Girls` Initiative, Youth Policy Initiative

Girls’ Initiative
Youth Policy Initiative
i
n
t
i
i
a
’
t
s
i
l
v
ri
e
e
v
a
h
s
y
o
b
d
n
a
s
s
d
l
e
r
i
e
g
n
e
u
q
i
n
u
relationships matter relationships matter relationships m
lationships matter relationships matter relationships ma
relationships matter relationships matter relationships
g
Report on High Risk Girls
and Gender-Specific Programming
succe
ss is n
o
September ab
t
j
u
s
s
t the
e
n
ce of
2009
negat
ive
girls and boys have unique needs
Table of Contents
girls and boys
have unique needs
Credits and Acknowledgements 4
Prologue
5
Executive Summary
6
I. Introduction
10
Letters of Support for this Report 11
Overview of the Girls’ Initiative 13
Moving a State: Partnership, Policy, and Programming14
II. Female Adolescent Development, Risk Indicators and
Protective Factors
16
Female Adolescent Development 16
Risk and Protective Factors 18
Girls’ Pathways to Delinquency 22
III. Promising Practices 23
Category 1 - Program Design and Content
23
a. Relationships
24
b. Safety and Environment
26
c. Health and Mental Health
29
d. Education and Economic Opportunity 32
e. Community and Civic Engagement 35
Category 2 - Administration and Management 36
a. Organizational Policies and Values 36
b. Staffing: Hiring, Training, Professional Development,
Diversity
37
c. Data, Assessment and Evaluation
39
IV. Data of Girls in Massachusetts, Suffolk County,
Boston and Chelsea
41
girls and boys
have unique needs
2
Data Introduction and Summary 41
General Population Overview
44
Economic and Family Risk and Protective Factors
Educational Risk and Protective Factors
Child Maltreatment
50
Girls as Victims of Domestic Violence 51
Girls as Victims of Sexual Assault
51
Girls as Victims of Weapons Injuries
52
Girls as Victims of Violence at School 52
44
46
girls and boys have unique needs
56
V. Oregon and Florida: Community Mobilization and
Legislative Action toward Gender Specific Programming
71
Florida Legislative Process Timeline and Summary
Oregon Legislative Process Timeline and Summary
71
72
VI. Community Action Plan for Massachusetts 74
1. The Process: Government, Community,
Policy, Legislation & Advocacy
2. Funding Streams and Other Resources for
Female Gender Specific Programming
74
78
VII. Findings, Conclusion and Recommendations
Appendix
86
81
Appendices 1-7: Girls’ Initiative Grantees
86
Appendix 8: JJDPA Explanation
93
Appendix 9: Youth Development Framework (from EOHHS) 94
Appendix 10: Key Juvenile Justice
Decision Points and Options
95
Appendices 11-12: Girls’ Initiative
2008 Community Meetings (Agendas)
96
Appendix 13: Girls’ Initiative September 9, 2009 Conference:
“Practice, Policy, and Promise”
(Agenda and Workshop Offerings)
98
Appendix 14: Letters and Fact Sheets
Used for Legislative Advocacy 100
Appendix 15: H3418
103
Bibliography
Table of Contents
Suicide and Self Injury
52
Girls as Perpetrators of Violence
54
Substance Abuse
55
Other Data on Risk and Protective Factors
Pregnancy
57
Juvenile Justice System Involvement
57
Arrests
58
Juvenile Court
59
DYS Information
65
girls and boys
have unique needs
106
girls and boys have unique needs
3
Readers and Reviewers:
Credits
Report Written by:
Lynne Lyman, MPA
Elizabeth Spinney, MPP
Public Cause Consulting, www.publiccauseconsulting.com
Author’s special thanks to:
Patricia Patton and Marcia Morgan of Oregon for their invaluable document, which was used every step along the way to
inform our process, as well as a great starting point for research
on girls and gender-specific programming; Kalya Hamlett
Murray and Ellen Bass of the Black Ministerial Alliance for
their steady guidance and leadership on this project; and Sylvia Johnson and Tammy Tai of the Hyams Foundation for their
deep commitment and abundant passion for the Girls’ Initiative.
Mia Alvarado, Roxbury Youthworks, Inc.
Ellen Bass, Black Ministerial Alliance
Josh Dohan, Youth Advocacy Project
Mark Evans, Bridge Over Troubled Waters
Elaine Fersh, Community Matters
Kalya Hamlett Murray, Black Ministerial
Alliance
Latifah Hassan, Bridge Over Troubled
Waters
Becky Nyce, Roca
Kevin Peterson, Ella J. Baker House
Jill Taylor, Simmons College
Chris Troy, Boston Urban Youth
Foundation
Janie Ward, Simmons College
Report Design and Graphics by:
Eve Lyman, http://theeyeofthebeholder.net
Black Ministerial Alliance Acknowledgements
This report was made possible by a grant from The Youth Public Policy Initiative (YPI) of the Boston Foundation
to the Girls’ Initiative at the Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston. YPI seeks to build the capacity of
Boston-area youth-serving organizations to impact public policy that advances positive educational, social, and
workforce outcomes for high-risk youth. Through this three-year initiative, the Boston Foundation in collaboration
with the Barr Foundation and the Hyams Foundation, has utilized research, technical assistance, convening and
grantmaking strategies to build a robust network of organizations and collaborations working to develop, articulate
and implement a shared advocacy agenda.
The Girls’ Initiative’s work has been supported by 6 years of multi-year funding from The Hyams Foundation
who answered the challenge in 2003 by creating the Initiative to affect positive outcomes for high risk and systeminvolved girls. A special thank you to Dr. Sylvia Johnson, whose vision and leadership has been the driving force
behind the Girls’ Initiative since its inception. The United Way Massachusetts Bay and Merrimack Valley and The
Boston Foundation became funders in 2006 and 2007 respectively. Thank you to our funders whose resources
have provided for the learning, research, advocacy and growth of the Grantees, now to be shared with the larger
girl serving community.
Thank you to the Girls’ Initiative grantees, which comprised the learning community and working group of
the Youth Policy Initiative.
Boston Urban Youth Foundation
Ella J. Baker House
ROCA Inc.
Bridge Over Troubled Waters
Generation Excel
Roxbury Youthworks, Inc.
4
Kalya Hamlett Murray, Project Director, The Girls’ Initiative
David Wright, Executive Director
Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston
7 Palmer Street, Suite 301, Roxbury, MA 02119
(617) 445-2737, extension 17, [email protected]
w
why girls?why now? why girls?why now? why girls
Prologue
Why is it important to focus on girls
when boys make up the majority of youth
involved with the juvenile justice system?
First, more girls are getting in trouble. In the 1990’s,
researchers, policymakers and program managers
noticed sharp increases in girls’ involvement in the
juvenile justice system. In Massachusetts alone the
number of girls on probation nearly tripled from
1992 to 2002. And while these sharp increases may
have leveled off recently, trends have not gone
back to pre-1990’s levels. In some cases, increases
are still occurring. For example, nationally from
1997 through 2006, arrests of girls decreased less
than arrests of boys in most offense categories,
and in some categories female arrests increased
while male arrests decreased (Snyder, 2008). The
proportion of juveniles who are female entering the
juvenile justice system continues to grow, and while
juvenile arrests for violent crimes declined 22% for
males between 1997 and 2006, they declined only
12% for females (Snyder, 2008). The OJJDP report
that guided much of this report states, “Making
girls a priority before their numbers increase to
the level of male juvenile delinquents represents
a proactive rather than reactive way of addressing
the problem,” (Greene, et al., 1998, p. 38).
Second, girls have unique risk and protective factors, unique developmental pathways, unique crime
patterns, and unique needs. The need for genderspecific services to help girls avoid delinquency
and to achieve positive outcomes within the juvenile justice system is examined in depth in this document. Most scholars and practitioners acknowledge that the juvenile justice system was designed
for boys. We too often try to squeeze delinquent
girls in to an existing boys program, without stepping back to evaluate if that program is effective or
even suited for girls’ needs. “Equal” does not mean
gender neutral. Girls are entering government institutions with very different personal profiles than
boys, and the issues girls struggle with as they go
through female adolescent development warrant a
decidedly different approach than taken with boys.
There has been growing consensus over the past 15
years that gender specific programming at all levels
can have far more promising and successful results
for girls involved in high-risk behavior.
This document illustrates how girls tend to differ from boys and why gender-specific approaches are important
for girls’ success. What is not examined in detail are the crucial differences among girls by race, ethnicity, class,
immigration status, and other personal characteristics. Although we do not attempt to examine these issues in
depth, they are important to understand when developing any program or policy. Girls are not a homogeneous
group. Each girl is a unique individual with unique experiences, strengths and hopes. We hope this document is
used to improve services for girls and to develop programs and policies that focus on their specific needs and
individuality, not that create a one-size-fits-all approach to working with girls. While this report exclusively
addresses gender-specificity as it pertains to females, it in no way intends to devalue or downplay the magnitude
and depth of the challenge of boys in the criminal justice system, especially boys of color. As the Girls’ Initiative,
we focus on girls. We hope that reports by other entities will address the needs of system-involved boys.
5
why girls?why now? why girls?why now? why girls
Executive Summary
Gender-responsive programming for girls intentionally allows gender
to affect and guide services, creating an environment through site
selection, staff selection, program development, content, and material
that reflects an understanding of the realities of girls’ lives.
The Report on High Risk Girls and Gender-Specific Programming is written to engage the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts in a conversation about the most effective ways to serve girls at high risk, so that they achieve positive life
outcomes and reach their full potential. We are writing for several audiences: state legislators, state agencies that deliver
publicly-funded services to girls, community-based agencies that support girls at high risk, and anyone who cares
about the best ways to support girls as they mature. While the focus of the report is on girls at high risk, the promising
practices that are most effective with this special population are the same practices that are most effective with all girls.
This report argues that although boys make up the
majority of youth involved with the juvenile justice
system, it is important to focus on girls because:
✜✜ Girls are now the fastest growing segment of the juvenile justice population.
✜✜ It is smart public policy to focus on girls before their numbers increase to the level of male
juvenile delinquents.
✜✜ Girls have unique risk and protective factors, unique developmental pathways, unique crime
patterns, and unique needs.
◊ Nearly all juvenile female offenders have been subjected to some form of emotional,
physical, and/or sexual abuse.
◊ Girls are most often arrested for non-violent crimes and status offenses, including
truancy, curfew violations, probation violations, disorderly conduct, runaways, or
prostitution.
✜✜ The juvenile justice system was designed for boys and we too often try to squeeze delinquent
girls in to an existing boys program, without stepping back to evaluate if that program is effective
or even suited for girls’ needs.
6
s?why now? why girls?why now? why girls?why
This report offers extensively researched promising
practices that any community or government agency
can incorporate.
All of the promising practices speak to program design focused on relationships, health and safety, and an
organizational structure that reflects the values of gender-specific programming in its policies, staff training
and hiring protocols, assessment tools, evaluation measurements, and data collection. A general principle of
positive youth development, and a specific recommendation under all published gender-specific programming
is to involve the girls in the design and development of programs and spaces intended to support them.
In the full report, each of the promising practices content areas offers the general overarching
“promising practice”; accompanying “guiding principles”; a “deeper look” into the research and
implementation guidance of that promising practice; and a list of innovate ideas for employing that
promising practice generated through the Boston workshops as well as workshops offered in other states.
Following is the list of the recommended promising practices:
✜✜ Promote Positive Relationships… between girls… between girls and staff… and
between girls and their families.
✜✜ Create a safe and supporting environment, by providing physical safety from self
and others, emotional safety, and supportive surroundings.
✜✜ Promote and Provide Access to Physical and Mental Health, through physical
and nutritional health, sexual health and hygiene, and mental health and trauma
response.
✜✜ Provide quality education and workforce preparation
✜✜ Promote civic engagement through volunteerism, community service, and social
and political action
✜✜ Develop a value statement on serving girls that is written into the overall mission
or vision statement for the organization.
✜✜ Hire and train staff that are committed to serving girls and that are generally
representative of the diverse population being served.
✜✜ Collect and maintain accurate and relevant data on the population you serve;
develop gender-specific assessment tools; and integrate a female-guided evaluation
strategy through every stage of a program.
7
The following finding’s highlights are covered in detail
in the Conclusion Section of the full report:
✜✜ Girls are at highest risk for delinquency between 12 and 14 year old.
✜✜ Girls and young women in general are experiencing an intolerable level of sexual abuse and domestic
violence and most high-risk and system involved girls have been sexually abused:
✜✜ Girls of color are overwhelmingly overrepresented in the juvenile justice system.
✜✜ Nationally juvenile female arrests are not declining nearly as fast as they are for boys.
✜✜ In Boston there was a huge increase in girl arrests in 2008.
✜✜ Most girls who end up in DYS were previously served in DCF:
✜✜ To successfully rehabilitate and reintegrate juvenile delinquents, we must truly understand and address
the social and economic conditions that negatively impact their families.
✜✜ Girls are suffering with higher rates of depression, body image disorders and suicidal tendencies and
these problems increase for girls in the juvenile justice population:
✜✜ The consequences of not completing high school are higher for girls than boys in any jurisdiction.
✜✜ Girls in Boston and Chelsea are at much higher risk of dropping out than girls statewide:
✜✜ Girls bully, but it takes the form of rumor spreading, secret-divulging, alliance building, backstabbing,
ignoring, excluding from social groups and activities, verbally insulting, and using hostile body language
✜✜ Girls in the juvenile justice system are more likely to be person offenders, while boys are more likely to
be property offenders.
Next Steps and Recommendations
This report provides valuable insight into the needs of all girls, especially those who get into
trouble, and how both community agencies and public agencies can best support them. The Girls’
Initiative recommends that community agencies and public agencies assess the status of their genderresponsive programming and strengthen it by implementing the promising practices described above.
Using Florida and Oregon as a model, the Girls’ Initiative is supporting pending legislation, H3418 in the
Massachusetts legislature: An Act to Establish a Special Commission on Gender-Responsive Programming
for System-Involved Girls. Members of the network have been engaged in aggressive education and
advocacy with state representatives on this bill since early 2009 and will continue to be through the two-year
legislative session that ends in December 2010. The Girls’ Initiative is hopeful that the release of this report
will assist in the passage of H3418 and that the Commonwealth adopt the following recommendations:
8
1.That the Commonwealth adopt a general value statement on serving girls.
2.That all relevant state agencies incorporate gender-specific training.
3.That the Commonwealth collect data by gender among relevant agencies and makes
available to the public.
4.That the Commonwealth issue recommended policies, standards, procedures and
criteria for girls’ programming.
5.That the Commonwealth propose an implementation plan for incorporating those
criteria within the relevant state agencies.
6.That the Commonwealth issue a bi-annual report on the status of system involved
girls.
The Girls’ Initiative
Initiated by the Hyams Foundation in January of 2003, the Girls’ Initiative is a response to the problem of the
growing number of girls entering the juvenile justice system. The long-term goal of the initiative is to promote
positive outcomes for high risk and/or already system-involved girls and to reduce the rates of involvement and
recidivism of girls in the juvenile justice system, particularly for girls of color.
Currently, the Girls’ Initiative is focusing on the YPI (Youth Policy Initiative), which advocates for changes in
policy/regulation in favor of a gender specific approach when working with high-risk girls. With the release of this
report, we have developed gender specific criteria based on promising practices that can inform this policy and
broader training and curriculum development.
Moving a state towards developing and adopting gender-specific programming for girls requires long-term vision
and commitment from an advocacy community and/or the government. This report relies on the OJJDP framework
for states to follow offered in their 1998 report, Guiding Principles for Promising Female Programming:
1. Get Organized
2. Define mission, goals, and objectives
3. Gather information on scope and nature of problems girls face
4. Disseminate Findings
5. Lobby for Legislation
6. Plan for Implementation
7. Identify Barriers
8. Develop a Community Action Plan
This Report represents a first step in the Community Action Plan for Massachusetts. With this report, all girl-serving
agencies are invited to join the Girls’ Initiative, which is becoming a public network of community agencies, to
strengthen our own gender-responsive programming and to partner with the Commonwealth to strengthen their
gender-responsive practices
9
I.Introduction
“In order to effectively implement systemic change through the infusion
of gender-specific programming for girls, there is a need for courageous
advocacy for gender specific programming,” (Greene et al., 1998, p. 37).
What is gender-specific programming?
What does gender responsive mean?
“Gender-specific programming for girls is a comprehensive approach to female delinquency rooted in the experience of girls. It aims to help girls already in trouble, while preventing future delinquency among girls who are
at risk. It bridges theory-into-practice by combining female adolescent theory with juvenile justice practices”
(Greene et al., 1998, p. 3).
“Gender-responsive programming for girls intentionally allows gender to affect and guide services, creating
an environment through site selection, staff selection, program development, content, and material that reflects
an understanding of the realities of girls’ lives, and is responsive to the issues and needs of the girls and young
women being served” (Patton & Morgan, 2002, p. 9).
“Gender-sensitive programs are those that not only pay attention to the multi-faceted identities of participating
girls, but also consider the unique developmental needs and strengths of girls as integral to program design and
practice” (Wheeler, 2005, p. 9).
We are not the first in Massachusetts to issue a call for gender-specific programming:
✜✜ In 1996, the United Way of Massachusetts Bay (UWMB) created Today’s Girls…Tomorrow’s Leaders
(TGTL) as an initiative “to fill the void of too little gender-specific and gender-sensitive programming for
girls, to focus on the positive aspects of girls’ experiences, and to support and enhance girl programming”
(TGTL Guidelines and Guiding Principles, 2008-2009).
✜✜ Citizens for Juvenile Justice has also focused their advocacy work on gender-specific services. In 2005 they
stated, “Massachusetts must invest in gender-specific programming and resources within the system to adequately address the needs of the growing number of girls in the juvenile justice system.”.
✜✜ One of the key findings from the Girls’ Coalition of Greater Boston’s report on the state of girls was, “The
need for gender-sensitive youth programming that meets the specific and unique needs of girls is growing”
(Wheeler, 2005).
✜✜ Additionally, the Girls’ Coalition report found, “When funding streams are specifically available to girls, and
the need for gender-specific programs is highlighted, all programs are more likely to pay attention to gender in
design, implementation, and evaluation” (Wheeler, 2005, p 5).
✜✜ BOSTnet, an organization that advocates for increased and improved out of school time programming, stated
in 2008 that “Culturally competent programs must also be gender sensitive, creating context (environment and
staffing) and content (approach), that reflects and understanding of the role of gender in the lives of participants” (BOSTnet, 2008, p. 3).
This report attempts to build on the excellent work that has been done by community-based organizations and
individuals through greater Boston and Massachusetts seeking to improve and increase services for girls.
10
THE HYAMS FOUNDATION, INC.
September 9, 2009
Dear Friends and Colleagues:
On behalf of The Hyams Foundation and our Trustees, I am pleased to commend to
you this Report on High Risk Girls and Gender-Specific Programming. The Report
represents the culmination of six years of service, learning, partnership, and
advocacy on behalf of girls at high risk in the cities of Boston and Chelsea -The Girls’ Initiative. As such it also represents the capstone of $2.5 million
investment by the Hyams Foundation over this period to address the challenges
faced by system involved girls.
Initiated by the Hyams Foundation in January of 2003, the Girls’ Initiative is a
response to the problem of the growing number of girls entering the juvenile justice system. The long-term goal of the initiative is to promote positive outcomes for high risk and/or already system-involved girls and to reduce the rates
of involvement and recidivism of girls in the juvenile justice system, particularly for girls of color.
We agree that all young people deserve to have equal access to programs and services that will help them achieve their potential and be successful. The criminal justice system was designed for boys, and yet now girls are the fastest growing segment of the juvenile justice population. While few would deny that it is
critical to provide “equal access” to services and treatment for boys and girls
involved with the justice system, how we get to equal is more complex than it may
appear to be on the surface. This report outlines gender-responsive practice
goals, guiding principles, and innovative ideas that all of us can adapt and use
to help girls achieve positive life outcomes. Data presented in this report conclusively indicate that our work is far from finished. We invite our communities
to collaborate to address the challenges outlined in this report, daily faced by
high risk and system-involved girls.
Thank you to the seven Hyams Foundation grantees, who have identified and piloted
many of the promising practices in this report, and have initiated the advocacy
campaign that this report undergirds, to strengthen gender-responsive programming
in our state agencies: Boston Urban Youth Foundation, Bridge Over Troubled Waters, Ella J. Baker House, Generation Excel, ROCA Inc., Roxbury Youthworks, Inc.,
and Youth Advocacy Project.
This report and your advocacy efforts in response are an important part of a
transformation in the way we work with girls in our public agencies and in our
communities. On behalf of the Hyams Foundation, I am grateful for your dedication and commitment to the girls you serve and all girls across the Commonwealth.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth B. Smith
Executive Director
11
g
September 2, 2009
As the funders of the Youth Policy Initiative, we congratulate the Girls’
Initiative on the completion of this important report on the lives of high-risk and
system-involved girls. Rich in content and context, the report provides a window
into the challenges and myriad risk factors adolescent girls and young women face
in our society today, and how these challenges are compounded for girls who enter
the juvenile justice system. Further, by providing examples of best practices for
serving system-involved girls and offering recommendations to policymakers, the
report serves as a starting point for Massachusetts officials who seek to explore,
and eventually adopt, smart gender-specific policies and programs that will benefit
girls, families, and communities statewide.
We commend the Girls’ Initiative for their efforts to raise awareness on this
critical issue, and to push policymakers to action. The organizations that
comprise the Initiative each carry considerable clout and respect in the field of
youth services, yet by joining together they have amplified their individual voices
and become a collective power and a true champion for girls and young women
throughout the Commonwealth.
Their involvement in the Youth Policy
Initiative has enriched the initiative and added an important element to our
advocacy efforts.
