youth, which are referred to the youth's home county.

Counseled/Referred & Closed

Youth is diverted to CARC at arrest. The young person does not complete an intake with JPD. If the young person

completes their CARC case plan, the case is not referred to the DA for prosecution. Most misdemeanors are eligible

to be diverted to CARC at point of arrest, with the exclusion of traffic referrals, out of county transfer-in citations, and

707(b) offenses. Cases that are not eligible for diversion, including felony citations, may also be referred to CARC

for support and services during the court process.

CARC Diversion

Youth is cited to JPD at arrest and is diverted by JPD either back to CARC or to another program pursuant to

Welfare & Institutions Code 654. If the young person completes their case plan, the case is not referred to the DA

for prosecution.

JPD 654 Diversion

Youth is cited to JPD at arrest and the case requires a referral to the DA pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code

653.5(c). The DA instructs JPD to divert pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code 654. If the young person completes

their case plan, the case is not prosecuted.

SFDA 654 Diversion

Youth is cited to JPD at arrest and the case requires a referral to the DA pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code

653.5(c). The DA diverts the case to Make it Right, UCAP, or AFTER prior to filing charges. If the young person

completes their case plan, the case is not prosecuted.

SFDA Pre-Filing Diversion

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSChart2.1:ProbationActiveCaseload

• Description

• Chart 2.1 provides the total number of active cases on JPD's caseload for all units, both pre-

and post-adjudication, as well as AB12, as of the last day of the month.

• On the last day of June,

• The JPD active caseload was 389 youth.

• There were 238 pre-adjudicated cases (38% were diversion cases), 120 post-adjudicated

cases, and 31 AB12 cases.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS2.1:ProbationActiveCaseload

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSCharts2.2&2.3:ActiveCaseloadbyUnit& Average

CaseloadSize

• Description

• Chart 2.2 shows active caseload by Unit by month, reflecting the most recent Unit

restructurings.

• Chart 2.3 shows the average caseload size per case manager by unit.

• Note: This includes all JPD staff that carry a caseload, including CARC, as well as JPD's

AB12 social workers.

• On the last day of June,

• The average caseload size per case manager was 18 youth.

• PS1 had the highest average caseload sizes at 22 youth, while CARC & AB12 had the lowest

at 10 youth.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS2.2:ActiveCaseloadbyUnit

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS2.3:AverageCaseloadSize

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS2.4&2.5:ActiveCaseloadDemographics

• Description

• The next two slides show active caseload demographics (race/ethnicity, gender, age),

residential zip codes, and age as of the last day of the month. 2.4 shows the age breakdown for

the active caseload, by Unit.

• As of the last day of June,

• Girls represented 25% of the active caseload, and boys represented 75%.

• 50% of the active caseload was Black, 37% was Latinx, 7% was AAPI, 4% was white, and 3%

was other/unknown race/ethnicity.

• 30% of youth supervised by JPD live outside of San Francisco, and 38% of youth live in five zip

codes, with the largest group (15%) living in Bayview/Hunter's Point (94124).

• 30% of JPD's active caseload is 18 or older, with AB12 and Placement/JCRU supervising a

larger percentage of young adults than other units.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS2.4:ActiveCaseloadDemographics

% of

Youth

# of

Youth

Neighborhood

30118Out of County

1560Bayview/Hunters Point (94124)

625Visitacion Valley/Sunnydale (94134)

623Mission/Bernal Heights (94110)

520Western Addition (94115)

519Ingleside/Excelsior (94112)

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS2.5:ActiveCaseloadDemographics

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSChart3:ActiveCaseloadActiveinPr ograms

• Description

• Chart 3.1 depicts the percentage of JPD's active caseload that is active in programs by month.

• Chart 3.2 is a new slide that shows the total number of youth referred to various Huckleberry

Youth programs (regardless of diversion status) per month.

• As of the last day of June, 75% of young people on active caseload were active in programs,

either in the community or in Juvenile Hall

• Notes: (1) Youth who are only on electronic or alcohol monitoring are not included in this

calculation.

• In June, 20 youth total were referred to Huckleberry Youth Programs.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS3.1:ActiveCaseloadActiveinPrograms

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS3.2:HuckleberryServiceReferrals

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSCharts4.1&4.2:AlternativePlacement

• Description

• Chart 4.1 shows all youth in alternative placements by Gender, as of the last day of each month

for all status categories (see Alternative Placement Glossary):

• Table 4.2 provides details for each alternative placement category, as of the last day of each

month. A glossary is provided on the following slides.

• As of the last day of June,

• The total alternative placement population was 48 youth.