Research shows, and common sense tells us, that girls and boys experience
adolescence differently. They differ in their interpretations of and responses to
challenges and risk factors, and they respond to interventions and supports
differently. The challenge before us now – researchers, organizational leaders,
funders, policymakers, and citizens – is to ensure this knowledge is applied to the
systems and programs designed to support and rehabilitate girls and young women
in need of services, particularly those who come under the care of the state. As
the funders of the Youth Policy Initiative, we welcome this report and hope its
dissemination will serve to educate the public and policymakers on this critical
issue.
Geeta Pradhan
Director of Programs
The Boston Foundation
12
Melinda Marble
Deputy Director
The Barr Foundation
Elizabeth B. Smith
Executive Director
The Hyams Foundation
girl’s initiative the girl’s initiative the girl’s initi
Overview of the Girls’ Initiative
Initiated by the Hyams Foundation in January of 2003, serving girls and to act as leaders for change on a more
the Girls’ Initiative is a response to the problem of the macro level.
growing number of girls entering the juvenile justice
system. The long-term goal of the initiative is to promote
Following are the 3 year goals of Phase II:
positive outcomes for high risk and/or already systeminvolved girls and to reduce the rates of involvement
✜✜ To build the capacity of organizations
and recidivism of girls in the juvenile justice system,
and their staff to better serve high risk
particularly for girls of color. In Phase I of the Initiative,
girls;
the Foundation addressed the problem by supporting
✜✜ To facilitate better connections and
eight community-based programs through $40,000 to
ongoing working relationships among
$50,000 grants for five years to provide direct services
organizations that serve high risk girls;
to system-involved girls and to participate in a Learning
and
Community.
✜✜ To develop a public policy agenda
and advocacy effort that supports the
The “Learning Community,” which continues to be
institutionalization of a gender specific
central to the Initiative, engages grantees to identify
approach when working with girls in
common issues of practice and policy affecting this
all agencies. (Funded by The Boston
targeted population of girls and to learn from one
Foundation’s Youth Policy Initiative)
another’s experience. The Girls’ Initiative supports
effective program models for serving Boston and Chelsea
girls who have been or are under the jurisdiction of the Currently, the Girls’ Initiative is focusing on the YPI
Juvenile Court, DCF, or DYS as a result of CHINS or (Youth Policy Initiative), which will: Advocate for
delinquency. The girls served are between the ages of changes in policy/regulation in favor of a gender specific
13 to 18 (up to 21 if they remain committed to DYS).
approach when working with girls. It will develop gender
specific criteria based on best practices that can inform this
In Phase I the Foundation recognized that organizations policy and broader training and curriculum development.
have a strong commitment to serving system-involved Presently, The Girls’ Initiative is supporting pending
and other vulnerable girls, however, organizational legislation, H3418 in the Massachusetts legislature
capacity was lacking in several areas. In order for the An Act establishing a special commission on genderinitiative to reach ultimate success, grantee organizations responsive programming for system-involved girls.
need to increase capacity to incorporate best practices in
In Phase III, (2010) The Girls’ Initiative plans to use this Report on High Risk Girls and Gender-Specific
Programming in support of the following legislative goals:
✜✜ Track and support legislative track for the adoption of H3418
✜✜ Equip girl service providers with the knowledge to advocate for gender responsive policy through
advocacy workshops
✜✜ Develop curriculum and trainings for DYS, DCF and Juvenile Probation
✜✜ Provide learning community trainings based on gender responsive best practices
✜✜ Create a girls’ advocacy component
All girls serving agencies are invited to join in this work together.
13
initiative the girl’s initiative the girl’s initiative
the girl’s initiative the girl’s initiative the girl’s
iative the girl’s initiative the girl’s initiative the
Moving a State:
Partnership, Policy, and Programming
Moving a state towards developing and adopting gender-specific programming for girls requires longterm vision and commitment from an advocacy community and/or the government. Chapter Two of the
OJJDP Report, Guiding Principles for Promising Female Programming, offers a framework for states to
follow that includes these steps (Greene, et al., 1998):
1. Get Organized
In Boston, this was achieved through the five-year Hyams Foundation grant that convened and
developed the Girls’ Initiative (GI) in 2003. In the 2006, the Black Ministerial Alliance was asked
to be the convener of this work moving forward. As described in further detail in the Local Action
Plan section, when the GI was awarded the Youth Policy Initiative (YPI) grant from the Boston
Foundation, the network got more organized and focused on the particular advocacy issue of genderspecific programming.
2. Define mission, goals, and objectives
Again, in Boston, this was achieved through the Girls’ Initiative five-year process that preceded the
YPI grant. The goals and objectives of Phases I and II were determined and are stated in the previous
summary of the GI.
3. Gather information on scope and nature of problems girls face
This report presents a broad spectrum of data that the authors were able to collect and analyze, looking
at the general population statewide and in the targeted cities, as well as at girls within the targeted
agencies. However, since Massachusetts does not currently collect basic statistical juvenile justice
data (race, age, ethnicity, gender, age, geography, and offense type) consistently or systematically,
comprehensive analysis was limited and in many instances we offer data that can only compare
apples to oranges (CfJJ, 2008). 1
1 Citizens for Juvenile Justice (CfJJ), as part of a larger network also funded under the Youth Policy Initiative, has filed
Senate Bill 940 “An Act to Improve Juvenile Justice Data Collection.”
relationships
are
fundamental
relationships
are
f
14
the girl’s initiative the girl’s initiative the girl’s
initiative the girl’s initiative the girl’s the girl’s
girl’s initiative the girl’s initiative the girl’s init
4. Disseminate Findings
The release of this report is the first step in disseminating the findings of the Girls’ Initiative.
5. Lobby for Legislation
In late 2008 through early 2009, the Girls’ Initiative proposed and filed legislation to create “An
Act Establishing a Special Commission on Gender-Responsive Programming for System-involved
Girls,” currently registered as H3418. For full details on this legislation and the advocacy process that
has accompanied it, please see Section VI, the Community Action Plan for Massachusetts.
6. Plan for Implementation
The intent is that with the successful establishment of the commission (as proposed in H3418), a plan
for implementation will be developed in partnership with the relevant state agencies and community
organizations. In the meantime, the Girls’ Initiative continues to independently cultivate relationships
with those state agencies and explore interest in expanding components of their girls’ programming.
Please see Section VI, the Community Action Plan for Massachusetts, for a description of those
meetings.
7. Identify Barriers
The largest barrier this effort faces is insufficient funding. The Hyams Foundation grant will conclude
in October 2009 and the Boston Foundation’s YPI grant may conclude in November 2009. Other
states that have done this successfully have either had the work initiated and funded directly through
a government agency or a federal grant (usually the JJDPA Formula Grant) had been awarded to
a community-based effort to take the lead. In Massachusetts, the JJDPA Formula Grants are used
almost exclusively for the secure pre-arraignment detention of juveniles (called secure alternative
lockup programs), see Appendix 8 for further explanation. An extensive review into available girls
programming in Massachusetts by the Girls’ Coalition of Greater Boston found that nearly every
program they surveyed stated lack of funding, particularly larger multiyear grants, as a major concern
(Wheeler, 2005). As the convener, the Black Ministerial Alliance is actively seeking additional
funding to continue these efforts. In Section VI, the Community Action Plan for Massachusetts, there
is a list of national and local funders for work with girls.
8. Develop a Community Action Plan
This report offers the first pieces of a Community Action Plan, answering the questions: What are we
doing? Why? How will we do it? What is the timeline? It also presents a clear plan for the legislative
advocacy necessary to get the Commission established. Once (or if) the Commission is established,
it will then be charged with developing an action plan for moving the Commonwealth’s agencies
towards gender-specific programming.
fundamental relationships are fundamental relat
15
II. Female Adolescent Development,
Risk Indicators and Protective Factors
Female Adolescent Development
When evaluating what works for at-risk and system-involved girls, it is important to understand
specific risk indicators and protective factors for girls as well as what is known about female
adolescent development.
“Adolescence is a difficult passage for many girls, even those who have a strong
safety net of support at home and in school…During the teen years, girls begin to
separate from their families, assert their own identity, identify with their peers, redefine their relationships with nurturing adults, explore their sexuality, develop their
own moral and ethical sense, and prepare for the responsibilities and challenges
of adulthood. It’s seldom a smooth or easy metamorphosis.” (Greene et al., 1998).
Carol Gilligan’s groundbreaking work, In a Difference Voice (1982), introduced a whole new way of thinking
about girls and kicked off a decade of research into girls’ adolescent development. Among her many findings, she
identified the following as distinct from boys:
✜✜ Relationships are fundamental to girls’ lives; they relate to the world through the context of relationships and
gain their sense of connection that way.
✜✜ Girls generally relate and work better one-on-one than in larger groups
✜✜ Females in general tend to internalize failure and externalize success.
✜✜ Girls often use external sources to build their self-esteem
safety trust love respect validation safety trust l
16
Patton and Morgan juxtapose those tendencies in girls
with how boys often form their identity in relation to the
greater world and how they fit into that structure (2002,
p. 12). They suggest that while boys tend to do well in a
program with compartmentalized and hierarchal structure
with clear rules, many girls tend to do better in a structure based on one-on-one relationships that allows time
to talk and process issues as they arise. The authors claim
that a gender-specific program model can be strength
based and non-punitive, as well as relationship-based
and non-hierarchical and still be accountable (p. 40).
Additionally, a 1998 report commissioned by OJJDP
stresses that staff must understand female adolescent development in order for them to respond appropriately and
constructively (Green et al., 1998). Girls are more likely
to question rules and to ask for explanations to their questions, not necessarily with the intention of being rebellious and insubordinate but rather because of their need
for verbal engagement (Acoca, 1998). Often, girls are
disciplined for such behavior as “talking back.” When
staff has a better understanding of a girl’s need to process
and talk through issues, better outcomes are more likely.
In Gilligan’s later book, Meeting at the Crossroads
(1992), she claims that girls experience a dramatic
change in self-perception when they reach adolescence,
that around age 13, girls “hit the wall.” They often loose
their voice and the sense of who they are and who they
want to be, their self-esteem and inner strength diminishes, essentially they give up self to meet social expectations and manage peer pressure and relationships
(1992). The Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development found that self-confidence also declines with age
for girls, but not for boys (Patton & Morgan, 2002).
in trouble more quietly. When they are angry, frightened,
neglected or unloved they are more likely to strike inward,
exhibiting such risk indicators as eating disorders, depression, dating/sexual abuse, substance abuse, mutilation,
starvation (Greene et al., 1998). Boys who engage in risky
behaviors are often externally aggressive, committing acts
of violence against other persons or property, thus often
receiving immediate attention from supervising adults.
Because delinquent girls tend to internalize disorders and
aim their frustration and violence inward, their disorders
often going untreated and overlooked (Veysey, 2003). Although boys more often act outward posing threats to society, girls threaten their own well-being, a condition now
commonly referred to as “acting in.” Program staff need
to understand the connection between girls’ anger and
acting out or acting in (i.e., self-destructive) behaviors,
their reluctance to trust others, and their victimization.
In the state of Florida’s ongoing reporting on the rationale
and efficacy of their intention to provide gender-specific
services for delinquent girls, they acknowledge that the
juvenile justice system has historically been directed at
serving males, but that delinquency programs are more
effective when they are gender specific, for females and
males (Florida Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability, 2005a). Boys and girls develop
differently, take different paths to delinquency and will
benefit from gender-specific programming approaches.
Almost all the research points to the importance of relationships for girls; and Florida’s report states, “While
boys’ emotional development during adolescence focuses on increasing independence, research shows that girls’
development occurs through relationship and increasing connection with others” (OPPAGA, 2005a, pp. 1-2).
For both boys and girls, “adolescence is an intense period of
physical, emotional, intellectual and social development”
(Coalition for Juvenile Justice, 2006). It is a period marked
by key changes and life events that are often stressful and
require the acquisition of new social roles and identities
(Call and Mortimer, 2001, p. 8). During adolescence, brain
maturation is “dramatic and crucial.” Parts of the brain
that govern reasoning, advanced thought, impulse control, emotions, problem-solving, memory, concentration,
motivation, and mental associations connecting actions
to pleasure are still developing and shifting (Coalition for
Juvenile Justice, 2006). These changes affect how girls
Many researchers have drawn the conclusion that girls get think, feel and act. Some argue that this part of the brain
However, it is critical to note this loss of voice may
be experienced very differently based on race and cultural background (Patton & Morgan, 2002; American
Association of University Women, 2001). An African
American girl’s voice may actually become louder as
a response to race, class, and gender oppression, even
though internally she is struggling with a sense of herself (Patton & Morgan, 2002, p. 12). Other girls may
become quiet in school because they perceive academic
success as connected to their silence (Patton & Morgan).
love respect validation safety trust love respect v
17
does not fully develop until mid twenties (Haney, 2006).
During this time of great change,
girls have specific developmental
needs. The Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention lists the
following as what girls need for healthy
development (Greene et al., 1998):
 Need for physical safety and healthy
physical development.
 Need for trust, love, respect,
validation from caring adults to foster
healthy emotional development and
form positive relationships.
 Need for positive female role models
to develop healthy identity as a woman.
 Need for safety to explore sexuality
at own pace for healthy sexual
development.
 Need to belong, to feel competent
and worthy.
Risk and Protective Factors
mon among girls (Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, 2007; Ford et. al., 2007). In 1996
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
found that girls are three times as likely to have been
sexually abused as boys and that female delinquents
are more likely to have a history of sex abuse than
girls in the general population (Greene et al., 1998).
A striking 40% of girls in the juvenile justice system
have been raped (NCCD, 2007). The majority of prostitutes were sexually abused at a young age, and the
average age for entering into prostitution is 13 (Patton
& Morgan, 2002). According to the U.S. Department
of Justice, 73% of girls in the juvenile justice system
have been abused (Patton & Morgan, 2002). Of grave
concern is that most abuse is perpetrated by someone
the girl perceives as a trusting adult such as a family
member or close family friend (Greene, et al., 1998).
Sexual abuse often leads to many of the other risk indicators: low self-esteem, inability to trust, academic
failure, eating disorders, teen pregnancy, and other
serious concerns. A 2000 study found that girls who
have been abused and neglected were nearly twice
as likely to be arrested as other girls (Veysey, 2003).
✜✜ Mental Health: Research shows that the majority
of youth in the juvenile justice system have at least
one mental health diagnosis, and that girls experience
a higher rate of disorders when compared to males
(Skowyra and Cocozza, 2007; Veysey, 2003). According to the Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, nationally girls are 50% more likely to suffer
from depression than boys (1995). A 2002 study of
youth in detention found that 74% of girls suffered
from an active mental disorder, compared to 66% of
boys, and that nearly twice as many girls than boys
had two or more mental disorders (Veysey, 2003).
Although individual risk factors seldom occur in isolation and are more typically interconnected, it is important ✜✜ Substance Abuse: Research has shown that adoto identify them individually in order to gain a better unlescent females display “unique vulnerabilities that
derstanding of them. In addition to overall societal issues
can lead to substance use” and that drug abuse has a
such as poverty, racism and sexism that affect girls, the fol“more profound impact on teen girls, both physically
lowing risk indicators that are of special concern to girls:
and psychologically” (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2006). These unique vulnerabilities include
✜✜ History of violence victimization (sexual,
depression, anxiety, excessive concerns about weight
physical and emotional abuse): Many scholars have
and appearance, and more acute susceptibility to peer
identified sexual, physical and emotional victimization
pressure when it comes to drinking (2006). Additionas risk factors for girls to enter the juvenile and crimially, substance abuse exacerbates the other problems
nal justice systems (Acoca, 1999). While violence
that might put a girl at risk of delinquency (Greene et.
victimization is a risk factor for both girls and boys
al., 1998). Designing early interventions is especially
(Resnick, Ireland & Borowksy, 2004), many sources
critical since evidence suggests girls move from exshow that sexual abuse victimization is more comperimentation with substances into problematic use
18
and addiction more quickly than boys (Miller, 2003).
✜✜ Physical Health and Development: Girls in
the juvenile justice system also suffer from a myriad of physical risks, including body image disorders
and disordered eating (overeating, anorexia, bulimia), unprotected sex, and generally limited health
care. Girls often arrive to a center with numerous
untreated health conditions (Pam/Morgan, 2002). A
survey of girls in the juvenile just ice system found
that 32% had current or past sexually transmitted
diseases, 32% had chronic health problems, and that
girls were 11 times more likely to die while incarcerated (NCCD, 2007). Additionally, the physical changes and challenges that come with puberty present a
risky time for girls. “Puberty—especially early puberty—increases the risk for substance abuse among
girls more than among boys” (CASA, 2003, p. 1).
✜✜ Dysfunctional Family Systems: One study of
juvenile justice system-involved girls showed that
over 95% of the girls were assessed as lacking a stable
home environment (Acoca, 1998). Studies show that
high levels of conflict and stress as well as low levels
of affection, support and communication in the home
can lead to a range of negative adolescent outcomes
and that parenting quality and negative emotion from
family affects girls more than boys (Call and Mortimer, 2001, p. 20; Office of National Drug Control Policy,
2006). However, other reports have found that family-related risk factors are less influential in adolescence than in earlier childhood (Office of the Surgeon
General, 2001). Nevertheless, family risks should
be taken into consideration given that dysfunctional
family systems can overwhelm girls’ capacities for
coping and self-regulation (Call and Mortimer, 2001).
✜✜ Early Sexual Experimentation and Teen ✜✜ Sexualization: Sexualization occurs when one
or more of the following conditions is present: 1)
Pregnancy: Female juvenile offenders engage
a person’s value comes only from her sexual apin sexual activity at an earlier age than non-offendpeal or behavior to the exclusion of other characterers, putting them at higher risk of sexually transistics, 2) a person is held to a standard that equates
mitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy. Teen
physical attractiveness (narrowly defined) with bemothers are more likely to dropout of high school
ing sexy, 3) a person is sexually objectified – that is,
and remain single for most of their young adult
made into a thing for others’ sexual use, rather than
years while earning wages significantly below
seen as a person with the capacity for independent
the federal poverty level (Greene et. al., 1998).
action and decision making, and/or 4) sexuality is
inappropriately imposed upon a person (American
✜✜ Poor Academic Performance: For both boys
Psychological Association, 2007. There is ample
and girls, one of the most significant risk factors reevidence of the sexualization of women in numerlating to early onset of delinquency is poor academic
ous media forms such as television, music videos,
performance, which can include learning problems,
music lyrics, movies, magazines, sports media,
having repeated a grade, high absenteeism, and low
video games, the Internet and advertising. Sexualgrade point averages (Resnick, Ireland and Borowksy,
ization has negative effects in a variety of domains,
2004; Greene et. al., 1998). These youth have often
including cognitive functioning, physical and menbeen bounced around from school to school, exacertal health, sexuality and attitudes and beliefs (2007).
bating their difficulties in connecting with and thriving in the school environment. Because of their poor
academic performance, many girls may have devel- ✜✜ Media: As mentioned above, the media supplies a
flood of images that greatly influence a girl’s idenoped a “negative attitude about learning and lack
tify and sense of self. At a young age children are
self-confidence about their own ability to master acaalready bombarded with ads promoting sexualized
demic skills” (Greene et al., 1998). The NCCD 1998
stereotypes and gender identity prototypes: there are
California study discovered that many girls embraced
40,000 Disney Princess items alone on the market
dropping out as an escape because they experienced
today (Lin, 2008 as cited in Campaign for a Comschool as a battleground of sexual harassment, racism,
mercial Free Childhood). The media’s portrayal of
peer rivalries, with little or no attention from adult
females—sexualized and objectified—not only afstaff (Acoca, 1999). Acoca states, “Failing in school
fects how girls perceive themselves, but also how
was almost as universal an experience as victimizaboys perceive them. And studies have now found
tion in the lives of the girls interviewed” (1999, p.6).
19
that girls’ acceptance of these media images is neg- In addition to the three protective factors described above,
atively related to feelings about the self, leading to OJJDP points to the following additional protective facdecreased self esteem (Patton & Morgan, 2002). tors that can help girls change their negative behavior:
While the risk factors above affect many young fe- ✜✜ Interpersonal relations: Relationships are
male offenders, certain subgroups of girls may have
of particular importance to girls. Positive readditional challenges. Girls of color, low income girls,
lationships with both friends and adults can be
girls who are pregnant and/or parenting, female gang
strong protective factors (Greene et al., 1998).
members, girls who feel awkward and/or alienated
due to early onset of puberty, and lesbian, transgen- ✜✜ Positive gender identification: The diminishder and bisexual girls face additional challenges and
ing self-confidence and hope that occurs to girls durrisks that must be taken into consideration when deing adolescence can be addressed through positive
veloping strategies to help them (Greene et al., 1998).
gender identity development (Greene et al., 1998).
Protective Factors
✜✜ Individualism: Having a strong sense of self helps
girls set appropriate boundaries, make good decisions,
and form healthy relationships (Greene et al., 1998).
Despite exposure to risk factors, many resilient
girls are able to avoid delinquency and other vio- ✜✜ Delay of sexual experimentation and positive sexual development: Delaying sexual activlence and dangerous behaviors. According to OJJDP,
ity offers girls a protective factor against unwanted
these girls tend to have the following characteristics:
pregnancy and other risks that could lead to delinquency (Greene et al., 1998).
✜✜ They have a close relationship with
at least one caring, trusted adult.
✜✜ Academic success/progress: Academic success
.
is one of the strongest protective factors for both girls
✜✜ Their teachers and parents express
and boys (Resnick, Ireland, and Borowsky, 2004;
high expectations for them, helping
OJJDP, 1998).
them look positively toward the future.
✜✜ They are given opportunities to meet and
be influenced by positive role models
and mentors through their neighborhood
and community life. (Greene et al., 1998)
.
✜✜ Positive self-esteem: Girls’ self-esteem is particularly vulnerable at adolescence and tends to decrease
during early adolescence (Call and Mortimer, 2001,
8). While some research has been unable to link
increases in self-esteem to decreases in criminality
(Crime and Justice Institute, 2004), other research has
shown that enhanced self-esteem can mitigate against
ocial skills community support social skills com
lf esteem cultural connection self esteem cultu
delay sex academic success delay sex academic s
friends positive gender identity sense of self fr
ring adults high expectations caring adults high
20
behavioral risks in girls such as delinquency, depression, suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, teen
pregnancy, and school failure (Greene et al., 1998).
✜✜ Positive racial/ethnic self-esteem: for girls
from different backgrounds, personal acceptance,
cultural identity and pride, and feeling a connection
to cultural group can be important protective factors (Robinson & Ward, 1991). See the best practices section on program content for more on this.
✜✜ Pro-social skills and competence: As girls
master new skills and increase their competencies (i.e.
self defense training) they gain a better sense of their
worth and their strengths which often leads them to
adopt more pro-social behaviors (Greene et al., 1998).
✜✜ Physical development: Girls who enter puberty
close to the time of their immediate peer group are
more likely to successfully master this physical, emotional, psychological, and social transition (Greene et
al., 1998).
✜✜ Family-School-Community Support: Protective factors can be found in the family, school
and community (as listed above). By working together, families, schools, and communities can pro-
vide a strong network of support for girls (Greene
et al., 1998). These different spheres of a girl’s
life should ideally work together toward common
goals, with shared values, mutual respect, offering
girls a strong network of support and consistency.
◊School Connectedness: At least one study
has shown that school connectedness is a
significant protective factor for girls only
(Resnick, Ireland & Borowksy, 2004).
◊Positive family environment: Families can
foster positive development in girls by “providing a nurturing home environment, setting clear
limits, teaching cultural identity, communicating expectations, and monitoring the whereabouts of their children” (Greene et al., 1998).
Positive family experiences such as connectedness, balanced parental expectations about
school, ability to discuss problems with parents, and frequently sharing activities with parents has shown significant protective effects for
girls (Resnick, Ireland and Borowksy, 2004).
◊Religiosity: At least one study has shown that religiosity (the valuing of religious observance and
personal prayer) has shown significant protective
effects against violence for girls (Resnick, Ireland
& Borowksy, 2004). Other activities that build a
sense of community and belonging can also have
a positive impact and help prevent delinquency.
high expectations caring adults high expectation
cultural connection self esteem cultural conne
caring adults high expectations caring adults hi
mmunity support social skills community support
ural connection self esteem cultural connection
success delay sex academic success delay sex a
riends positive gender identity sense of self fri
expectations caring adults high expectations ca
21
Girls’ Pathways to
Delinquency
to delinquency between the ages of 12 and 14. Consider
these findings:
✜✜ The 1998 NCCD California study found the median
age for becoming victims of sexual assault was 13;
the median age they were first shot or stabbed was 14;
they were most likely to become sexually active and
begin using drugs and alcohol at 13; they had their
History of Victimization
first arrest at ages 13-14 (Acoca, 1999).
✜✜ The 2006 NCCD Florida study concurred, finding
There is a growing consensus among researchers that
that 40% of girls reported committing their first ofboys and girls have different pathways to delinquency.
fense before age 13.
Veysey proposes that there are, “distinct gender-specific
✜✜ In 2007 the NCCD reported that 42% of girls in the
developmental pathways that influence the nature of their
juvenile justice system are 15 and younger compared
victimization experiences, involvement in illegal activiwith 31% of boys.
ties, and entry into the juvenile justice system” (2003,
p.3). Scholars in this field have nearly universally identified physical, sexual, and emotional victimization as the
first step on a girl’s pathway toward delinquency (Acoca, Race and Ethnicity
1999). The 1998 NCCD study of girls in the California
juvenile justice system found that 92% of the juvenile “The disparate treatment of minorities appears to be an
female offenders interviewed reported that they had been important factor in the processing of girls’ cases,” (Acosubjected to some form of emotional, physical, and/or ca, 1999, p. 8). Racial disparities exist for both boys and
sexual abuse (Acoca and Dedel, 1998). There are addi- girls in the juvenile justice system. For example, in Mastional statistics demonstrating this issue in the Risk Indi- sachusetts, approximately one quarter of all youth are
cators section above.
youth of color, but they make up over 60% of the youth
sent to secure facilities after being arraigned in Juvenile
Court 1 (Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Advisory ComOffense Types
mittee, 2008, p. 16). Addressing racial disparities is a
Girls are most often arrested for non-violent crimes and core requirement for states to receive federal Formula
status offenses, including truancy, curfew violations, pro- Grant funding from the Office of Juvenile Justice and
bation violations, disorderly conduct, runaways, or pros- Delinquency Prevention.
titution. Of girls reporting person offenses, most were for
assault, and in most cases that assault had occurred in
1 In 2006, minorities made up 24% of the youth population in
mutual combat situations with parents (Acoca, 1999).
Young Age
Girls seem to be a highest risk for going down the path
Massachusetts; 53% of the youth sent to alternative lockup programs (pre-arraignment detention) were minority in 2005; 61% of
the youth sent to secure detention were minority in 2007; and 62%
of the youth committed to the Department of Youth Services (DYS)
were minority in 2007.
pathways to delinquincy pathways to delinquincy p
22
III. Promising Practices
Research has shown that gender-specific programming has been beneficial to girls in many areas, including
reducing recidivism (OPPAGA, 2005a). Although different states and researchers have put forward varying
ways of grouping the best practices of gender-specific programming and the tenants for implementing them,
quite similar components are identified across the board. All of the recommendations speak to program
design focused on relationships, health and safety, and an organizational structure that reflects the values of
gender-specific programming in its policies, staff training and hiring protocols, assessment tools, evaluation
measurements, and data collection. This section of the report will organize the numerous promising practices
into two overarching categories:
1.Program Design and Content
✜✜ Relationships
✜✜ Safety and Environment
✜✜ Health and Mental Health
✜✜ Education and Economic Opportunity
✜✜ Civic Engagement
2.Administration and Management
✜✜ Organizational Policies and Values
✜✜ Staffing: Hiring, Training, Professional Development, and Diversity
✜✜ Data, Evaluation and Assessment
support them. In Florida’s assessment, effective genderspecific programs must involve girls in program design
Category 1 and evaluation, asserting that, “When adults listen to and
implement girls’ ideas, it can motivate girls to be more
Program Design and Content
involved in the program and improve their behavior and
compliance” (OPPAGA, 2005a, p. 11). Oregon’s guideThis section will review five generalized content topics lines also stress actively involving girls, and go on further
and more specific sub-topics for effective gender-spe- to recommend that the design of programs in any of the
cific programming. Relying on the Youth Development content areas should include an understanding of girls’
Framework offered by the Commonwealth’s Executive development and socialization (Patton & Morgan, 2002,
Office of Health and Human Services (see Appendix 9), p. 18).
gender-specific services can be organized into the following parallel of their five domains of positive youth devel- Additionally, program design should always incorporate
opment: Relationships, Safety and Environment, Health a holistic approach to programming: “A holistic approach
and Mental Health, Education and Economic Opportu- to the individual girl addresses the whole girl within the
nity, and Civic Engagement.
social context of her life, her relationships, the system
she encounters, and the society in which she lives” (PatA general principle of positive youth development, and ton & Morgan, 2002, p. 36). Likewise in their youth dea specific recommendation under all published gender- velopment writings, experts Karen Pittman and Marlene
specific programming is to involve the girls in the design Wright claim that youth development must be attached
and development of programs and spaces intended to to young people themselves, not to the institutions that
23
espect trust consistency respect trust consistenc
serve them. This literature goes further to say that youth
development is an ongoing process impacted by all that
youth are engaged in and even in the absence of formal
programs and family structure, all youth are seeking to
meet their basic needs and build their competencies (Pittman & Wright, 1991, p. ii). This underscores that we
must think about the whole child and how to interact with
the various people (and systems) affecting her in order to
achieve positive youth development outcomes.
Each of the 5 program content areas will be organized as
follows:
✜✜ A general overarching “promising practice”
✜✜ Accompanying “guiding principles”
✜✜ A “deeper look” into the research and implementation guidance of that promising practice
✜✜ A list of innovate ideas for employing that promising practice generated through the Boston workshops as well as workshops offered in other states.
a. Relationships
Promising Practice:
Promote Positive Relationships
…between girls
…between girls and staff
…between girls and their families
Guiding Principles 1:
Respect
Trust
Consistency
1 These principles were generated by participants at the Girls’ Initiative
Meeting on 9/9/08 at the Reggie Lewis Center in Boston, MA (from here on
referred to as Boston 9/9/08 meeting).
t trust consistency respect trust consistency resp
respect trust consistency respect trust consisten
24
cy respect trust consistency respect trust consist
A Deeper Look:
The importance of relationships is a core tenant of successful gender-responsive programming and the role of
relationships will be woven throughout the other best
practices content areas discussed in this report. In fact,
female adolescent development research identifies the
importance of relationships as one of the central distinguishing characteristics that drive girls’ behavior. Carol
Gilligan, who is perhaps the most prominent voice and
author on female development, states “attachment, interdependence, and connectedness to a relationship are critical issues that form the foundation of female identity”
(Gilligan, 1982). Teaching girls how to develop healthy
relationships and maintain healthy boundaries is vital to
their success.
Between girls:
As parents, friends or providers we readily acknowledge
the power and often negative impact of peers on young
people’s behavior. Patton and Morgan list a number of
common negative behaviors that girls can inflict upon
each other. Labeled “relational aggression,” these behaviors include: rolling eyes, verbal put downs, spreading rumors or threatening to do so, ignoring someone,
telling others to ignore someone and so on (2002, p. 32).
Girls must learn how to be respectful of each other, even
when they disagree, as “respect” is something all youth
will tell you they want and expect from both adults and
their peers. Additionally, there are vast potential benefits
that can come from positive peer influence. Therefore, in
designing programs, it is important to make time for girls
to discuss (with staff guidance) issues that are important
to them, in a setting where they feel safe from ridicule or
confidentiality violation.
program and held in a safe environment that is far enough
away from boys’ visual or hearing range.
Between girls and staff
Since most girls that end up in the system have experienced some type of abuse or neglect (Greene et al., 1998;
Acoca, 1999; and OPPAGA, 2005b), programs should
include the opportunity for girls to develop a positive relationship with adult staff members. It is critical to the
girl’s success in the program that she feels connected to
staff. The dynamics of this staff-girl relationship can become the model for the girl to base her future relationships
on. Staff must recognize the importance and power they
hold in this capacity. Staff should nurture a relationship
based on trust, which can be gained through consistency
and confidentiality, and the staff’s ability to truly listen
and hear the girl. Patton and Morgan recommend, “when
working with young women it is important to understand
and respect their communication style and to know that
part of their purpose in communicating is to build trust
and relationships” (2002, p. 42). As identified by these
authors, as well as Boston area agency leaders, program
providers need to “take time for relationships” with the
girls.
Between girls and their families
Building a relationship with the family and encouraging
the mother-daughter bond is important to long-term success for girls. When girls come from abusive homes or
romantic relationships, the inclination of providers may
be to sever those negative relationships. However, this
separation can lead to an unhealthy competition between
the community (family or boyfriend) and the provider
agency (staff). Given that nearly 100% of girls will return to their communities when their treatment is complete, providers should try to support and improve those
These group discussions are best in single-sex settings relationships while the girl is still system involved. The
(including staff), in order to remove the pressure for girls Oregon guidelines affirm that “when possible, we need to
to impress the boys, hide their weaknesses, or make other empower girls and their mothers by helping them build
girls look bad so they look better. If the program is coed, healthy relationships instead of protecting the girl from
girls-only discussion time should be structured into the her mother” (2002, p. 45).
pect trust consistency respect trust consistency
ncy respect trust consistency respect trust consis
25
Protection Expression Inspiration Motivation Comfo
Programs should seek to strengthen families through
home visits, discussion groups for parents (in multiple
languages), and through regular contact with the mother
or other primary caregiver (Greene et al., p. 54). Tina
Chery of Boston’s Louis D. Brown Peace Institute suggests that effective family engagement must give the
parents roadmaps and time lines with built in check-ins;
Chery also notes the importance of actually listening to
the family1 . Cultural competency--the provider’s knowledge of and sensitivity to the family’s culture and cultural
influences--is also important to a successful relationship
with the family.
flection, coupled with the positive relationship modeling
she is experiencing in the program, the girl may come
to realize the abusive aspects of her relationships on her
own (Patton & Morgan, 2002). As the girl comes to this
realization, staff should be prepared to help her process
her emotions and create a plan for change when she returns to her community.
Using the trusting relationship they have established with
the girl, staff should encourage the girl to discuss and reflect on the struggles in her relationships with her family
members or boyfriend. Through this discussion and re1 Girls’ Initiative Family Engagement Workshop on 3/24/09 at
Elderly Services of Boston.
Innovative Ideas:
✜✜ Allow the girls to select a staff
member to be their mentor (OPPAGA, 2005a, p. 7).
✜✜ Develop and sign (both sides)
confidentiality contracts (between
girls, between girls and staff)
(OPPAGA, 2005a, p. 7).
✜✜ Encourage staff to ‘catch girls
doing something right’ (Boston
9/9/08 Meeting).
b. Safety and Environment
Promising Practice:
Create a safe and supporting environment, by providing
…physical safety from self and others
…emotional safety
…supportive surroundings
Guiding Principles:
Protection
Expression
Inspiration
Motivation
Comfort
26
ort Protection Expression Inspiration Motivation Com
so there is often time for staff to verbally intervene if they
are properly trained” (OPPAGA, 2005a, 8-9). Staff interventions around verbal conflicts or non-compliance
A Deeper Look:
All programs should provide girls a space that is safe should de-escalate the situation, and physical restraint
from physical, sexual, and emotional violence, abuse, should only be used when absolutely necessary.
and harassment of any kind.
Self-defense training is a great way to teach girls how to
recognize and respond to violence, as well as make them
Physical safety
in to survivors rather than victims (Greene et al., 1998, p.
When assessing the physical safety of a program, it is
49). While it is a great opportunity for girls to learn how
important to consider the external location (what street,
to physically defend themselves, it is also about learning
what neighborhood), the modes of travel to and from the
how to be aware of one’s surroundings and how to say
location, as well as the internal location of the program.
no authoritatively. Like any skills training, self-defense
Program implementers should ensure the safety of the
training can also help girls discover their strengths and
space where the program may be held, the other spaces
adopt pro-social skills.
that must be traversed within the building to get there,
and the structure and set-up of the rooms. Maintaining
bright and tamper-proof lighting, avoiding secluded stair- Emotional Safety
wells, and ensuring handicap accessibility all contribute Providing girls with an emotionally safe space is just as
to physical safety. Additionally, awareness of varying important as protecting girls’ physical safety. Girls comgang affiliations is critical to ensure that staff can manage ing from abusive and/or neglectful environments or who
or avoid having conflicting gang members in same space, have been victimized in other ways may be accustomed to
feeling extremely unsafe and powerless. Emotional saferoom, or discussion sessions.
ty is important for programming to be effective. A sense
Girls must feel physically safe around other girls, staff, of emotional safety will come mostly from the developand themselves. Even without physically harming a girl, ment of positive relationships between the girls and the
other girls and staff may intentionally or inadvertently staff. Staff should be trained to listen closely to what the
violate a girl’s need for her own physical space. Staff girls say and how they say it. It is also important to listen
should watch for signs of discomfort or increasing ten- for what girls do not say. Their omissions can be just as
sion in girls. When there is concern that a girl may harm significant as the information they do share” (Greene et
herself, staff must maintain acute awareness about the al., p. 47).
girl’s access to tools and other instruments that could be
used to inflict injuries. “A program’s environment must Consistent protocols for responding to relational aggresprotect girls from self-destructive behaviors such as mu- sion (put downs, etc.) are critical for increasing girls’
tilation, suicide attempts, eating disorders, or drug and al- feelings of emotional safety. If a girl has been sexually
cohol abuse,” (Patton & Morgan, 2002, p. 32). Protocols abused, it is important that male staff be especially aware
for responding to physical incidents should be in place, and sensitive to what might trigger a post-traumatic stress
reviewed with all participants, and implemented in a con- reaction. Defining boundaries and sticking to them helps
sistent and calm manner as to not further traumatize the girls acclimate to new environments. These boundaries
can be spatial—don’t enter the room without knocking
girls or further escalate the conflict.
first, no touching, etc. or verbal—the girl is not ready to
Florida’s reports on gender specific programming stress talk about X topic yet and that is okay and allowed. Patton
that physical safety be taken seriously and that manage- and Morgan suggest, “Staff members should assess their
ment contribute to creating an environment where bound- body language when interacting with a girl, and consider
aries are clear and behavior is consistently addressed. how their own preoccupations, irritations, frustrations, or
The report points out that in successful programs, staff urgency impact a girl’s sense of emotional safety” (2002,
identified that, “girls usually talk angrily before they fight p. 33).
27
th empowerment self-esteem health empowerment
Supportive Surroundings
Not only should programs provide settings that are physically and emotionally safe, but they should also provide
surroundings that value females, are nurturing, and culturally and gender sensitive. Little things such as scented
lotion in the bathroom and other self-care amenities can
go a long way in making girls feel comfortable and even
valued. For obvious reasons, peeling paint, white walls,
dirty floors and the like may make girls feel uncomfortable, not valued, even disrespected--which can thwart
other programmatic efforts. Likewise, in some juvenile
facilities across the country, the bathrooms are equipped
primarily with urinals, clearly not a gender-responsive
environment for a girl.
Decorations of space should feature work by girls themselves (essays, drawings, photographs, quilts) and by
notable female role models. In Oregon’s section on surroundings, Patton and Morgan (2002, p. 34) make some
very practical and doable suggestions:
✜✜ Have books (or books on tape) about strong females
available for use.
✜✜ Hang posters or pictures of inspirational and strong
women in history.
✜✜ Hold events that celebrate women of different cultures (during Women’s History Month or Black or
Latino History Months).
✜✜ Create a video library stocked with films and shows
that depict women protagonists as leaders, educators,
and scientists instead of as sex symbols or victims.
✜✜ Invite inspirational women from the community to
come in as guest speakers for the girls.
On the substantive side, gender responsive programs
should develop female-centered curricula. Helpful sug-
28
gestions include education that focuses on women’s history and culture and using materials that speak to the
girls’ heritage and life experiences (Greene et al., 1998,
p. 48). In programs that serve pregnant or parenting girls,
offering healthy food, toys and child care for meetings, as
well as nutrition, prenatal and parenting workshops allow
girls to feel comfortable, supported and even nurtured
themselves–dynamics that they can then ideally model
with their own children.
Innovative Ideas:
✜✜ Hold healing or peace circles (Roca,
Boston 9/9/08 Meeting).
✜✜ In group sessions, use word symbols
like “oops” when you realize you said
something hurtful, “ouch” when someone’s comments hurt you, or snap your
fingers when you really agree with
what someone else says (Sisters Behind
Walls, Boston 9/9/08 Meeting).
✜✜ Post inspirational quotes by women
on the walls or on notice boards and
have the girls assist in space design and
decoration (Patton & Morgan, 2002).
✜✜ Ask the girls to develop “house rules”
and then staff can modify and approve
them (Boston 9/9/08 Meeting).
t self-esteem health empowerment self-esteem h
c. Health and Mental Health
Promising Practice:
Promote and Provide Access to Physical and Mental Health, through:
…physical and nutritional health
…sexual health and hygiene
…mental health and trauma response
Guiding Principles:
Self-esteem
Empowerment
Clinical Expertise
Sexuality
De-stigmatize
Demystify
Dental care and eye care are aspects of physical wellComprehensive programs that serve girls should either ness that are often overlooked but are crucial to a girl’s
provide, or refer out for, health services that encompass overall health. We know that good physical health leads
nutrition, physical activity, female sexual and hygiene to improved self-esteem, increased stamina, strengthened
immune system and overall more balanced emotional
education, and mental health and trauma services.
health. Good physical health requires programs to offer
recreational activities, which are not always as readily
Physical and Nutritional Health
available for girls as they are for boys. All the programs
Research has consistently found that girls entering the ju- that have been reviewed have stressed providing an array
venile justice system have four times as many health is- of physical activities to girls, often ones that are less comsues as boys. And because of the prevalence of sexual vic- petitive, but still structured in nature, involving positive
timization, abuse and drug use, they are at an even higher risk-taking, teamwork and goal-setting.
risk for serious diseases (OPPAGA, 2005a, p. 9). Additionally, since many of the girls who end up in the justice A history of abuse can also lead to concerning physical
system are runaways, it is likely that their health needs conditions. Symptoms such as an outbreak of herpes, irrihave been neglected. It is essential to utilize some kind of table bowel syndrome, or stomach cramps may be physicomprehensive health screening, which will be discussed cal responses to stress or crisis (Reed, 1994). Additionfurther in the “Intake and Assessment” section.