• Since the beginning of 2024, RFA + AFS placements have accounted for an average of 33% of

alternative placements per month, STRTPs have accounted for 6%, and commitments have

accounted for 21%.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS4.1:AlternativePlacementsbyGender

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS4.2:AlternativePlacementsbyDetails

Avg %Jun-24May-24Apr-24Mar-24Feb-24Jan-24Alternative Placements

0%000001Pending Adjudication

2%001103Pending Disposition

7%453141Pending Placement

27%12131213119RFA

6%333222AFS

6%332134STRTP

3%111221Home Trial (Re-Entry)

3%222200THP+FC

2%111110Juvenile Hall Commitment

19%888898Secure Youth Treatment Facility

1%000011County Jail (adult criminal complaint)

3%1112

11SYTF Post-Release

7%443233Prop 57 Resentencing

13%866544AWOL

100%484743404138Total

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

AlternativePlacementGlossary

DefinitionStatus

When a youth previously ordered to out of home placement who has a petition filed and is moving through the court process however, the

petition has yet to be found true or dismissed.

Pending Adjudication

When a youth who has sustained charges and is now awaiting disposition or the court to make a determination on the outcome of the case.Pending Disposition

When a youth who has been committed to out of home placement by the court but is waiting for interviews, notice of acceptance, and the

scheduling of transportation is pending placement.

Pending Placement

A Resource Family (RFA) is a caregiver who provides out-of-home care for children in foster care.RFA

Alternative Family Services (AFS) placements are Intensive Services Foster Care (ISFC) Resource Family homes in the Bay Area, contracted

to serve youth involved in San Francisco's juvenile justice system.

AFS

Short-term Residential Therapeutic Program (STRTP), formerly referred to as a Group Home, is a residential facility operated by a public

agency or private organization that provides an integrated program of specialized and intensive care and supervision, services and supports,

treatment, and short-term 24-hour care and supervision to children and nonminor dependents.

STRTP

Home Trial is the period a youth is provided by the Court upon returning from an STRTP.Home Trial (Re-Entry)

Transitional Housing Placement-Plus Foster Care (THP+FC), also referred to as AB 12, allows eligible foster youth to extend foster care

beyond age 18 and up to age 21. The eligible foster youth are designated Non-Minor Dependents (NMDs) and are entitled to variousfoster

placement options including Supervised Independent Living Settings (SILPs).

THP + FC

When the Court orders a youth to remain in Juvenile Hall as their Disposition.Juvenile Hall Commitment

Due to the closure of DJJ, youth who would have previously been eligible to be committed to DJJ are now eligible to be committed to a

Secure Youth Treatment Facility (SYTF). Currently, San Francisco is using Juvenile Hall as its SYTF.

Secure Track Commitment

When a young adult (18+) has an outstanding juvenile warrant and is in county jail due to adult charges.

County Jail (adult criminal

complaint)

When a young person serving a Secure Youth Treatment Facility (SYTF) commitment has been released from custody is under community

supervision.

SYTF Post-Release

When an individual whose case was transferred to adult court as a juvenile has been re-sentenced and released under Proposition 57.Prop 57 Resentencing

When a youth leaves their court ordered placement or home without approval or consent of the program or parent/guardian/caregiver.AWOL

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSCharts5.1&5.2:ActiveWarrants

• Description

• Chart 5.1 is a new chart that shows the number and type of warrants active as of the last day of

each month.

• Arrest warrants are initiated by JPD, petition warrants are initiated by the police, and bench

warrants are initiated by the court.

• Chart 5.2 is a new chart that shows the mean and median age of warrants active as of the last

day of each month.

• As of the last day of June,

• There were 42 youth with active warrants and 53 active warrants total: 13 arrest warrants, 11

petition warrants, and 28 bench warrants.

• The mean length of time from warrant issue date was 252 days and the median was 200 days.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS5.1:ActiveWarrantsbyType

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS5.2:ActiveWarrantsbyAgeofWarrant

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSChart6:ElectronicMonitoring

• Description

• Chart 6 provides data about the number of youth on electronic monitoring as of the last day of

each month and the average length of monitoring.

• As of the last day of June,

• There were 37 youth on electronic monitoring, with an average length of monitoring of 39 days.

• 19% were girls and 81% were boys

• 49% were Black, 41% were Latinx, and 11% were another race/ethnicity.

• There was 1 youth on alcohol monitoring.

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS6:ElectronicMonitoring

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSChart7:HomeDetention

• Description

• Chart 7 provides data for the number of youth on Home Detention as of the last day of the

month.

• Chart 7 also shows the average length of Home Detention on the last day of the month.

• As of the last day of June,

• There were 49 youth on Home Detention. The average length of stay was 75 days.

• 18% were girls & 82% were boys

• 41% were Black, 35% were Latinx, 24% were another race or ethnicity

• 88% were pre-adjudicated

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS7:HomeDetention

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PSChart8:PetitionDispositions

• Description

• Chart 8 shows all petition dispositions by month.

• Since the start of 2024,

• 3% resulted in commitments to SYTF or Juvenile Hall

• 11% resulted in out of home placement (commit + recommit to out of home placement)

• 19% of dispositions resulted in wardship probation (ward probation + wardship redeclared).

• 5% resulted in 725(a) non wardship probation

• 26% resulted in 654 informal probation

• 20% resulted in transfers out

• 15% resulted in dismissals

SanFranciscoJuvenileProbationDepartment

PS8:PetitionDispositions

THANK YOU

QUESTIONS?