A Deeper Look:
29
health empowerment self-esteem health empower
ally, different diseases have different affects on varying
groups: for example, diabetes appears with greater frequency among African-Americans (Acoca, 1998). Gender-responsiveness can be manifested in the approach to
treatment. For example, research has shown that while
men do better in coed recovery programs, women do better in same gender treatment; thus providing access to
such single gender programming is ensuring equal treatment (Patton & Morgan, 2002, p. 55).
ences radical physical and chemical (hormonal) changes
every fourth week. For some girls, “PMS is characterized by anxiety, irritability and mood swings” (Women’s
Health Information, 2009). Both the girls and the staff
should be taught about the physical and emotional challenges experienced during monthly menstruation. Small
efforts such as providing Motrin and adequate feminine
products should be encouraged towards creating a supportive environment for girls. Staff may have to help
the girls overcome cultural myths around menstruation,
Good nutrition is essential to physical and mental well- such as “during menstruation a female can ‘take’ a man’s
ness for girls. Coping with societal pressures about the power and therefore men should stay away from them,”
female image and body types, girls may under-eat to or more simply that is it “dirty,” “nasty” and generally
achieve a desired weight or eat unrestrictedly as a reac- something to be ashamed of (Delaney, 1988, p. 161).
tion to stress or as a rebellious act. The rising rates of type
2 diabetes, especially among minorities, is an indicator Florida’s review of their girls’ programs uncovered that
of the overeating and poor nutrition (CDC, 2009). Girls some had not moved away from the boy-based standard
need to learn and practice healthy diet habits. A gender- of a 2-minute shower. Simple changes, such as allowing
specific approach would take into consideration the fact longer showers to respond to the hygiene needs of girls,
that girls don’t actually need as many carbohydrates as can be made quickly while evaluating the greater changes
boys as a proportion of their total caloric intake (Boyce, needed to make programming more gender-specific and
2000, p. 25). As in other program areas, it is important to effective.
not only offer more nutritional choices to girls, but to also
educate them about the effects, physical and mental, that Being culturally sensitive goes hand-in-hand with gender sensitivity. For example when it comes to grooming
different foods can have.
products, the needs of African American girls differ from
the needs of white girls. It makes sense to provide wideSexual Health and Hygiene
Being gender-responsive and having an understanding of toothed combs in addition to brushes, and shampoos and
female adolescent development is essential in program- conditioners that do not easily dry out the hair. Additionming around female sexual health and hygiene. It is critical ally, American-based hygiene habits like the use of dethat gynecological services be included in general health odorant may have to be explained to girls from other culservices for girls. Education around sexuality, the repro- tures where body odor is standard in order to reduce the
ductive system, contraception and sexually transmitted possibility of peer ridicule.
diseases should be part of any core curriculum. “Effective programs teach girls to understand what is happening Mental Health and Trauma
to their bodies during puberty as a positive, normal aspect All girls are at risk for low self-esteem, distorted notions
of becoming a woman” (Greene et al., 1998, p. 48). The of body image and immense societal pressures about how
report further notes that girls who may mature earlier (or girls should look and act. For girls entering the juvenile
later) than their peers may suffer from peer rejection and justice system with a history of sexual abuse and victimridicule, thus placing them at further risk.
ization, there are even more risks, including risk of serious mental disorders and post-traumatic stress syndrome.
Unlike any male physical condition, a girl’s body experi- In Florida, reports showed that “abuse and victimization
werment self-esteem health empowerment self-e
empowerment self-esteem health empowerment se
30
rment self-esteem health empowerment self-este
of girls tends to lead to low self-esteem and anger directed
inward, resulting in substance abuse, post-traumatic stress
disorder, anxiety, depression, and self-mutilating and suicidal behavior” (OPPAGA, 2005a, p. 5). The scope of
mental health disorders among delinquent girls is so large
that the National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile
Justice warns that if they are not addressed with genderand trauma-specific treatment, these girls will be caught
in a life of increased criminality, substance abuse, early
pregnancy and interpersonal violence (Veysey, 2003).
even shunned. Thus, finding a way to de-stigmatize and
de-mystify the basics of mental health through providing accurate and culturally relevant information is critical
to any therapeutic approach. In Boston, for example, the
Boston Public Health Commission has initiated an effort
at “street-based mental health” through a method which
they label trauma response and containment. Following
a youth homicide, trained staff and volunteers (whether
clinical or not) go to the funeral, the school, the home,
and even the hang-out of the deceased’s friends and family. While this approach is applied to youth of both genA gender-responsive program would have clinical men- ders, it serves as an example of how to initiate mental
tal health professionals that have experience working health care within a population that might not be open to
with adolescent females and familiarity with the range the idea of seeing a psychiatrist.
of disorders most commonly found among this population. These clinicians would work closely with the case The OJJDP report recommends several ways to help girls
managers/social workers to administer the mental health recognize and grow their strengths and engage in proassessment and proscribe the appropriate treatment. Gen- social behavior (Greene et al., p. 49):
eral therapy has proven to be a very productive gender- ✜✜ Assertiveness training – help girls who have been vicresponsive approach because girls are relational and often
timized to find their voice, express choices, explore
work issues out through talking. However, given that the
options and set boundaries in relationships.
majority of girls in the juvenile justice system are girls of ✜✜ Self-esteem training – teach girls to appreciate and
color, the lack of minority therapists presents an ongoing
respect themselves, not relying on outside validation
challenge.
and provide girls opportunities to master new skills to
give them a greater sense of their own competencies.
Girls in the juvenile justice system experience higher ✜✜ Empowerment training – teach girls to recognize
rates than boys of serious mental health conditions includtheir own strengths and capabilities and set and reach
ing psychiatric disorders, post traumatic stress disorder,
goals; teach them to make positive choices and leadattempts of self harm, and suicide (National Center on
ership skills by providing opportunities for them to
Crime and Delinquency, 2007). Additionally, according
design and evaluate their own programs.
to a 2008 study, adolescents in detention and correctional
facilities are ten times more likely to suffer from psychosis than adolescents in the general adolescent population,
and girls are more often diagnosed with major depression
than boys (29.2% of girls compared to 10.6% of boys)
(Fazel, Doll and Langström, 2008). But because the juvenile justice system still operates as a system designed
for males, there is a lack of mental health treatment for
system-involved girls (Veysey, 2003).
In many communities of color and non-American cultures, mental health treatment is highly stigmatized and
esteem health empowerment self-esteem health
elf-esteem health empowerment self-esteem heal
31
The Girls Equitable Treatment Coalition in Colorado ad- through self-destructive behaviors such as mutilation and
dresses a behavior more commonly seen in females, that suicide attempts, or by “acting out” by being mean, viothey label “learned helplessness” which is derived from lent and disrespectful to other girls and staff.
the “I can’t attitude” (Boyce, 2000, p. 25). Helping girls
build their resiliency and the “I can” attitude is a critical
part of any treatment program.
Innovative Ideas:
Some practitioners argue that before trying to teach selfesteem skills it is important to first help the girl understand her victimization. Patton and Morgan suggest that
“for programs to build on a girl’s strengths, they must
first understand and address issues of victimization to get
at the root of a girl’s attitudes and behaviors. Victimization issues should be discussed one-on-one or in singlegender groups” (2002, p. 51). Staff needs to be sensitive
to the many things that could cause a traumatized reaction
such as being touched by men (as in the case of physical
restraint), doors slamming, the dark, loud noises in general, and gynecological exams. Girls need help finding
ways to express their pain and anger without “acting in”
✜✜ Have female staff accompany girls to health
exams and screenings (OPPAGA, 2005a, p.
9).
✜✜ Provide transportation for family members
to ensure their attendance at family therapy
sessions (Boston 9/9/08 Meeting).
✜✜ Employ a reward-based points system,
charting positive behaviors, to help build
self-esteem (Boston 9/9/08 Meeting).
d. Education and Economic Opportunity
Promising Practice:
Provide quality education and workforce preparation
Guiding Principles:
Quality
Stigmas
Skills
A Deeper Look:
More and more, the youth development sector is realizing the importance of preparing young people for the
workforce through skill building, career planning, and
job placement. This holds true for girls as well as boys.
Where a gender lens can be helpful is in the understanding of the long-term implications for girls if they do not
gain an education and/or basic workforce development.
Andrew Sum, from Northeastern University’s Labor and
Market Studies Department, found that female dropouts
fared considerable worse than their male counterparts in
finding employment in Massachusetts in 2005 with only
45 of every 100 female adult dropouts being employed
versus 64 of every 100 male dropouts. The low employment rates of female adult dropouts substantially
increase their exposure to poverty and other income
inadequacy problems over their entire work lives. In
2002-2003, those adult women lacking a high school diploma represented only 8% of the female 18-44 year old
population in Massachusetts yet they accounted for 37%
education economic opportunity education economic
32
of all TANF recipients (Sum et. al., 2007, p. 84). Adult
female dropouts are much less likely to be married
than their better educated peers and frequently become
single mothers, placing their children at a variety of
risks of developmental problems (Sum et. al., 2007, p.
20). Thus, getting to these high-risk girls while they are
young and still connected to some institution or program
becomes even more critical to their life success.
et al., 1998, p. 47). Staff may also have to help the girls
overcome the stigma and myth that learning disabilities
are an indicator of intelligence. On the other hand, some
girls will be suffering from the reverse stigma—that being smart is not cool and especially that boys do not like
smart girls. The clear advantages of academic achievement should be continually and consistently relayed to
girls.
The national research also shows that while girls consistently have lower school dropout rates than boys, female
dropouts are at particular economic risk. Females who
fail to graduate from high school have higher rates of
unemployment, make significantly lower wages, and are
more likely to need to rely on public support programs
to provide for their families than males who fail to
graduate (National Women’s Law Center, 2007). These
consequences are also intergenerational as girls become
mothers. One study found that the educational attainment of mothers may affect girls more than the educational attainment of their fathers. While girls whose
fathers graduated from high school were 15% less likely
to dropout of school than girls whose fathers dropped
out, the daughters of women who graduated from high
school were one third less likely to drop out of school
than daughters of women who dropped out (2007). (See
Graph National Employment Rates for Female High
School Dropouts vs. Female High School Graduates and
Male High School Dropouts in 2006 in the Data Section.)
Girls may also respond better to different learning styles
and environments than boys. Because girls tend to
value relationships, they may benefit from cooperative
learning environments where problem solving is a group
task (Greene et al., 1998, p. 47). Colorado’s guidelines
note that, “…young women learn well through hands-on
applications and when sufficient time is given for response to questions.” (2000, p. 25). A gender-responsive
approach to educating girls would take these and other
developmental factors into consideration when designing curriculum and class structure. Depending on the
assessment results, girls not in residential programs
may do better in an alternative or community school, in
a vocational school, or some other type of continuing
education program. Additionally girls who are pregnant
or parents may feel less embarrassed attending a special
school for teen parents, especially if childcare is provided.
Education
In Boston and across the Commonwealth, girls achieve
academically far better than boys. However, many of the
girls who enter the juvenile justice system demonstrate
poor academic achievement and have a record of struggling in school, as demonstrated by their histories of
truancies, suspensions, and dropping out. A 1998 study
done of girls in California’s juvenile justice system
found that 85% of girls had been expelled or suspended,
and the median age for the first of these experiences was
13 (Acoca, 1999, p. 7).
It may also be possible that students with poor academic
records have an undiagnosed or untreated learning disability. Ideally, initial academic screening and assessment of girls entering the system will detect the disability and tailor a learning plan to remediate it (Greene
Education should be comprehensive and include parenting classes, financial literacy, safe food preparation,
time management, etc. so that girls feel they are gaining
knowledge that is useful and applicable to their lives.
Effective programs help girls make connections between
what they study and how it relates to what they will
need to know to succeed in the real world” (Greene et
al., 1998, p.48). A participant in the September 2009
Boston workshop on gender-specific education and economic opportunity noted that CEOs often say they are
looking for employees that ask good questions. Young
girls do this naturally but are frequently rejected as being rebellious. This led the group to the poignant question, “How can we channel this energy and refine it?”
Economic Opportunity
Some girls may come from families where women do
not work outside the home, or where women lack formal
education or English language skills and are relegated
to low-skill jobs. Therefore, the first step toward eco-
c opportunity education economic opportunity educ
33
nomic opportunity for girls is often career exploration
and career planning. As discussed in previous sections,
connecting girls with female mentors in their field of
interest, inviting successful women to speak, and arranging field trips to worksites can greatly enhance a
girl’s interest in her studies as well as her understanding
and hope for success by allowing her access to real-life
role models, and the opportunity to see herself in those
successful women. It is especially important to make
efforts to bring in mentors from diverse backgrounds
so that girls can literally see what someone who “looks
like them” is capable of achieving. Oregon’s guidelines
recommend having girls explore fields usually associated with males, such as forestry, mechanics, web page
design and technology (Patton & Morgan, 2002, p. 47).
Career planning begins by identifying a girl’s interests
and strengths, and then connecting those activities to
career paths and job opportunities. Programs should
provide, or refer out to, professional and technical
training in the identified trade. Career support does not
simply end with job placement, especially in the case of
system-involved and other high-risk youth. Initial job
placement for this cohort should be treated as transitional employment and supported as such. Many of
these girls have had home lives lacking in routine and
accountability, and thus will need support in the basics
such as showing up on time and proper attire, as well
as more nuanced skills such as appropriate work place
commentary and how to deal with supervisors and authority.
34
Innovative Ideas:
✜✜ Identify opportunities for girls to participate
in job shadowing with identified mentors
(Boston 9/9/08 Meeting).
✜✜ Turn a girl’s interest in hair braiding into
a vocation by helping her obtain a license
(OPPAGA, 2005a).
✜✜ Start an in-house enterprise such as a coffee shop, magazine stand, etc to serve as the
transitional employment opportunity. (Roca,
Boston 9/9/08 Meeting)
✜✜ Start an apprenticeship program with a local
union or business where the youth do their
training and apprenticeship while in the
institution (Suffolk County House of Corrections).
e. Community and Civic Engagement
Promising Practice:
Promote civic engagement through
…volunteerism
…community service
…social and political action
Guiding Principles:
Power
Giving
Collective
A Deeper Look:
Civic engagement has long been acknowledged as an
important asset for any young person. It can strengthen
one’s resiliencies and leads to positive outcomes for the
individual as well as the broader community. Community engagement can be especially impactful for girls
in high-risk environments and those already system
involved. A girl can realize her own strength and power
through positive and tangible impacts of a community
service project she might work on. Involving girls in
community activities “helps girls see themselves as contributing members of society” (Greene at al., 1998, p.
55). Volunteerism and community service projects can
reconnect girls to their own communities and in effect
re-root them there in a positive context. It is empowering to see how one’s own small actions can help another
person–giving becomes a form of receiving.
Teaching girls how to advocate around a social or
political issue of concern to them not only helps them
feel good for contributing to the collective, but it also
models behavior that can later help with self-advocacy.
Colorado’s study stresses the importance of teaching
advocacy and providing opportunities to practice such
skills, therefore helping young women become advocates and agents of change around the very issues they
are overcoming (Boyce, 2000, p 25). Advocacy can easily be linked to education, starting with researching the
history and current context of an issue and then making
calls, writing letters, contacting the media and otherwise
fighting for the desired outcome. Likewise, use educa-
tion to connect voting to daily life (like paying taxes,
paved roads or free public education) and then register
girls to vote (if eligible) and hold mock elections.
Present a list of interest groups, clubs, or churches that
girls might want to become members of. Invite representatives from those organizations to come speak to the
girls about the value and benefit of joining their group.
Perhaps the girls could start the joining process while
they are still in care with permission given to attend a
gathering or have the group come visit the girl. This
could be particularly helpful when girls are released and
trying to transition back to the “outside” where they will
likely feel awkward and out of place.
Innovative Ideas:
✜✜ Allow older girls to serve as peer
mentors to younger girls (Boston
9/9/08 Meeting).
✜✜ Create Youth Councils or Government
Associations within the program
(Boston 9/9/08 Meeting).
✜✜ Organize debate groups and hold
debates (Boston 9/9/08 Meeting).
✜✜ Take trips to the State House for an
“advocacy day” or to meet with the
Women’s Caucus (Boston 9/9/08
Meeting).
35
Category 2 - Administration and Management
a. Organizational Policies and Values
Promising Practice:
✜✜ Develop a value statement on serving girls that is writ-
ten into the overall mission or vision statement for the
organization.
A value statement about serving girls, whether in girlsonly or in coed programs, is important because it sets the
tone from which policies and practice will follow. For
example, in 2004 the State of Florida enacted House Bill
1989 which then became Chapter 2004-333 of the Florida
Statutes, stating:
into the state laws would then facilitate a clearer directive
to the state agencies that serve girls1.
In the Boston Community Meeting, the participants
suggested a team approach for developing a gender
responsive inspirational statement that included the girls,
“The Legislature finds that the prevention, treatment, and frontline youth and program workers, board members and
rehabilitation needs of youth served by the juvenile jus- even an outside partner (Boston 10/21/08 Meeting).
tice system are gender-specific. Gender-specific programming refers to unique program models and services that Patton and Morgan write that creating a value statement
comprehensively address the needs of a targeted gender as a first step, “ensures that administration and staff are
group. Gender-specific services require the adherence to informed and follow a similar set of work practices,
the principle of equity to ensure that the different inter- understand the philosophy and commitment to girls’
ests of young women and men are recognized and vary- gender-specific services, and create a culture where
ing needs are met, with equality as the desired outcome. gender issues are integrated into the organizational
Gender-specific programming focuses on the differences culture” (2002, p. 13).
between young females’ and young males’ roles and responsibilities, positions in society, access to and use of Organizations and agencies that serve girls exclusively
resources, and social codes governing behavior.”
should have a strong, clear mission statement to that
(Laws of Florida, Ch. 2004-333, Section 8(b) of 985.02)
As has been done in Oregon and Florida, ideally the
Commonwealth would adopt such a statement into the
general laws of the state. A broad value statement written
36
1 In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts those agencies include
the Department of Youth Services, the Department of Children
and Families, the Department of Public Health, the Department of
Mental Health, the Department of Education, Juvenile Probation,
and CPCS.
✜✜ Client conduct
effect. A coed organization can still include a broad value
✜✜ Confidentiality
statement regarding a commitment to gender-responsive
programming or ensuring equal access for boys and girls.
✜✜ Family contact
✜✜ Evaluation
In the Boston workshop, the small group on this topic
✜✜ Follow-up and After-care
offered this sample language: “an environment that is
safe for young men and women” (Boston 10/21/08). In
addition to value and mission statements, gender-specific Patton and Morgan affirm that gender-specific policies
language can be incorporated into requests for proposals and practices should be integrated into all parts of the
program continuum from intake to follow-up/aftercare
(RFP), contracts, and measurement values.
(2002, p. 13). The authors go on to make the point that
Next, agencies need to develop clear organizational and instituting the policy is the first step; ensuring that the
program policies that address how those values will be organization’s environment is supportive of and responcarried out. The participants in the Boston workshop em- sive to the policy can be even more challenging (2002, p.
phasized the utility of spelling out the range of activities 15). The Boston workshop participants noted that enforcthat policies could cover, including, but not limited to:
ing these policies with staff as well as supervising staff,
administrative personnel, board, and volunteers can be a
✜✜ Allocation of resources
big challenge because managers do not have control over
✜✜ Intake and Assessment
✜✜ Hiring and training (covered in the following every interaction. Having an alternative feedback loop,
such as an anonymous suggestion box, can help “take the
section)
temperature of the environment” and help discover what
✜✜ Environment
is really happening, in addition to having a formal com✜✜ Personnel conduct: staff/client boundaries
plaint process that is clear and posted. There should also
✜✜ Interventions
Boston Poses the Question:
Should policy be linked to liability—that there be some stated responsibility to
those you are serving: practice and policy versus ideology?
b. Staffing: Hiring, Training,
Professional Development, Diversity
Promising Practice:
Hire and train staff that are committed to serving girls and that are generally representative of the diverse population being served.
It is very likely that the single most important factor for
effectively delivering gender responsive programming is
the staff. Whether in a government agency or a community-based organization, it is the people who serve the
girls. Although mission statements and value statements
are important for setting tone and direction, ultimately it
is the staff that will make or break your program.
Hiring
Employers should be intentional about gender responsiveness from the beginning. Hiring a new staff presents
a great opportunity to ensure the right qualities and qualifications are brought to their clients. Job descriptions
should require interest in and/or experience in working
with youth women. The Boston participants pointed out
the need to be intentional and strategic about recruit-
37
ment, thinking beyond traditional means of job postings
(10/21/08). The interview process should include a series of questions about the applicants’ interest in, passion for, and experience with working with girls. Some
basic understanding of female adolescent development
is an asset, but not necessarily a requirement as long as
the applicant is open to learning about this topic. A good
awareness of self is another applicant characteristic to
identify in the hiring process. It is important to discover
whether the applicant is aware of his/her own biases and
assumptions derived from personal experience or societal norms and media messages regarding gender (Patton
& Morgan, 2002).
The Boston workshop generated a list of what to look for
when hiring (10/21/08):
✜✜ Passion for youth work
✜✜ Commitment to mission, to girls
✜✜ Good boundaries, mature
✜✜ Capacity to engage and develop positive
relationships
✜✜ Understanding of strengths perspective
✜✜ Trainability and flexibility
For final round candidates, the group suggested three test
exercises:
✜✜ Capacity for self-reflection: ask applicants about
change they have made in own life.
✜✜ Have applicants visit the program; observe how
they engage with the girls.
✜✜ Ask applicants to tell a ‘challenge’ story in their
experiences with young people, and then a ‘success’ story.
professional development opportunities for all staff that
create a highly effective gender responsive setting. Orientation should include clear and consistent information
about gender-specific values, polices and guidelines. “All
staff, including those in non-counseling roles, should understand the vision, mission, program goals, and objectives of gender-specific programming” (Greene et al.,
1998, p. 45). In Florida, contracts stipulate that new employee training address adolescent female development,
victimization, domestic violence, trauma and so on (OPPAGA, 2005a). The Oregon model offers a good starting list for training
topics (Patton &Morgan, 2002, p. 28): female adolescent
development, sexuality, female issues and needs, unique
issues for girls of color, staff boundaries, and gender
identity. It is also important that training be evaluated
for relevance, impact on staff behavior, and retention of
knowledge (2002, p. 28).
Management should consider the following:
✜✜ How often are trainings offered? (should be regularly)
✜✜ Is there an evaluation process of the trainings? (there
should be, see Oregon quote above)
✜✜ Who participates in the trainings? (should be all staff,
see Greene quote above)
There is also an important role for managers in terms of
developing gender-responsive competencies in direct
service staff. The Boston workshop participants emphasized the importance of managers modeling the desired
competencies for their staff, so that then staff would be
able to do the same for the girls, thus using themselves
as tools to help move the girls forward developmentally
(10/21/08). Specifically the Boston participants emphaMuch research shows that youth workers often say that sized that it was important for managers to offer profesgirls are more difficult to work with than boys (Belknap sional modeling, support, self-reflection and teaching.
et. al., 1997). This type of personal attitude can represent
a real barrier to making progress with the girls. The em- Diversity
ployer has to consider whether this applicant will be able Organizations should seek to hire and maintain a staff
to serve as a role model, living and behaving by the same that is reflective of the population being served. Havvalues the program hopes to instill in the girls. The Colo- ing a diverse staff in terms of race, ethnicity, language,
rado guidelines state that, “Staff must value the female gender and sexual orientation will create an environment
perspective, honor the female experience, and respect fe- that is more inclusive and culturally appropriate. “A dimale development” (Boyce, 2000, p. 26). verse staff can help a program understand and integrate
multiple cultural perspectives and information into daily
programming, as well as increase the opportunity of conTraining and Professional Development
Initial staff orientation and training curricula should be necting young women of a similar culture” (Patton &
gender specific. Additionally, there should be ongoing Morgan, 2002, p. 27). 38
There are varying opinions regarding gender diversity in
staffing. Many gender-specific programs hire all female
staff. However, the report commissioned by the OJJDP
offers an interesting perspective on male staffing: “Many
girls may not have had positive experiences with men in
the past, especially if they were sexually abused or exploited by males, or if they grew up in households headed
by women. In addition to offering positive role models,
male staff can provide frank but clear feedback on how
some men might perceive females” (Greene et al., 1998,
p. 45).
Even if the staff is not ethnically and racially diverse, it is
essential that all staff be culturally competent (Greene et
al., 1998, p. 45). When diversity is lacking among staff,
Patton and Morgan recommend bringing in volunteers,
speakers and mentors from diverse backgrounds and generally ensuring that multiple perspectives are invited, included and integrated into the program (2002, pp. 27-28).
Colorado’s guidelines emphasize the issue of fostering
role modeling as central to the need for a diverse staff.
(Boyce, 2000). Boston Poses the Question:
Is it necessary to hire females only to do girls’ programming...
or is commitment to girls and being intentional about positive
development more important (10/21/08)?
c. Data, Assessment and Evaluation
Promising Practice:
✜✜ Collect and maintain accurate and relevant data on the population you serve;
develop gender-specific assessment tools; and integrate a female-guided
evaluation strategy through every stage of a program.
Data
Patton and Morgan suggest collecting data both on the
targeted population being served and the general population in the same demographic (2002). This allows for reasonable comparison and a broader context from which to
design program goals. Data collection should occur from
intake to serve as a benchmark from which to measure
progress in the future. Data collection should then be ongoing and be tied to program goals and desired outcomes.
Data can be collected on many things, and agencies often feel challenged in determining what types of data to
collect. Many lack a process for making such decisions.
Patton and Morgan offer the following questions (partial
list) as points of discussion (2002, p. 17):
✜✜ What sort of data currently exists for your program?
✜✜ What do girls say they need or want from the program?
✜✜ What do you want to know? What are you trying
to answer or address?
✜✜ Will the data be from self-reports or will it be
grounded in secondary data sources?
✜✜ What data might be available about issues that are
specific for girls?
39
Assessment Tools: Intake and Screening
Generally there are two types of evaluation (Greene et al.,
1998, p 57): a) process evaluation assesses what a program does—what happens day-to-day, who receives the
services, how often, by whom, etc.; b) outcome evaluation assesses the impact of a program—is it effective, is it
reaching its goals, is it contributing to positive youth development, is it reducing the number of girls entering the
juvenile justice system or returning to it, etc. Outcome
evaluation especially poses challenges to smaller organizations with fewer resources. Measurements should be
tied to goals and outcomes that are important for girls
to become strong and healthy individuals. Measurements
should use quantitative and qualitative data as indicators
Where no assessment tools exist, an organization com- of success. When designing evaluation, it is important to
mitted to gender-responsive programming should devel- remember that “success is not just the absence of negaop new ones, which are sensitive to the needs of females tives” (Patton & Morgan, 2002, p. 22).
and minimize barriers and bias (Patton & Morgan, 2002).
Tools should also focus on strengths. Participants in the The Boston workshop listed the following challenges of
Boston workshop noted that surveys often ask about defi- evaluation (10/21/08):
cits and that it is difficult to start a relationship with a
✜✜ Evaluation takes time away from programming
child in that manner (10/21/08). In addition to the struc✜✜ Evaluations are complex
tured processing points (intake, various screenings, etc.),
✜✜ Evaluation is expensive
agencies should examine all formal and informal decision
✜✜ Evaluation across multiple programs can be inpoints throughout the system to eliminate gender-bias
consistent
practices (Patton & Morgan, 2002). There are numerous
✜
✜
Some indicators do not have benchmarks
examples of gender-specific assessment tools developed
✜✜ Stories are not reflected in evaluations
in different states and nationally by the National Council
✜✜ Funders want long-term outcomes but expect imon Crime and Delinquency.
mediate answers
Without intentionality around gender, general intake
forms and standard practices may not ascertain important
profile information about the girl, and in some cases may
exacerbate her trauma (i.e. a standard entry strip-search
on a girl by male staff is likely to set off a victim of sexual
abuse). “It often takes longer to complete intake assessment with girls than boys because girls have a greater
need to talk, process, connect, feel safe, and build trust”
(Patton & Morgan, 2002, p. 21). Screenings should seek
to identify key risks and resiliencies that are most common for females (see earlier section on Indicators for a
full list).
Evaluation: Process vs Outcomes
Once an agency has determined what goals it intends to
accomplish and what strategies it will use to get there
(goals and strategies not covered in this report), a strong
evaluation component should be integrated. This evaluation should span from planning stages though implementation and ongoing improvements/adjustments. It is necessary to provide formal and informal feedback loops.
For community-based organizations, the two biggest challenges to quality data collection, assessment, and evaluation are often financial and technical capacity. The Girls’
Initiative in Boston has been successful at addressing this
barrier through creating links between service providers
and researchers.
Boston Poses the Question:
Does the provider community really believe in data collection and
evaluation or do we do it because its required by funders?
40
IV. Data of Girls in Massachusetts,
Suffolk County, Boston and Chelsea
Data Introduction and Summary
The data presented in this section gives an important snapshot of how girls are doing statewide, in
Suffolk County and in the targeted cities of Boston and Chelsea. Sometimes, information is given
for all youth, sometimes information is given for both girls and boys, and sometimes the information is shown for girls only. We believe the data show that there is a need for gender-specific services
both for girls in Massachusetts who are involved with the juvenile justice system and for girls who
are engaging in behaviors that can directly lead to juvenile justice system involvement. Across the
state, there are girls in need, however in the targeted cities of Boston and Chelsea the need is even
greater given the challenging economic and social environments where many of these girls live.
Increases in girls’ involvement
in the Massachusetts juvenile justice system:
✜✜ From 1992 to 2002, the number of girls placed on probation statewide increased steadily, almost tripling in
number. And while the numbers have decreased since then, the overall percentage of girls as a total of new
probations has remained between 21% and 23% since 2001 (up from 14% in 1992).
✜✜ Statewide, the number of females in the total DYS committed population in 2008 was 291. This figure is
a drastic decrease from its high of 514 in 2003. However, the percent of females in the total DYS population has not decreased. Since 2002, it has ranged between 15% and 17% (up from 7% to 9% from 1992 to
1996).
✜✜ A 2004 snapshot of Massachusetts girls placed on probation statewide showed that over 70% had an education need, a counseling need or a family relations need; over half had a substance abuse problem; and over
half were younger than 15 years old at their first offense. Additionally, 46% had a drug abuse need, and 38%
had an alcohol abuse need. Approximately one quarter had a prior record, and 17% had had two or more
residence changes in the past year.
✜✜ Neglect victimizations (both boys and girls) were highest at ages less than one year and gradually diminished
with increasing age. However, there was a resurgence in neglected girls between the ages of 13 and 16.
41
what can we learn from the numbers? what can we
Massachusetts girls compared to Massachusetts
boys in the general population:
✜✜ Girls are more likely to graduate from high school and are less likely to get suspended.
✜✜ High school girls are more likely to feel supported by teachers in school and are more likely to
do volunteer work.
✜✜ Girls are twice as likely as boys to be reported victims of domestic violence to the FBI.
✜✜ Girls are more likely to be sexually abused at all ages and are more likely to be physically abused,
sexually abused and neglected as adolescents.
✜✜ From 2000-2006, Girls accounted for over 94% of the sexual assaults perpetrated on youth victims reported to Executive Office of Public Safety.
✜✜ High school girls are more likely to report hurting themselves and to seriously consider suicide.
✜✜ Young women ages 15-24 have the highest rates of hospitalization for self-inflicted injury than
females of any other age group and much higher than the rate for males in this age group. Girls,
ages 5-14, also have higher rates of hospitalization for self-inflicted injury than boys ages 5-14.
✜✜ Even though high school girls are less likely to be overweight than high school boys, they are
more likely to perceive themselves as overweight and are more likely to report trying to lose
weight.
✜✜ High school girls drink less milk and get less physical activity.
Massachusetts girls compared to Massachusetts boys
in the juvenile justice system:
✜✜ Girls are much less likely to be in Juvenile Court for delinquencies or to be indicted as youthful
offenders.
✜✜ Girls are approximately equally as likely as boys to be in Juvenile Court for child in need of services (CHINS) cases.
can we learn from the numbers? what can we lear
42
e learn from the numbers? what can we learn fro
✜✜ Girls in the juvenile justice system are more likely to be person offenders (see footnote on p.59
for offender definitions) than boys in the juvenile justice system.
✜✜ In 2005 and 2006, girls on probation were more likely than boys on probation to have had two or
more residence changes in the past year and to have a family-relations need.
✜✜ Girls living in Boston and Chelsea are more likely to grow up in economic and family environments that are less correlated with future success. These girls tend to live in areas with more poverty and less stable family structures (U.S. Census, 2000).
Suffolk County girls compared to girls statewide
in the general population:
✜✜ Girls from Boston and Chelsea are less likely to graduate from high school in four years and are
approximately twice as likely to drop out of school.
✜✜ There are also more girls of color in Suffolk County than in the state overall.
Overrepresentation of girls of color
in the juvenile justice system:
✜✜ While girls of color make up 24% of the Massachusetts youth population, they make up 63%
of the DYS committed population. In Suffolk County, while girls of color make up 55% of the
youth population, they make up 90% of the DYS committed
learn from the numbers? what can we learn from th
what can we learn from the numbers? what can we
rn from the numbers? what can we learn from the
43
General Population Overview
In Massachusetts there are over 300,000 young women ages 14-20. Approximately 12% of Massachusetts girls live
in Suffolk County, which is comprised of the City of Boston, the City of Chelsea, the City of Revere and the Town of
Winthrop. Approximately 25% of the young women in Massachusetts statewide are young women of color1. Of the
over 37,000 young women ages 14-20 who live in Suffolk County, approximately 55% are young women of color. In
the targeted cities of Boston and Chelsea, the percent of young women who are women of color is greater.
Massachusetts Females Ages 14-20,
by Race/Ethnicity, 2007
Asian,
15,933 (5%)
Hispanic,
33,721,
(11%)
Suffolk County Females Ages 14-20,
by Race/Ethnicity, 2007
Native
American,
927 (0%)
Native
Asian,
American,
3,027 (8%) 133 (0%)
Hispanic,
7,820 (21%)
Black,
25,034 (8%)
White,
237,230
(76%)
White,
16,640
(45%)
Black, 9,494
(26%)
Data Source: Puzzanchera, C., Sladky, A. and Kang, W. (2008). “Easy Access to Juvenile Populations: 19902007.” Online. Available: http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/ezapop/
Economic and Family Risk and Protective Factors
Both girls and boys are affected by the family and economic environments where they reside. Research has shown
that poverty and low parent education levels are risk factors for problems such as drug abuse and delinquency (Interagency Working Group on Youth Programs, n.d.). Education levels are also related to the quality of prenatal and
infant care. For example, in Massachusetts mothers with a high school education or less were less likely to receive
adequate prenatal care, more likely to report smoking during their pregnancies, and less likely to breastfeed their infants than mothers who had a college degree or higher (Massachusetts Department of Public Health, 2009).
While children in Massachusetts tend to have more favorable family and economic indicators than children nationally, children in the targeted cities of Boston and Chelsea are more likely to grow up in economic and family environments that are less correlated with future success. They tend to live in areas with more poverty and less stable family
structures.
1 All data from 2007. Data Source: Puzzanchera, C., Sladky, A. and Kang, W. (2008). “Easy Access to Juvenile Populations: 19902007.” Online. Available: http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/ezapop/
44
Percent of Families below federal poverty level (2000)
30.0%
27.5%
24.1%
25.0%
23.9%
20.6%
20.1%
20.0%
15.3%
14.5%
15.0%
9.2%
10.0%
6.7%
5.0%
SA
U
Ch
el
se
D
a
or
ch
es
te
r(
02
12
5)
Bo
sto
n
ov
er
al
M
l
at
ta
pa
n
(0
21
26
)
M
as
sa
ch
us
et
ts
(0
21
19
)
Ro
xb
ur
y
(0
21
21
)
Ro
xb
ur
y
Ro
xb
ur
y
(0
21
20
)
0.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Summary File 1 (SF 1) and Summary File 3 (SF 3).
The 2000 United States Census revealed that the cities of Boston and Chelsea had significantly higher poverty rates
than both the state as a whole and the nation. Over 20% of families in Chelsea and 15% of families in Boston were at
or below the federal poverty level in 2000 compared to 6.7% of Massachusetts families and 9.2% of families nationally. Specific neighborhoods of Boston were also more affected by poverty, such as Dorchester and Roxbury. For
example, in the Roxbury Crossing neighborhood (02120), family poverty levels exceeded 27% in 2000.
Data on children, available for the City of Boston and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, reveals that in 2007, 31%
of Boston children were living at or below the federal poverty level compared to 13% statewide and 18% nationally.
Parental employment and family structure also varies by geography. In 2006, over 40% of Boston children were living in families where no parent had full-time, year-round employment, compared to 30% statewide and 33% nationally. And over half of Boston children lived in single parent families in 2007 compared to 29% of Massachusetts
children and 32% of children nationally (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2007).
Percent of children living in single-parent
families
60%
54%
Percent of children living in families where no
parent has full-time, year-round employment
50%
45%
40%
40%
35%
30%
29%
32%
30%
25%
20%
20%
15%
10%
10%
42%
33%
30%
5%
0%
0%
Boston 2007
MA 2007
US 2007
Boston 2006
MA 2006
US 2006
Source: Annie E. Casey Foundation, Kids Count Data Center.
45
While Massachusetts tends to have a higher percentage of adults with bachelor’s degrees than the nation as a whole,
the City of Chelsea has a population with significantly less formal education than the state or the nation according to
the 2000 U.S. Census. In 2000, 33% of adults in Massachusetts had a bachelor’s degree, while in Chelsea only 10%
had that level of formal education. And while the City of Boston appears to have a higher percentage of adults with
bachelor’s degree than the state as a whole, neighborhoods such as Mattapan, Roxbury and Dorchester were comprised of populations with fewer than 20% of adults holding bachelor’s degrees or higher in 2000.
Population 25 and older with a Bachelor's Degree or Higher, 2000
40.0%
35.6%
33.2%
35.0%
30.0%
24.4%
25.0%
20.0%
15.5%
16.8%
18.0%
15.0%
10.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Chelsea
M attapan
(02126)
Dorchester Boston overall M assachusetts
Roxbury
(02119, 02120, (zip codes
02122, 02124,
02121)
02125)
USA
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Summary File 1 (SF 1) and Summary File 3 (SF 3).
Educational Risk and Protective Factors
There are many risk and protective factors in the school setting. In-school time can provide a multitude of protective
factors against delinquency, such as opportunities for involvement in prosocial activities, the presence of caring and
supportive adults, and academic achievement. In-school time can also expose youth to risk factors for delinquency
such as truancy, suspension, dropout, and exposure to delinquent peers. The following data gives a brief snapshot of
the risk and protective factors for girls in Massachusetts in the school setting.
School Suspensions and Expulsions: During the 2006-07 school year, approximately 25% of the students
suspended or expelled from public schools were girls (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education). Of the 15,794 female school suspensions and expulsions, approximately 80% were out-of-school suspensions
and 20% were in-school suspensions. There were 83 permanent expulsions of female students statewide.
Teacher Support in School: In 2007, almost ¾ of female students statewide reported having a teacher or another
adult in school with whom they could talk about a problem, higher than boys (74% of girls vs. 65% of boys) (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2008). In the City of Boston in 2006, the percentage
of female students who reported that there was at least one adult at school who they would turn to for support (76%)
was similar to the statewide percentage (Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center, 2007).
46
Volunteer Work: In 2007, half of high school girls reported participating in volunteer work in the last month,
significantly higher than boys (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2008).
School Dropout1 : While girls consistently have lower school dropout rates than boys, female dropouts are at
particular economic risk. High school graduates tend to do better than dropouts overall, but being a female dropout
is even more economically risky than being a male dropout. Females who fail to graduate from high school have
higher rates of unemployment, make significantly lower wages, and are more likely to need to rely on public support
programs to provide for their families than males who fail to graduate (National Women’s Law Center, 2007).
National Employment Rates for Female High School Dropouts vs. Female High School
Graduates and Male High School Dropouts, 2006
100%
87%
90%
80%
80%
71%
71%
69%
70%
60%
56%
52%
61%
53%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
White
Black
Female Graduate
Female Dropuout
Hispanic
Male Dropout
Source: National Women’s Law Center. (2007). When Girls Don’t Graduate We All Fail: A Call to Improve High School Graduation Rates for Girls, page. 7. NWLC calculations based on U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2007 Annual Social
and Economic Supplement. PINC-03. Educational Attainment—People 25 Years Old and Over, by Total Money Earnings in 2006,
Work Experience in 2006, Age, Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex. All persons with zero income were counted as unemployed.
From 2000 to 2007, the Massachusetts statewide public school dropout rate for girls has been between 2.6% and 3.3%
while the rate for boys has been between 3.5% and 4.4%. The female high school dropout rates in the targeted cities
of Boston and Chelsea have historically been much higher than the female dropout rate statewide. From 2000 to 2007,
the Boston female dropout rate has ranged between 6.0% and 8.3% while the Chelsea rate has ranged between 6.3%
and 9.6%. During the 2006-07 school year, the one-year female school dropout rates in Boston and Chelsea were over
7% compared to 3.3% for the state as a whole.
1 This refers to the annual dropout rate, which is different from the four-year dropout rates that was already mentioned. The annual dropout rate provides information about one particular school year and all students enrolled in high school in that year. The cohort graduation
rate (in the case of this report, the four-year graduation rate) and the cohort dropout rate provide information about a particular group of
students followed over the course of high school.
47
Annual Female High School Dropout Rate in Boston, Chelsea and Statewide, 2000-2007
12.0%
9.6%
10.0%
8.0%
8.3%
8.1%
7.9%
7.0%
7.8%
7.6%
6.0%
6.0%
7.5%
7.4%
6.3%
6.2%
7.1%
7.2%
4.0%
2.0%
2.9%
2.8%
2.8%
3.1%
3.2%
2.8%
3.3%
1999-2000
2000-01
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
0.0%
Boston
Chelsea
Statewide
Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (n.d.). Dropout Rates in Massachusetts Public
Schools: 2007-08. Retrieved August 25, 2009 from http://www.doe.mass.edu/infoservices/reports/dropout/0708/default.html.
This chart refers to the annual dropout rate, which is different from the four-year dropout rate. The annual dropout rate provides
information about one particular school year and all students enrolled in high school in that year.
Availability of Drugs at School: Almost one quarter of high school girls in Massachusetts reported being of-
fered, sold, or given an illegal drug by someone on school property during the previous twelve months. This figure is
lower than the figure for high school boys (23% vs. 31%) (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education, 2008).
Graduation Rates Statewide: In 2007, the four-year high school graduation rate for female students was 84.1%
compared to 77.8% for male students (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education). Of the
15.9% of girls who did not graduate in four years, 7.9% dropped out, 5.2% were still in school and 1.8% got their
GED. Fewer than 1% were expelled or were non-grad completers1. White female students were more likely to graduate than their Asian, African American and Hispanic counterparts in 2007. Hispanic girls were the least likely female
racial/ethnic group to graduate in four years in 2007. Girls who had limited English proficiency (LEP) and girls who
were special education students were also less likely to graduate in four years. Only 58.8% of LEP girls and 65.3% of
special education girls graduated in four years.
Four Year Female Public High School Graduation Rates by Race/Ethnicity, 2007
100.0%
85.5%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
88.8%
72.1%
64.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Hispanic Female
Af. Am. Female
Asian Female
White Female
Source: Massachusetts Department of Education. Cohort 2007 4-Year Graduation Rates - State Results.
1 Non-Grad Completer includes 1) students who earned a certificate of attainment, 2) students who met local graduation requirements
but the district does not offer certificates of attainment, and 3) students with special needs who reached the maximum age (22) but did not
graduate.
48
Graduation Rates in Boston and Chelsea: Female public school students in Boston and Chelsea were far
less likely than female students statewide to graduate in four years. They were also more likely to still be in school
after four years and more likely to have dropped out of school than female students statewide. While over 84% of female public school students statewide graduated from high school in four years, only 67.2% of Boston Public School
female students and 58.6% of Chelsea Public School female students did so. After four years, over 11% of public
school female students from Boston and over 17% of public school female students from Chelsea were still in school
compared to only 4.5% of female public school students statewide. And while the four-year female public school
dropout rate statewide was 8.3%, it was over 18% in Boston and over 20% in Chelsea.
Four-Year Female Graduation Results for the City of Boston, the City of Chelsea and
Statewide, 2008
90.0%
84.7%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
67.2%
58.6%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.7%
18.2%
17.7%
20.0%
11.7%
10.0%
4.5%
8.3%
1.2% 0.5% 0.7%
1.6% 2.5% 1.8%
% Non-Grad
Completers
% GED
0.0%
% Graduated
% Still in School
Bos ton
Chels ea
% Dropped Out
Statewide
Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2008 Graduation Rate Report
(DISTRICT) for All Students, 4-Year Graduation Rate and Cohort 2008 Four-Year Graduation Rates - State Results
49
Child Maltreatment
Child victimization and maltreatment
are risk factors for problems such as
Care and Protection Cases 1998-2008, Statewide and Suffolk County
drug abuse and delinquency (Spatz Widom, 2003; Interagency Working Group
on Youth Programs, n.d.). In Massachusetts, child abuse and neglect is estimated
through a number of ways including Care
and Protection cases (when child abuse
and neglect are alleged). While it is not
broken down by gender, unfortunately,
both in Suffolk County and statewide the
number of Care and Protection cases for
all children has increased over the past decade (Office of the Commissioner of Probation, 2009). The number of cases stateData Source: Office of the Commissioner of Probation.
wide has increased from 2,343 in 1998
to 3,632 in 2008 – a 55% increase. The
number of cases in Suffolk County has increased from 359 in 1998 to 586 in 2008 – a 63% increase.
According to an analysis of 2007 data done by the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families (DCF), the
number of girls who had been both neglected and physically abused statewide was similar to the number of boys
(2008). Additionally, approximately half of the children in residential placement were girls (48% girls, 52% boys).
However, this data also show that 78% of sexually abused children were female1. Other disturbing facts based on
this analysis of 2007 data include the following:
✜✜ During the adolescent years, significantly more girls than boys were physically abused, sexually abused, or neglected.
✜✜ Neglect victimizations (both boys and girls) were highest at ages less than one year and gradually diminished with
increasing age. However, there was a resurgence in neglected girls between the ages of 13 and 16.
✜✜ Physically abused boys outnumbered girls at ages 12 years and younger. At ages 13 and older, girls were more
numerous than boys. The number of female victims peaked at 15 years old.
✜✜ The number of sexually abused girls exceeded the number of boys at all ages. Female victims of sexual abuse
were most numerous at ages 14-16 years (DCF, 2008).
The positive news is that both statewide and nationally, there appears to be a decline in sexual abuse. In Massachusetts from 1990 to 2007, the number of children with supNumber of Girls in Foster Care from Chelsea and Boston, 2002-2008
ported allegations of sexual abuse dropped 69%. Substantial declines occurred across all ages, but most significantly
among the youngest children (DCF, 2008).
Similar to the statewide numbers, girls also made up half
of the children in DCF placement in the Boston Region in
2007. Over 80% of these children were children of color
(51% black, 25% Hispanic/Latino, 16% white, 2% Asian)
Over the past seven years, the number of girls from Chelsea
and Boston living in foster care ranged from 269 to 370 per
year.
1 Supported Allegations
50
Source: Massachusetts Department of Public Health MassCHIP; data retrieved July 10, 2009.
Girls as Victims of Domestic Violence1
Girls are twice as likely as boys to be reported victims of domestic violence in Massachusetts, according to police
records submitted to the FBI. In 2005, there were 3,560 reported female victims of domestic violence under the age
of 21 in Massachusetts compared to 1,525 reported male victims2. The disparity increases with age.
✜✜ For children under age 6, there are slightly more boys than girls reported as victims of domestic violence (55%
vs. 45%).
✜✜ Of the reported victims ages 6 to 11, half are boys and half are boys.
✜✜ Of the reported victims ages 12 to 14, 45% are boys and 55% are girls.
✜✜ Of the reported victims ages 15 to 17, 27% are boys and 73% are girls.
✜✜ Of the reported victims ages 18 to 20, 19% are boys and 81% are girls.
Of the reported domestic violence incidences involving female victims under the age of 21, the majority of the crimes
were simple assaults (61%), followed by aggravated assaults (18%) and then intimidation (11%). In approximately
half of the cases, the alleged perpetrator was a boyfriend or a girlfriend. In over 20% of the cases, the alleged perpetrator was a parent or stepparent, and in 14% of the cases the alleged perpetrator was a sibling or step-sibling.
Over half of the female victims under the age of 21 were between the ages of 18 and 20 (52%). Girls between the ages
of 15 and 17 represented 26% of the reported victims, girls between the ages of 12 and 14 represented 10% of the
reported victims, girls between the ages of 6 and 12 represented 7% of the reported victims and girls age 5 and under
represented 5% of the reported victims.
Over half of the reported domestic violence incidents involving girls ages 0-20 resulted in no injury, 44% resulted
in minor injury and 3% resulted in major injury (such as death, broken bones, loss of teeth, severe laceration or unconsciousness3). Female victims under the age of 12 were more likely to suffer major injury than those ages 12 and
over (6% vs. 2%). Female victims ages 12-20 were more likely to suffer minor injury than those under the age of 12
(46% vs. 24%).
Girls as Victims of Sexual Assault4
A recent analysis of the Massachusetts Provider Sexual Crime Report (PSCR) dataset reveals that of the over 2,000
cases of sexual assault perpetrated on youth victims from January 2000 through December 2006, the vast majority
(94.2%) were female and nearly all of the assailants (99%) were male (MA Executive Office of Public Safety and
Security[EOPSS], April 2008). Of the 1,944 reported female victims, 63% were white, 19% were Hispanic and 17%
were black. While most of the female cases involved one assailant, 10% involved two assailants and 7% involved
three or more assailants.
1 All data in this section from the following source: Adams, B., Puzzanchera, C., and Kang, W. (2008). “Easy Access to NIBRS: Vic-
tims of Domestic Violence, 2005.” Available: http://ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/ezanibrsdv/. NIBRS data capture an unknown portion of the
domestic violence victims known to law enforcement within a State (i.e., some agencies within the State do not report their information to
the FBI). As such, the data presented in this application do not represent the complete volume of domestic violence victims known to law
enforcement.
2 See previous NIBRS data disclaimer.
3 This variable is based on the perception of law enforcement responding to the scene, not based on actual medical records.
4 All data in this section comes from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security’s April 2008 report, Youth Victims of Sexual Assault: Using Medical Provider Data to Describe the Nature and Context of Sexual Crime Perpetrated on Youth Victims.
The results presented in this report should not be considered a representative sample of sexual assault in Massachusetts, but merely a
reflection of the cases in which a victim sought medical attention and a medical professional forwarded this information to the Massachusetts EOPSS. This report does not present information on the incidence or prevalence of sexual victimization, as it does not include sexual
assaults where the victim did not seek medical attention.
51
Girls as Victims of Weapons Injuries
In 2007 in the City of Boston, 12 girls between the ages of 15 and 19 were injured by weapons and seen in the emergency room. The number of girls treated yearly in emergency rooms in Boston has ranged between 5 and 31 over the
past 14 years. 1
Girls as Victims of Violence at School
Statewide in 2007, girls were less likely to report having been threatened or injured with a weapon at school in the
past year than boys (3% vs. 8%). The percent of students who have reported this has decreased over time (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2008).
Percent of Students Reporting they were injured/threatened with weapon at school by
Gender, 1995-2007
14
12
12
10
11
10
10
8
8
6
5
5
8
8
3
3
2005
2007
6
4
4
4
2
0
1995
1997
1999
2001
Male
2003
Female
Data Sources: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2005 Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior Survey Results, Appendix
C.; and Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Health and Risk Behaviors of Massachusetts Youth, 2007: The Report.
In the City of Boston in 2006, girls reported being equally as likely to witness violence at schools (31% of both
female and male students reported this) but less likely than boys to be victims of violence at school (10% of male
students versus 5% of female students). Similarly, girls were equally as likely as boys to witness violence on their
commute to and from school as boys (21% of boys compared to 22% of girls), but boys were more likely to be victims
of violence during the commute (8% of boys compared to 3% of girls). Violence included seeing someone punched,
kicked, choked, beaten up, attacked with a weapon, shot or shot at (Boston Public Health Commission, 2008).
Suicide and Self Injury
According to the Health and Risk Behaviors of Massachusetts Youth, 2007: The Report, Massachusetts high school
girls were more likely than high school boys to report hurting themselves and to seriously consider suicide. In
2007,
✜✜ 22% of girls reported non-suicidal harm to themselves (compared to 12% of boys),
✜✜ 16% reported seriously considering suicide (compared to 9% of boys),
✜✜ 13% reported making a suicide plan (compared to 9% of boys), and
✜✜ 9% reported attempting suicide (compared to 6% of boys) 2
(Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2008).
1 Source: Weapon Related Injury Surveillance System, Injury Surveillance Program, Center for Health Information, Statistics, Research
and Evaluation, MA Dept. of Public Health accessed through MassCHIP. WRISS case criteria: any gunshot-related injury treated in an
acute care MA hospital emergency department (ED) regardless of intent (e.g., assault-related, intentional self-inflicted, unintentional) and
any assault-related stabbing incident (cut/pierce injury). Gunshot wounds include those resulting from firearms, non-powder guns such as
airguns, and other guns. One limitation of the WRISS system is underreporting; reporting levels statewide are approximately 80-85% for
gunshot injuries and 70-75% for assault-related sharp instrument wounds.
2 The difference in suicide attempts between boys and girls is not statistically significant.
52
Suicidal and Non-Suicidal Self-Injury Among MA High School Students, 2007
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
22%
16%
12%
Non-Suicidal Self
Harm
13%
9%
9%
Seriously Considered
Suicide
Made a Suicide Plan
Female
9%
6%
Attempted Suicide
Male
Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Health and Risk Behaviors of
Massachusetts Youth, 2007: The Report.
The good news is that from 1995 to 2005, the number of girls who reported seriously considering suicide, attempting
suicide, making a suicide plan and being treated medically for a suicide attempt decreased. The percent of girls who
seriously considered suicide and made a suicide plan decreased by more than half during this time.
Another statewide data source reveals that the number and rate of male suicides exceeded the female number and rate
of suicides at every age group (Massachusetts Department of Public Health, 2008). In 2005, twelve females ages 1524 committed suicide compared to 42 males, which translates into a rate of 2.9 per 100,000 for females and 9.7 per
100,000 for males during this year. This demonstrates that while more girls than boys consider and attempt suicide,
boys are more successful when they do attempt.
However, females had a higher rate of hospital stays for self-inflicted injury than males during 2005. The highest hospitalization rate for females was in the 15-24 year age group (154.6 per 100,000). This rate was not only higher than
the rates for other female age groups, it was much higher than the 15-24 year old males, whose rate was 81.7. Girls
ages 5-14 also had higher rates of hospitalization for self-inflicted injury than boys in that age group (Massachusetts
Department of Public Health, 2008).
Statewide High School Female Suicide Indicators, 1995-2007
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
Seriously considered suicide, past year
Made a suicide plan, past year
Attempted suicide, past year
Treated medically for a suicide attempt
Data Sources: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2005 Massachusetts Youth Risk
Behavior Survey Results, Appendix C.; and Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Health and Risk Behaviors of Massachusetts Youth, 2007: The Report.
53
Girls as Perpetrators of Violence
Most of the violence-related self-report indicators tested in Health and Risk Behaviors of Massachusetts Youth, 2007:
The Report, show that girls statewide are less involved with being perpetrators of violence than boys (Massachusetts
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2008). For example, in 2007:
✜✜ The percentage of high school boys who reported that they had bullied or pushed someone around during
the previous twelve months was twice that of girls (18% vs. 9%). However, many girls do not consider the
relational aggression they commit as bullying. Girls’ bullying can take the form of rumor spreading, secretdivulging, alliance building, backstabbing, ignoring, excluding from social groups and activities, verbally
insulting, and using hostile body language (i.e., eye rolling and smirking) (National Association of School
Psychologists, 2005), which they may not consider bullying.
✜✜ Male students were more than two times more likely than female students to report carrying a weapon on
school property (7% vs. 3%).
✜✜ Fighting on school property was significantly more common among male students (12%, compared to 8% of
females).
✜✜ Significantly more male than female high school students reported carrying a weapon in the previous thirty
days (24% vs. 5%), carrying a gun in the past 30 days (13% vs. 4%), and being a member of a gang in the past
year (6% vs. 1%).
✜✜ Data collected through the Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center’s 2006 Boston Youth Survey reveal
similar gender disparity for the City of Boston. In 2006, 43% of boys reported that they had carried a knife in
the past twelve months compared to 23% of girls. Additionally, 10% of boys reported that they had carried a
gun in the past 12 months compared to 3% of girls (Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center, April 2008).
✜✜ While boys are more likely to report getting into physical fights than girls, the percent of girls who report
fighting is significant and varies considerably by grade. Girls in the lower grades of high school tend to get in
more physical fights than girls in the higher grades. In 2005, 25.2% percent of 9th graders and 24.5% of 10th
graders reported that they were in a physical fight within the past year compared to 19.0% of 11th graders
and 12.8% of 12th graders (Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2008). The
numbers of girls who reported fighting has decreased from 1995 to 2005 for all grades.
Percent of Girls Reporting that they were in a Physical Fight in the Past Year
40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
35.4
32.2
33.6
21.6
27.0
23.8
20.7
21.7
15.0
31.6
28.1
21.7
19.3
27.9
26.5
24.8
20.0
23.8
19.3
19.9
25.2
24.5
19.0
17.5
12.8
10.0
5.0
0.0
1995
1997
9th grade
1999
10th grade
2001
11th grade
2003
2005
12th grade
Data Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2005 Massachusetts Youth Risk
Behavior Survey Results, Appendix C.
54
Substance Abuse
According to self-reports, Massachusetts girls are less likely than Massachusetts boys to use illegal drugs. However,
their illegal drug use is significant. In 2005, over half of female twelfth graders reported having used marijuana in
their lifetimes and one quarter reported having used marijuana in the past month. Over 8% reported that they had used
cocaine at least once in their lifetimes.
Statewide Self-Reported Substance Use by Female High School Seniors, 1995-2005
70.0
60.0
57.9
56.7
35.6
33.7
58.0
55.9
55.1
50.4
50.0
40.0
31.4
30.0
32.3
29.9
30.4
29.9
30.0
25.1
27.9
24.7
20.0
18.6
10.0
8.6
7.3
7.2
1995
1997
10.2
7.9
8.3
0.0
1999
A ny marijuana us e, lifetime
2001
M arijuana us e, pas t month
2003
A ny cocaine us e, lifetime
2005
Offered/s old drugs at s chool
Data Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2005 Massachusetts Youth Risk
Behavior Survey Results, Appendix C.
Statewide, alcohol and tobacco use was fairly similar for male and female high school students in 2007. However,
a smaller percentage of females reported having their first drink of alcohol before the age of 13 compared to males
(16% vs. 23%); and females were far less likely to report smoking cigars, cigarillos, little cigars or smokeless tobacco
use in the past 30 days than males.
In 2005, high school girls in Boston were either less likely or statistically equally as likely as high school boys in
Boston to report alcohol and illegal drug use (Boston Public Health Commission, 2007). Additionally, 2005 data seem
to show that high school girls in Boston were less likely to report alcohol and illegal drug use than girls statewide.
For example, while over 24% of high school girls statewide reported binge drinking in the past month, only 15% of
high school girls in Boston did so. And while over 23% of high school girls statewide reported marijuana use in the
past month, only 18.3% of high school girls in Boston did so.
Reported Alcohol and Illegal Drug Use by Male and Female High School Students in Boston and
Female High School Students Statewide, 2005
90
77
80
71.270.3
70
60
47.6
50
42.7 40.1
37.7
40
41.2
38.238.5
30
24.7
23.4 23.5
18.3
20
15
10
6.6
1 2.6
2.3
4.2
1.7
17.8
44
27.3
21.9
4.9 6.5
4
lif
e,
e,
us
oh
A
lc
A
lc
ol
oh
us
ol
U
sy
ta
cs
,E
A
M
M
D
pa
Bi
st
ng
m
on
ed
th
rin
ki
ng
,p
as
tm
on
lif
et
th
im
ei
lli
ci
td
pa
ru
st
g
m
us
on
e
th
ill
ic
it
dr
ug
us
e
e
im
et
tim
,l
se
e,
us
e
in
am
et
ph
m
ha
et
m
ife
et
lif
et
lif
e,
us
e
in
ca
co
ny
e
e
im
e
im
e
im
et
lif
e,
us
n
io
er
H
A
ar
M
A
ny
m
iju
ar
an
a
iju
us
an
a
e,
us
pa
e,
st
lif
m
et
on
im
th
e
0
Statewide Female
Bos ton Female
Bos ton M ales
Data Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2005 Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior
Survey Results, Appendix C; and Boston Public Health Commission, Substance Abuse in Boston, March 2007.
55
Additionally, in the City of Boston in 2007, 143 girls ages 15-19 were admitted to substance abuse treatment programs. The number of girls admitted to substance abuse treatment in Boston has ranged from a low of 133 in 2004
to a high or 227 in 1993.
Boston Substance Abuse Treatment Admissions for Girls Ages 15-19,
1992-2007
Data Source: MassCHIP, BSAS Substance Abuse Admissions: Count, retrieved July 10, 2009.
Other Self-Report Data on Risk and Protective Factors
Self report data from Health and Risk Behaviors of Massachusetts Youth, 2007: The Report show additional gender
differences between risk and protective factors among high school and middle school students.
Health and Nutrition: Female high school students were less likely than male students (18% vs.32%) to report
drinking non-diet soda one or more times per day during the past seven days, but only 10% of girls reported drinking
the recommended three glasses of milk per day, compared to 19% of boys. Female high school students were less
likely than male high school students to report that they were physically active for at least the recommended sixty
minutes per day on five or more of the past seven days (32% vs. 50%). Female high school students were less likely
than male students to be definitely overweight, however female students were more likely to perceive themselves as
overweight and more likely to be trying to lose weight. While only 7% of high school girls were definitely overweight
according to their self-reported body mass index, 36% perceived themselves to be overweight and 63% were reported
that they were trying to lose weight.
Weight and Weight Control by Gender, 2007 (Statewide)
70%
63%
60%
50%
36%
40%
29%
30%
22%
15%
20%
10%
7%
0%
Definitely Overweight
Perceive Themselves as
Overweight
high school females
56
Trying to Lose Weight
high school males
Data Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Health and Risk Behaviors of Massachusetts Youth, 2007: The Report.
Mental Health: In 2007, a significantly larger percentage of female high school students than males reported
feeling so sad or depressed daily for at least two weeks during the previous year that they discontinued usual activities
(31% vs. 17%). A larger proportion of female high school students than males reported feeling a need to talk to
someone in the previous twelve month other than a family member regarding their feelings and/or current issues in
their lives (59% vs. 31%). In middle school, a significantly greater proportion of girls compared with boys reported
feeling depressed (20% vs. 13%) and of feeling the need to talk to an adult outside their family (40% vs. 25%).
Pregnancy
While teenage pregnancy rates have declined steadily in the past decade, black and Hispanic girls are still becoming
mothers at a much higher rate than white girls in Boston. In 2005, the white adolescent birth rate for girls ages 15-17
was 5.1, while the rate for black girls was 21.6 and the rate for Hispanic girls was 29.7 (Boston Public Health Commission, 2007). More recent data (2006-2008) was not available from the Boston Public Health Commission.
Birth Rates Among Adolescents Ages 15-17 by Race/Ethnicity, Boston, 1993-2005
90
7 9 .5
80
7 0 .6
70
65
60
6 4 .4
6 5 .7
6 8 .3
5 6 .8
55
6 0 .7
5 8 .8
5 0 .1
4 7 .7
50
4 6 .9
40
4 9 .5
3 8 .8
3 7 .9
30
34
2 9 .7
3 6 .4
3 2 .7
20
10
3 5 .5
4 5 .2
2 9 .1
2 6 .7
27
2 1 .6
1 7 .6
1 9 .2
1 6 .4
1 6 .2
1 3 .8
1 3 .5
1 1 .8
9 .8
1 1 .3
1 2 .8
1 0 .8
8 .7
5 .1
0
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
Black
1999
Latina
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
White
Source: Boston Public Health Commission. (2007). Boston Natality 2007: A Review of 2005 Birth Data, p. 10.
Juvenile Justice System Involvement
The flow of juveniles through the Massachusetts Juvenile Justice system is complicated, with many options at each
decision point, making it difficult to create a simple chart. However, there are some basic steps that can help to understand how the system works. To see these basic steps, please go to Appendix 10.
Arrests
In the City of Boston in 2008, there were 123 girls age 16 and under arrested for Violent Part I crime (robbery, attempted robbery, and aggravated assault) and 80 girls age 16 and under arrested for Property Part I crime (burglary,
attempted burglary, larceny, attempted larceny, vehicle theft and attempted vehicle theft). Additionally, 156 girls
ages 16 and under were arrested for Part II crime, which included other assaults, vandalism, weapons violations,
prostitution, drugs, and disorderly conduct. Total Part I crime arrests in 2008 were 16% lower than the high of 243
in 2002 but 42% higher than in the previous year. Total Part II crime arrests in 2008 were 28% lower than the high
of 216 in 2004 and 4% lower than the previous year.
57
City of Boston Arrests for Part I Crimes, Female Ages 16 and Under, 2000-2008
180
154
160
140
123
119
105
100
80
137
135
130
120
159
90
108
94
88
78
60
71
80
80
62
40
53
20
0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Violent Crime
2005
2006
2007
2008
Property Crime
Data Source: Boston Police Department (received May 28, 2009). Part I violent crimes are
homicide, rape & attempted, robbery & attempted, aggravated assault. Part II property crimes
include burglary & attempted, larceny & attempted, vehicle theft & attempted.
City of Boston Arrests for Part I and II Crime, Female 16 & Under, 2000-2008
Violent Crime
Property Crime
Homicide
Rape & Attempted
Robbery & Attempted
Aggravated Assault
Burglary & Attempted
Larceny & Attempted
Vehicle Theft & Attempted
Total Part I
Other Assaults
Vandalism
Weapons Violations
Prostitution
Drugs
DWI
Disorderly Conduct
Other Part II
Total Part II
2000
130
94
0
0
13
117
8
75
11
224
55
5
2
11
16
0
34
30
153
2001
105
88
0
0
10
95
3
70
15
193
45
3
6
10
12
0
48
30
154
2002
135
108
0
0
27
108
6
76
26
243
54
5
4
7
21
0
55
25
171
2003
154
78
0
0
25
129
5
56
17
232
57
6
2
5
19
0
40
32
161
2004
159
71
0
0
16
143
11
52
8
230
72
26
5
5
11
0
65
32
216
2005
119
80
1
0
11
107
11
63
6
199
69
5
6
2
16
0
53
28
179
Data Source: Boston Police Department (received May 28, 2009).
58
2006
137
62
0
0
28
109
6
56
0
199
72
5
2
6
11
0
53
26
175
2007
90
53
0
0
18
72
11
41
1
143
62
2
5
0
13
0
54
27
163
2008
123
80
0
0
28
95
13
65
2
203
53
7
4
2
15
0
55
20
156
Juvenile Court
While boys are still more likely than girls to be involved in the juvenile justice system, girls’ involvement is significant, especially at the less criminal levels. While girls represented fewer than 10% of the youthful offender indictments both statewide and in Suffolk County in 2007, they represented almost half of the Children in Need of Services
(CHINS) applications and approximately one quarter of delinquencies.
Representation of Girls in Suffolk Juvenile Court
and Statewide Juvenile Court, 2007
60%
50%
47%
48%
40%
27%
30%
22%
20%
10%
2%
5%
0%
CHINS Applications
Delinquency
Suffolk
Youthful Offender
Statewide
Source: Massachusetts Trial Court. Trial Court Case Statistics Directory. Retrieved March 6, 2009,
from http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/stats/index.html.
While property offenses and person offenses1 were the two most common delinquency offenses for both males and
females in 2006, there were differences in offenses by gender. For example, in 2006, approximately 40% of the females were sent to Juvenile Court for person offenses while only 28% of the boys were sent to Juvenile Court for
person offenses. In contrast, for property offenses, the male percentage was higher by the exact same number, 40% to
28% for females (Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, 2008).
1 Crimes are frequently divided into five or six categories: 1) property offenses, 2) person offenses, 3) controlled substance offenses, 4)
motor vehicle offenses, 5) weapons offenses, and 6) other public order offenses. Person Offenses include the following: aggravated assault
(an actual, attempted or threatened physical attack on a person that involves the use of a weapon or causes serious physical harm); criminal
homicide; robbery (actual or attempted unlawful taking of property in the direct possession of a person by force or threat of force); simple
assault (attempted or threatened physical attack on a person that causes less than serious physical harm without a weapon; includes nonphysical attacks causing fear of an attack.); violent sexual assault (actual or attempted sexual intercourse or sexual assaults against a person
against her or his will by force or threat of force); and other person offenses (such as harassment, coercion, kidnapping, reckless endangerment, stalking, etc.).
59
Girls’ Involvement in Juvenile Court Statewide, 2004-2007
5,000
4,500
4,000
4,370
4,384
4,206
4,300
3,987
4,085
3,690
3,500
3,662
3,466
3,000
3,148
3,085
2,862
2,500
3,317
2,944
2,610
2,000
2004
2005
CHINS Applications (Juv. Court)
2006
2007
CHINS Petitions (Juv. Court)
2008
Delinquency (Juv. Court)
Source: Massachusetts Trial Court. Trial Court Case Statistics Directory. Retrieved March 6, 2009, from
http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/stats/index.html.
Girls’ Involvement in Suffolk Juvenile Court, 2004-2007
900
784
800
700
769
713
682
653
600
500
586
552
400
486
494
300
434
439
411
386
355
351
200
100
0
2004
2005
CHINS Applications (Juv. Court)
2006
2007
CHINS Petitions (Juv. Court)
2008
Delinquency (Juv. Court)
Source: Massachusetts Trial Court. Trial Court Case Statistics Directory. Retrieved March 6, 2009, from
http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/stats/index.html.
Over the past five years, girls’ involvement in the Juvenile Court seems to have decreased slightly or at least remained
steady both statewide and in Suffolk County. In 2008, girls from Suffolk County represented 17% of the female
CHINS applications, 14% of the female CHINS petitions and 11% of the female delinquencies statewide.
60
Probation Information
Most juveniles who are found delinquent in Juvenile Court are placed on probation supervision.1 Statewide, from
1992 to 2002, the number of girls placed on probation increased steadily, almost tripling in number (Massachusetts
Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, 2008; Office of the Commissioner of Probation, 2009). And while
the numbers have decreased since then, the overall percentage of girls as a total of the new probations has remained
between 21% and 23% since 2001 (up from 14% in 1992). The decreasing numbers of juvenile placed in probation
statewide pertains to boys as well as girls.
Number of Juveniles Placed on Probation by Gender, 1992-2007
6,000
5,076 5,306 4,995
4,504
5,000
4,967
4,257
3,820
4,000
3,937
3,352
3,062
4,092
3,770 3,675
3,564
2,854 2,746
3,000
2,000
1,000 506
510
500
696
863
1,000
1,367 1,443 1,139 1,157
1,210 1,223 1,259
1,065
948 950
0
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Males
Females
Sources: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, 2008 Three Year Plan; Office of the Commissioner of Probation, March 2009.
1 All mention of probation in this document refers to risk/need probation. Risk/need probation is exercised in all felony, misdemeanor,
and delinquency cases in which supervision is ordered by the court, except for those cases which are assigned to DUIL supervision,
CHINS supervision, and administrative supervision. Risk/need supervision is designed for only those cases where a comprehensive assessment and classification process is necessary to respond effectively to the risk to the community presented by the offender and to the
individual offender’s needs. Administrative supervision is exercised in those cases where the primary purpose of the court’s order is the
enforcement of the collection of monies and/or any specific court orders. Care and Protection cases are subject to administrative supervision. For the rest of this report, we will refer to “risk/need probation” as simply “probation.”
61
Percent of Statewide Juveniles Placed on Probation that are Female,
1992-2007
25%
21%
21%
18% 19%
20%
23% 22% 22% 22%
21% 21%
19% 19%
17%
15% 15%
15% 14%
10%
5%
0%
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Sources: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, 2008 Three Year Plan;
Office of the Commissioner of Probation, March 2009.
From 1992 to 2007, between 42% and 57% of the girls on probation were person offenders.1 The percent of female
probationers who are person offenders appears to be increasing.
Percent of Female Probationers who were Person Offenders,
1992-2007
60%
54% 54%
48% 47% 47%
46%
50%
51%
57%
51% 51%
53% 54% 54%
52%
49%
42%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Sources: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, 2008 Three Year Plan;
Office of the Commissioner of Probation, March 2009.
1 See footnote on p.59 for a complete description of what types of actions fall under person offenders.
62
A snapshot from 2004 shows certain characteristics and needs of girls placed on probation statewide (see chart). According to the Probation Department, a majority of the girls placed on probation in 2004 had attitude problems, peer
relations problems, home discipline problems, social relations needs, education needs, counseling needs, family relations needs, and substance abuse problems (Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety, 2004).
Although males and female probationers have many similar characteristics and needs, in 2005 and 2006, there were
gender differences in two notable areas: residence changes and family relations needs. In 2005 and 2006, 19% of
girls had had two or more residence changes in the past year compared to 14-15% of boys. In 2005, 71% of girls were
deemed to have had a family-relations need compared to 63% of boys. In 2006, 73% of girls were deemed to have
had a family-relations need compared to 65% of boys (Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security,
2008).
Needs and Characteristics of Girls on Probation, 2004
94%
A ttitude Problem
83%
Peer Relation Problem
83%
Home Dis cipline Problem
82%
Social Relations Need
82%
School Dis cipline Problem
78%
Education Need
73%
Couns eling Need
70%
Family Relations Need
58%
Subs tance A bus e Problem
52%
Younger than 15 Years at Firs t Offens e
46%
Drug A bus e Need
38%
A lcohol A bus e Need
25%
Prior Record within the Pas t 5 Years
24%
Prior Probation within the Pas t 5 Years
17%
2 or M ore Res idence Changes withint Pas t Year
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Source: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security.
From 2003 to 2007, between 9% and 12% of female juvenile probationers statewide were from Suffolk County. Data
on female juvenile probationers from Suffolk County for the past few years seem to follow similar trends as the statewide data.
63
Number of Girls in Suffolk County Placed on Probation, 2003-2007
160
140
136
135
116
120
91
87
2006
2007
100
80
60
40
20
0
2003
2004
2005
Data Source: Office of the Commissioner of Probation, March 2009. Chart refers to risk/
need probation placements
However, the percent of female probationers who were person offenders was higher in Suffolk County than statewide
for the past five years. For example, in 2007 while 52% of girls statewide were placed on probation for person offenses, in Suffolk County, 64% of the girls placed on probation were placed for person offenses.
Percent of Female Probationers who are Person Offenders, Suffolk County
and Statewide, 2003-2007
90%
81%
80%
68%
70%
60%
53%
64%
64%
54%
64%
57%
54%
52%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2003
2004
2005
Statewide
2006
2007
Suffolk County
Data Sources: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security; and Office of the Commissioner of Probation, March 2009.
64
DYS Information
There are two primary levels of involvement in DYS: detention and commitment.
✜✜ Detention: Detention occurs when girls are held securely in a DYS facility while awaiting trial or another
placement. Massachusetts state law allows the secure detention of a juvenile when the release of such juvenile will not reasonably assure his or her appearance before the court (M.G.L. c. 276, sec. 58) and when it is
determined after a full hearing that a danger would be posed to any person or the community if the juvenile
were released (M.G.L. c. 276, sec. 58a).
✜✜ DYS Commitment: When youth are “committed to DYS” it means that they have been adjudicated a
delinquent child on a complaint or adjudicated a youthful offender on an indictment, and, because of that
adjudication, they will be in the custody of DYS until age 18, 19 or 211. “Committed to DYS” does not
necessarily mean living in a DYS facility. The continuum of care for a juvenile who is committed to DYS
is: Assessment, Residential Phase, Hardware/Secure Treatment, Staff Secure Treatment, Community Phase/
Day Reporting, and Discharge. DYS commitment data is presented either as total number of new commitments in a year or as the total number in the DYS committed population on a specific day.
Detention: “Detention is not a therapeutic environment or a gateway to treatment and should only be used when
absolutely necessary” (Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee, 2007). Various groups in Massachusetts have expressed concern that detention has been overused and that judicial bail decisions may be influenced by
factors other than those in Massachusetts state law, including a lack of access to mental health or substance abuse
programs and a lack of available Department of Children and Families (DCF) placements (JJAC, 2007). In 2008,
862 girls were sent to secure detention facilities statewide, 138 of whom were from the Metro Region (Suffolk
County). While the number of girls sent to secure detention is lower than the number of boys, and while the number
of girls has decreased over the past few years, 862 still represents a large number of girls being exposed to potential negative influences of secure detention. A recent analysis of a sample of Suffolk County detentions shows that
the average length of stay for girls in detention is approximately one month (similar to the average length of stay
for boys) (DYS, n.d.). National research has shown the following potential negative influences of secure detention
placements:
✜✜ Detention mixes youth that have less serious levels of offending with youth that have more serious levels
of offending. Lower offending youth who are placed in a secure detention setting are likely to make new
friends that are negative influences, learn new crime-related skills, break new social taboos, and develop a
criminal identity (Holman & Ziedenberg, 2006).
✜✜ Detention separates youth from their families, schools and support systems, disrupting the continuity of
activities (Austin, Johnson, & Weitzer, 2005) and causing additional stress to youth who may already be
suffering from depression or other mental illness (Holman & Ziedenberg, 2006). This risk may disproportionately affect girls since they are more likely to suffer from mental illnesses and since relationships and
connectedness are such important protective factors.
✜✜ Detention increases the likelihood that children will be placed out of their homes in the future, even when
controlling for offense, prior history and other factors (Rust, 1999).
1 If a juvenile is adjudicated a delinquent child and committed to DYS, he or she will usually be committed until age 18. In the case of
a child whose case is disposed of after he or she has attained his or her 18th birthday, he or she will be committed until age 19. If charged
as a youthful offender, he or she could be committed until age 21 (Mass. Gen. Laws ch.119, § 58).
65
Statewide Secure Detention Placements by Gender, 2000-2008
Source: Massachusetts Department of Youth Services, 2009.
Metro Region Secure Detention Placements by Gender, 2000-2008
Source: Massachusetts Department of Youth Services, 2009.
66
DYS Commitment: Statewide, the number of females in the total DYS committed population in 2008 was 291.
This figure is a drastic decrease from its high of 514 in 2003. However, the percent of females in the total DYS population has not decreased. Since 2002, it has ranged between 15% and 17% whereas it ranged between 7% and 9%
from 1992 to 1996.
DYS Statewide Female Committed Caseload, 1998-2008
600
514
478
500
390
400
477
453
440
411
385
358
318
291
300
200
100
0
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Source: Massachusetts Department of Youth Services, 2008.
Percent of the Total Statewide Committed Population that is Female, 1992-2007
20%
18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
17%
16% 16%
15%
12%
16%
15%
13% 13%
11%
8%
8%
7%
8%
9%
Jan- Jan- Jan- Jan- Jan- Jan- Jan- Dec- Dec- Jan- Jan- Jan- Jan- Jan- Jan92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
02
03
04
05
06
07
Source: Massachusetts Department of Youth Services. .
In 2008, there were 30 girls from Suffolk County in the DYS committed population, representing approximately 10%
of the total number of girls statewide. Similarly to the statewide DYS female committed population, 44% of them
were age 17.
67
Both statewide and in Suffolk County, girls of color are overrepresented among the DYS committed population compared to their numbers in the general youth population. Although minority girls make up 24% of the Massachusetts
youth population, they make up 63% of the DYS committed population. In Suffolk County, while minority girls make
up 55% of the youth population, they make up 90% of the DYS committed population.
Statewide, black and Hispanic girls appear to be the most overrepresented of the minority groups. While black girls
make up 8% of the statewide youth population, they make up 24% of the statewide DYS committed population. And
while Hispanic girls make up 11% of the population, they make up 32% of the DYS committed population. In Suffolk
County, the numbers are too small to make significant comparisons by group.
Statewide DYS Female Committed Caseload
By Race, 7/1/08
Asian, 4
(2%)
Suffolk County Female DYS Committed
Caseload By Race, 7/1/08
Asian, 1
(3%)
Other, 14
(5%)
White, 98
37%
Hispanic,
84
(32%)
Hispanic,
3
(10%)
Other, 1
(3%)
White, 3
(10%)
Black, 22
(74%)
Black, 62
(24%)
Source: Massachusetts Department of Youth Services.
Statewide white
Statewide black
Statewide Hispanic
Statewide Asian
Statewide minority
Suffolk County white
Suffolk County black
Suffolk County Hispanic
Suffolk County Asian
Suffolk County minority
68
Percent in DYS
Committed
Population (2008)
37%
24%
32%
2%
63%
10%
74%
10%
3%
90%
Percent in General
Youth Population
(2007)
76%
8%
11%
5%
24%
45%
26%
21%
8%
55%
Overrepresentation of Minority Girls in DYS Custody, 2008
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
90%
63%
55%
24%
Statewide
Suffolk County
Percent Minority in DYS Committed Population (2008)
Percent Minority in General Youth Population (2007)
The most frequent offenses for girls committed to DYS in 2008 were person crimes, followed by property crimes.
Statewide, 45% of the girls committed to DYS were committed for person crimes, and 23% were committed for
property crimes. In Suffolk County, 71% of the girls were committed to DYS for person crimes and 20% for property
crimes.
Statewide Female DYS Committed Caseload
By Offense Type, 7/1/08
Weapons,
8
(3%)
Drugs, 15
(6%)
Weapons,
1
(3%)
Public
Order, 54
(21%)
Drugs, 1
(3%)
Person,
120
(45%)
Motor
Vehicle, 6
(2%)
Suffolk County Female DYS Committed
Caseload By Offense Type, 7/1/08
Public
Order, 1
(3%)
Property, 6
(20%)
Person, 21
(71%)
Property,
59
(23%)
Source: Massachusetts Department of Youth Services.
69
Similar to differences in juvenile justice populations across the nation, the Massachusetts DYS committed population shows certain differences based on gender. For example, in 2006, while nearly
55% of the total DYS committed population (both boys and girls) had received services from the
Department of Social Services prior to commitment, 75% of the girls committed to DYS reported
receiving services (Massachusetts Department of Youth Services, 2006).
The following information, while it pertains to both boys and girls in the Massachusetts DYS committed population, can be very helpful in considering appropriate policy changes and services for
system-involved girls (all of the following information is from the DYS Public Information Packet,
2006).
Family Backgrounds:
✜✜ n only one of every eight cases (12%) do both of the juvenile’s biological parents serve as
his or her legal guardian;
✜✜ More than 40% of the families of DYS committed juveniles were receiving Department of
Transitional Assistance (DTA) at the time of commitment;
✜✜ More than half of the biological mothers of DYS committed juveniles were unemployed at
the time of their child’s commitment;
✜✜ Only 40% of the biological fathers of DYS committed juveniles were employed either full
or part time at the time of their child’s commitment; and
✜✜ Fewer than half of the biological mothers and fathers of DYS committed juveniles had completed the 12th grade.
Prior Services:
✜✜ Nearly half of DYS committed juveniles were placed in an out-of-home residential placement by another agency prior to commitment;
✜✜ Nearly 75% of DYS committed juveniles were known to have been adjudicated delinquent
(found guilty of a crime) and placed on probation at least once prior to their commitment to
DYS.
Alcohol and Drug Use:
✜✜ 61% of committed juveniles reported using alcohol prior to commitment, with 25% of the
population reporting at least weekly consumption;
✜✜ 82% of committed juveniles reported using marijuana prior to commitment, with nearly half
of the population reporting at least weekly use.
Education:
✜✜ Approximately 45% of DYS committed juveniles have been identified as having special
education needs.
70
V. Oregon and Florida:
Community Mobilization and Legislative Action
toward Gender Specific Programming
A few states across the nation have boldly attempted to understand and
institute gender-responsive approaches and gender-specific programming
for girls within the juvenile justice system and those at risk of entering it.
This report takes examples from a variety of these efforts but relies most
heavily on the comprehensive efforts in the states of Florida and Oregon.
This section offers a summary of the legislative efforts in these two states.
It is interesting to note that while the effort was community-initiated in both cases, state
government agencies ultimately took ownership in order to fully implement the changes
needed. In the case of Florida, it was the state Juvenile Justice Department, the equivalent of
Massachusetts’s Department of Youth Services (DYS); in Oregon it was the state Commission
on Children and Families, the equivalent of Massachusetts’s Department of Children and
Families (DCF). This demonstrates that there is no one set model that must be emulated; efforts
to provide gender-responsive services can develop in a manner that is most conducive to the
needs of a particular state and the interest and willingness of a particular state agency.
Florida Legislative Process Timeline and Summary
2002-2003 (approximately)
PACE Center for Girls, an organization in Broward County, Florida, was the driving force pushing for a piece of
legislation that would require gender-specific programming and services for the state’s juvenile justice system. PACE
targeted a newly elected representative, Ellyn Senator Bogdanoff of the 91st District, who had worked in the community with PACE, to be the bill sponsor. Bogdanoff agreed to sponsor House Bill 1589, which later was folded in to
a broader education bill, House Bill 1989 (Nevins, 2008).
July 1, 2004 (Enacted)
Co-sponsored by Representatives Kilmer, Bogdanoff, and Needelman, the Florida State Legislature passes House
Bill 1989 which directs that the Department of Juvenile Justice programs provide gender-specific services to delinquent youth:
71
The Legislature finds that the prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation needs of youth
served by the juvenile justice system are gender-specific. Gender-specific programming refers to unique program models and services that comprehensively address
the needs of a targeted gender group. Gender-specific services require the adherence
to the principle of equity to ensure that the different interests of young women and
men are recognized and varying needs are met, with equality as the desired outcome.
Gender-specific programming focuses on the differences between young females’ and
young males’ roles and responsibilities, positions in society, access to and use of resources, and social odes governing behavior.
(Florida Statutes 985.02, Section (8) (a) (b), page 2)
This bill, which became Chapter 2004-333 of the Laws of Florida, also directed the Florida OPPAGA (Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability) to analyze juvenile programs for female offenders within the
Department of Juvenile Justice.
December 2005
OPPAGA Report released examining the characteristics of delinquent girls and whether prevention, detention, and
probation programs are designed to meet girls’ gender-specific needs. The report finds that contracted prevention
programs meet most, but not all gender-specific criteria, and it recommends that the Department of Juvenile Justice
revise its grant awarding process to increase scoring criteria for applicants utilizing more gender specificity. This report also found that detention facilities needed to better train staff on how to work with delinquent girls (OPPAGA,
2005b, p. 1).
April 2006
OPPAGA Report released comparing the costs of girls’ residential juvenile justice programs to boys’. The report finds
that while generally girls programs have higher health care and hygiene costs, overall cost varied by risk level of the
program (costs were consistently equal for clothing and overtime staffing). Interestingly, the cost for boys and girls
in a high-risk program was the same, while the per diem cost was $9 more for girls in a moderate-risk program and
$3 less for girls than boys in a low-risk program (OPPAGA, 2006, p. 1).
Currently
The Department of Juvenile Justice is focusing on the challenges of successful reentry. Each residential program aims
to have a “transition coordinator” responsible for creating a Community Assessment Team (CAT) for each girl. The
CAT works with the girl’s mother and is composed of someone from her school, a mentor, and a vocational professional. The biggest challenge is when a girl cannot go home and needs to be set-up for Independent Living (Mills,
2008).
Oregon Legislative Process Timeline and Summary
1992
The Oregon Commission on Children and Families (CCF) issued a grant to develop and disseminate a collection of
interrelated communications and media products designed to better educate the public on the issues related to female
offenders. One result of the grant was an informational brochure containing 50 ways to assist girls and young women
in one’s home community, titled 50 Ways to Help Girls and Young Women (Greene et. al., 1998).
1993
A community network, The Coalition of Advocates for Equal Access for Girls, helped pass House Bill 3576, (enacted
72
July 18, 1993 as ORS 417.270), which required all state agencies serving youth under age 18 to ensure that girls and
boys had equal access to appropriate and gender-specific services, treatment, and facilities. The Bill stated:
The legislature acknowledges that females under 18 when compared to males under
18 often lack equal access to service and treatment provided by human services organizations. The legislature and DHS declares that it is a matter of best interest for
the state that males and females under 18 have equal access to gender appropriate
services, facilities and treatments.
(Oregon DHS policy #DHS-010-004, 2004)
Additionally state agencies were charged with ensuring that such access was also available through community services statewide, and they were required to submit a biennial report to the Legislative Assembly on Equal Access to
Services for Boys and Girls.
1996
The Oregon CCF used federal DOJ Formula Grant funding to create a training curriculum for all juvenile justice
advocates and Children’s Commission members. This curriculum and information package, Vision for Collaboration,
was designed to educate individuals of the need for and content of gender-specific services and to encourage community planning for alternatives to incarceration for young men and women (Greene et. al., 1998).
1997-98
The Oregon CCF continued this effort using Formula Grants funding to contract for a statewide research project concerning dependent and delinquent female adolescents. The report titled, Young Women in the Juvenile Justice System
in Oregon, was released at a Girls’ Summit organized in a partnership between the Commission and the Coalition
(Greene et. al., 1998).
2002
The Oregon Criminal Justice Commission Juvenile Crime Prevention Program and the Oregon CCF contracted consultants to write an implementation guide for effective gender-responsive programming. This is the document that has
guided much of our Massachusetts work to date.
2005
The Oregon Department of Human Services passed policy #DHS-010-004, titled Gender-Specific Services for Children and Youth. In addition to stating the following, the policy also detailed the specific actions it would take to
achieve this:
a. Gender-specific perspectives and practices for children and youth will be integrated, where appropriate, into
all parts of the Department’s service continuum and work-culture.
b. The Department’s service continuum includes intake to follow-up aftercare, program development through
program evaluation; services and treatment, where appropriate.
Currently:
The Oregon Youth Authority (OYA) convened a working group to make recommendations to the Oregon’s appropriate Legislative Body, the Ways and Means Public Safety Sub-Committee. OYA’s working group has issued a 20072009 Action Plan that lays out the steps for providing a continuum of services and programs for young women that
are gender-specific and based on research and best practice (OYA, 2007).
73
action advocacy partners action advocacy partners
VI. Community Action Plan
for Massachusetts
1. The Process: Government, Community,
Policy, Legislation & Advocacy
After five years of meeting as a learning community and improving the capacity of the seven agencies to deliver girls’ programming, in 2008 the Girls’ Initiative (GI) was awarded the Youth Policy
Initiative grant from the Boston Foundation to develop an advocacy plan to move the learning community’s work from concept to policy. After much discussion, the network decided to direct its efforts
towards advocating for the state to adopt gender-specific approaches when working with high-risk
girls. In order to develop the most comprehensive and inclusive set of gender-specific criteria, the
network embarked on a year of state agency meetings, community meetings, and research into best
practices around the country. This two-year journey continues today and has included community,
government, research, policy, advocacy and legislative components. Following is a road map of how
we got here.
Government Agencies:
The GI identified the Department of Youth Services, the Department of Children and Families, and the Division
of Juvenile Probation1 as primary partners in our advocacy efforts. Meetings were then held with these targeted
government agencies to determine current agency standards around girls’ programming and to identify related agency
needs and interests in order to advocate for gender-responsive changes in policies and procedures. At each meeting
the following were offered as examples of agency points of access for incorporating gender-specific criteria:
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
Policies: put in writing guiding principles and program values
Contracts and Procurements
Training
Contract Monitoring
Quality Assurance Procedures
Evaluation
1 The Network identified a longer list of government agencies that the Girls’ Initiative hopes to impact as a secondary goal, those
include: Dept of Education, Dept. of Public Health, Dept. of Mental Health, Committee for Public Counsel Services, Boston Police Dept.
and School Dept, Chelsea Police Dept. and School Dept.
advocacy partners action advocacy partners action
74
s action advocacy partners action advocacy partne
action advocacy partners action advocacy partners
A brief summary of each meeting follows:
Department of Youth Services: On June 24, 2008, members of the Girls’ Initiative met with Assistant
Commissioner for Operations, Peter Forbes. Takeaways from the meeting included:
✜✜ Girls are always served separately
◊Every girl that gets committed goes to new Westborough facility (capacity for 60-80, currently serving
40) for 30-45 days; goes through an assessment that includes clinical, behavioral, substance abuse, home
visit, educational status.
◊There are three regional reentry providers for girls: RYI for Boston, CJM for Worcester, Spectrum for
Springfield.
◊In Metro Region, one secure treatment program for girls (15), run by RFK
✜✜ The Department’s Director of Female Services position has been vacant since 2006.
✜✜ Mandatory training does include three hours on working with females (invitation extended to observe
training).
✜✜ No existing gender-specific assessment tools.
✜✜ Will share any available data.
✜✜ High-level of interest in continuing dialogue around how to improve services for girls in custody.
Department of Children and Families (at the time of the meeting it was named the Department of Social
Services): On July 1, 2008, members of the Girls’ Initiative met with Special Assistant to the Commissioner, Mia
Alvarado. Takeaways from the meeting included:
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
Children are served in a coed setting until they are older.
There is no existing gender-specific language or criteria in any department programming or training.
Agreement to set up subsequent meeting with Boston Regional Director and possibly four area directors.
Availability of data unclear.
Juvenile Court Department – Juvenile Probation: On July 22, 2008 members of the Girls’ Initiative met
with Chief Probation Officer of the Juvenile Court, Steven Siciliano. Takeaways from the meeting included:
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
Department does not currently utilize any gender-specific approaches or training.
Girls are not served in a separate unit; all probationers are organized by zip code.
Open to further exploring the nature of a pilot partnership in Suffolk County.
Very little data is collected, recorded and aggregated, but formal data request can be made separately.
action advocacy partners action advocacy partners
n advocacy partners action advocacy partners acti
75
Community
In order to engage community- and faith- based organizations around the policy and advocacy plan of the Girls’
Initiative, the network convened two community meetings in 2008. The first community meeting held on September
9, 2008 explored best practices around program design and content for girls, and was attended by over 100 community
service providers seeking to enhance their understanding and capacity around serving high-risk girls. At the second
meeting on October 21, 2008, we invited managerial staff from community-based organizations to dialogue around
the administration and management of gender-specific services for girls. Please go to Appendix 11 and 12 to see
respective meeting agendas.
The general goals of the community meetings were to:
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
Inform stakeholders and broader community about the Girls’ Initiative.
Learn from experts in the key areas affecting gender responsive programming.
Exchange ideas and solicit input from and among organizations working with girls in the Boston area.
Create networking opportunities and cross-organizational collaborations.
Guiding principles, poignant questions, and clear recommendations form the different workshops at both sessions are
incorporated into the Promising Practices Section. The culmination of this two-year process is a conference, titled
“Practice, Policy, and Promise,” scheduled for September 9, 2009. Please see Appendix 13 for conference agenda and
workshop offerings.
Policy and Research
In order to formulate the recommendations for Boston and Massachusetts girl-serving agencies, the Girls’ Initiative
conducted extensive research into the data relating to high-risk girls and reviewed gender-specific reports, curricula
and best practices by government, foundations, and non-profit organizations. In particular the work that has progressed
in Oregon, Florida and Colorado was examined in detail for this report.
Legislation and Advocacy
In a very short time, the Girls’ Initiative decided to pursue a legislative agenda for the 2009-2010 Massachusetts State
Legislative session. Following the example of efforts by another Youth Policy Initiative network around high school
dropout prevention, the GI decided to push to get a legislative commission created to examine the issue of genderresponsive programming for high-risk and system-involved girls. Following are the action steps and timeframe that
guided the network’s advocacy from late 2008 to current.
76
Action Steps and Timeframe:
1. Research any existing laws that may be related, as well as templates for creating commissions (December 1230, 2008).
Outcome: No other legislation related to gender-specific programming was identified. Numerous
models for other legislative commissions were available to serve as a template.
2. Prepare Relevant Documents (December 12-30, 2008):
a. Template letter requesting support
b. Fact sheet
c. Talking points
Outcome: Documents were prepared and approved by the network; see Appendix 14
3. Solicit legislative sponsors and supporters (December 2008 - January 2009).
a. Seek support of MCSW (Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women) and consider 2006 MCSW
pledge to the women of Massachusetts.
b. Identify key supporters and secure a sponsor.
Outcome: No response from MCSW, but Cheryl A. Coakley-Rivera of Springfield, also House
Chair of the Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities, was secured as
the lead sponsor.
4. Work with lead sponsor to craft bill language; determine commission composition and file legislation (January
1-15, 2009).
Outcome: Final legislation was agreed upon by all and filed before the deadline, see full bill in
Appendix 15.
5. Outreach and advocacy to legislators to sign on as a co-sponsors (January 15-Februray 15, 2009):
a. All those representing districts where network agencies are based.
b. All those representing districts where executive directors in network live.
c. All those who may be personal friends or acquaintances.
d. All those identified as friendly on women/girls issues.
e. Any others as directed by lead sponsor.
Outcome: A total of 12 co-sponsors were secured through vigorous outreach efforts from member of the network
and the convening agency that included letters, emails, phone calls, and meetings. See Appendix 14 or 15 for
complete list.
6. Deepen and broaden support in preparation for a future committee hearing.
a. Schedule meeting with Senate Chair of Joint Committee (Gale Candaras of Hampden/Hampshire).
b. Schedule meetings with all Senate members of the Joint Committee brief them on issue and the upcoming
bill.
c. Send letter to all co-sponsors, thanking them, give Bill#, ask for meeting.
d. Schedule a meeting with new House Chair, Kay Khan.
e. Schedule meetings with all House members of the Joint Committee to brief them on issue and the
upcoming bill.
77
Outcome: In progress at date of publication.
7. Media Strategy to generate interest and commentary around issues (April-November 2009).
Outcome: At date of publication, this had not yet occurred.
8. Committee Hearing and Committee Vote on Bill (predicted: September-November 2009).
Outcome: At date of publication, this had not yet occurred.
9. Full Vote on Bill (predicted: Fall 2009-Spirng 2010).
Outcome: At date of publication, this had not yet occurred.
2. Funding Streams and Other Resources
for Female Gender Specific Programming
National
Annie E. Casey Foundation (Associate Member of the Women’s Funding Network): Works to build better
futures for disadvantaged children and their families in the United States. Primary mission is to foster public policies,
human service reforms, and community supports that more effectively meet the needs of today’s vulnerable children
and families. Program areas include Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice (including at least one publication on girls in
detention). www.aecf.org
Girls Inc.: A national nonprofit youth organization dedicated to inspiring all girls to be strong, smart, and bold. The
organization does programming, advocacy and research and has helpful resources on its website. www.girlsinc.org
Girls’ Justice Initiative: A national collaboration of organizations and individuals dedicated to promoting equity
and justice for girls involved in the juvenile justice and related systems. Through research, public education, and
advocacy the Girls’ Justice Initiative identifies areas for reform, develops policy recommendations and promotes
gender responsive policies and practices so that fewer girls enter the justice system and those in the system receive
just treatment which is responsive to their needs and nurtures their strengths. www.girlsjusticeinitiative.org
Girls Study Group: An interdisciplinary group of scholars and practitioners convened by OJJDP to develop
a comprehensive research foundation for understanding and responding to girls’ involvement in delinquency. The
Study Group members provide complementary and multidisciplinary backgrounds and experiences that encompass
the range of knowledge needed to understand and explain female delinquency. http://girlsstudygroup.rti.org
Institute for Women’s Policy Research (member of Women’s Funding Network): Conducts rigorous research
and disseminates its findings to address the needs of women, promote public dialogue, and strengthen families,
communities, and societies. www.iwpr.org/index.cfm.
Kellogg Foundation’s Women’s Philanthropy: Focuses on philanthropies developed for and by women,
funds within philanthropic organizations earmarked for women and girls, and/or philanthropic organizations focused
on issues related to women in the larger society. http://www.wkkf.org/pubs/PhilVol/Pub602.pdf
78
Lovelight Foundation (member of Women’s Funding Network): Multi-generational foundation that seeks to
empower women and their children by supporting programs and partnerships that promote social change. http://
lovelightfoundation.org
MacArthur Foundation Models for Change Initiative: Through the Models for Change initiative, the
MacArthur Foundation supports reform in 16 states and aims to help accelerate a national juvenile justice reform
movement to improve the lives of young people in trouble with the law, while enhancing public safety and holding
young offenders accountable for their actions. www.macfound.org
Ms. Foundation for Women (member of Women’s Funding Network): Delivers strategic grants, capacity
building and leadership development to over 150 grassroots and national advocacy organizations throughout the U.S.
www.ms.foundation.org
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention: OJJDP, a component of the Office of Justice
Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, accomplishes its mission by supporting states, local communities, and tribal
jurisdictions in their efforts to develop and implement effective programs for juveniles. The Office strives to strengthen
the juvenile justice system’s efforts to protect public safety, hold offenders accountable, and provide services that
address the needs of youth and their families. OJJDP sponsors research, program, and training initiatives; develops
priorities and goals and sets policies to guide federal juvenile justice issues; disseminates information about juvenile
justice issues; and awards funds to states to support local programming. http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/
OJJDP Formula and Title V Grants: The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)
supports the development of gender specific services through granting and technical assistance. Each year, OJJDP
awards Massachusetts with Formula and Title V funding, which can be distributed as grants for services to address
the needs of female offenders in the juvenile justice system (in 2009, Massachusetts was awarded over $1 million
in Formula Funding and $38,360 in Title V funding). It is up to the Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee how these
funds are awarded (www.mass.gov/jjac), please see Appendix 2 for the recent history of this grant in Massachusetts.
Additionally, the OJJDP provides training and technical assistance in Formula Grant program areas, including genderspecific services. For more information, go to www.nttac.com or contact Andrew Polk ([email protected]).
Third Wave Foundation (member of Women’s Funding Network): A feminist, activist foundation
that works nationally to support young women and transgender youth ages 15 to 30. Supports groups and individuals
working towards gender, racial, economic, and social justice through strategic grantmaking, leadership development,
and philanthropic advocacy. www.thirdwavefoundation.org
Tides Reproductive Justice Fund (member of Women’s Funding Network): Grantmaking organization that
addresses issues such as quality, affordable health care; the right to bear and parent children; access to safe and
legal abortions; a commitment to end domestic violence; and the removal of environmental health threats. www.
tidesfoundation.org
Websites for Girls: A listing of selected websites that focus on girls’ and/or young women’s interests and resources.
http://userpages.umbc.edu/~korenman/wmst/links_girls.html.
Women Win (member of Women’s Funding Network): Financially supports organizations worldwide that focus
on empowering women and girls through sport. Women Win raises awareness about sport as a successful tool for
empowering women and girls. Women Win creates a platform for partnership and change that connects like-minded
people from different backgrounds and with complementary strategies. www.womenwin.org
Women’s Funding Network: Includes more than 145 organizations that fund women’s solutions across the
79
globe. Gives women the money and tools to transform their ideas into lasting change -- in every critical area from
combating poverty to achieving advances in healthcare, education and human rights. www.womensfundingnetwork.
org
Women’s Sports Foundation (member of Women’s Funding Network): A trusted voice of women’s sports and
physical activity. www.womenssportsfoundation.org
Local
Anna B. Stearns Charitable Foundation: Focuses its grantmaking on projects designed to strengthen the
education, independence, and/or socioeconomic status of women, children and youth, and protect and preserve the
urban natural environment. Grantmaking is limited to the cities of Boston, Cambridge, Chelsea, and Somerville.
http://stearnsfoundation.grantsmanagement08.com/
Boston Jewish Community Women’s Fund: Committed to healing the world on behalf of women and girls
by supporting programs in both the Jewish and general community. Requests and reviews proposals that address
issues affecting women and girls – abuse, empowerment, education, leadership development, self-esteem and selfsufficiency. A dynamic, member-driven group, The Women’s Fund views those issues through a gender lens and make
grants the address their root causes, as well as supporting programs that work to provide remedies to the women and
girls affected by them. http://www.cjp.org/page.aspx?id=101553
Boston Women’s Fund (member of Women’s Funding Network): A collaboration of staff, volunteers, donors,
and grantees working together for social and economic justice. The fund focuses on women and girls because women
and girls continue to experience gender related discrimination, abuse, and disparities. Provides grants to grassroots
organizations run by and for women and girls. Also supports grantee organizations through technical assistance
and networking forums. Runs programs to inspire young women to become philanthropists, develop leadership
among young women, and educate the public about injustice. Social, racial and economic justice is the goal. www.
bostonwomensfund.org
Rutland Corner Foundation: Committed to helping and sustaining programs serving girls ages 10-15 within
Greater Boston. Funds organizations and programs that promote girls’ self-sufficiency, self-esteem, and taking
responsibility for their lives in a myriad of ways. Provides support to programs that are oriented to several areas,
including: the arts, athletics, dance, science, writing, and health education. http://rutlandcorner.grantsmanagement08.
com/
United Way’s Women’s Initiative: Through the Women’s Initiative, female leaders throughout Greater Boston
and Merrimack Valley are becoming actively involved in the full spectrum of United Way of Massachusetts Bay
and Merrimack Valley’s work: Healthy Child Development, Youth Opportunities, Employment and Housing. http://
women.supportunitedway.org/
Women’s Fund of the Community Foundation of Southeastern Massachusetts (member of Women’s
Funding Network): Supports programs that develop, promote and protect the mind, body, spirit and choices of women
and girls. Has an active grantmaking program in support of the mission to fund programs that promote the educational
and economic advancement of women and girls in the area. www.cfsema.org/womensfund/
Women’s Fund of Western Massachusetts (member of Women’s Funding Network): The Women’s Fund
of Western Massachusetts advances social change philanthropy to create economic and social equality for women
and girls in Western Massachusetts through grantmaking, strategic advocacy, and community collaborations. www.
womensfund.net
80
VII. Findings, Conclusion and
Recommendations
More girls are getting in trouble. While the numbers of girls entering the
juvenile justice system have decreased in both Massachusetts and Suffolk
County over the past few years, their numbers are still significant, and their
percentages compared with pre-1990’s have remained the same or slightly
increased. Massachusetts has a strategic opportunity to move proactively
to address the unique needs of system-involved girls, to better help them
achieve positive life outcomes. Since we know that girls have different risk
and protective factors than boys and demonstrate unique needs from boys,
public and community agencies should implement effective interventions that
address those needs. Every single girl in the juvenile justice system designed
for boys should receive appropriate support, while she is in the care of the
Commonwealth. This report provides valuable insight into the needs of all
girls, especially those who get into trouble, and how both community agencies
and public agencies can best support them.
For example, the data demonstrate that the most vulnerable time for young women may be
during the early adolescent, middle school years, considering these data points:
✜✜ Girls in the lower grades of high school tend to get in more physical fights than girls in the higher grades. In
2005, approximately 25% of 9th and 10th graders reported that they were in a physical fight within the past
year compared to 19% of 11th graders and 13% of 12th graders.
✜✜ Although neglect victimizations (both boys and girls) are highest under one year old, there was a resurgence
in neglected girls between the ages of 13 and 16.
✜✜ At ages 13 and older, there are more physically abused girls than boys, with the number of female victims
peaking at 15 years old.
✜✜ The number of sexually abused girls exceeded the number of boys at all ages. Female victims of sexual abuse
were most numerous at ages 14-16 years.
✜✜ The 1998 NCCD California study found the median age for becoming victims of sexual assault was 13; the
median age they were first shot or stabbed was 14; they were most likely to become sexually active and begin
using drugs and alcohol at 13; they had their first arrest at ages 13-14.
✜✜ The 2006 NCCD Florida study found that 40% of girls reported committing their first offense before age 13.
✜✜ In 2007 the NCCD reported that 42% of girls in the juvenile justice system nationwide are 15 and younger
compared with 31% of boys.
81
Girls and young women in general are experiencing an intolerable level of sexual abuse and
domestic violence and most high-risk and system involved girls have been sexually abused:
✜✜ 78% of sexually abused children in Massachusetts are female.
✜✜ In 2005, there were 3,560 reported female victims of domestic violence under the age of 21 in Massachusetts
compared to 1,525 reported male victims. The disparity increases with age.
✜✜ From 2000-2006, girls accounted for over 94% of the sexual assaults perpetrated on youth victims reported
to Executive Office of Public Safety. Nationally 70% of female delinquents have a history of sexual abuse.
Sexual abuse is an underlying factor in subsequent high-risk behaviors that lead to delinquency.
Also, of grave concern is the overrepresentation of girls of color in the juvenile justice system.
✜✜ Both statewide and in Suffolk County, girls of color are overrepresented among the DYS committed population compared to their numbers in the general youth population. Girls of color make up 24% of the Massachusetts youth population, but 63% of the DYS committed population. In Suffolk County, girls of color make up
55% of the youth population, and 90% of the DYS committed population.
Nationally juvenile female arrests are not declining nearly as fast as they are for boys; AND
in Boston there was a huge increase in girl arrests in 2008:
✜✜ Total Part I crime (robbery, burglary, aggravated assaults, etc.) arrests of girls 16 and under in Boston in 2008
were 16% lower than the high of 243 in 2002 but 42% higher than in 2007.
✜✜ The proportion of juveniles who are female entering the juvenile justice system continues to grow, and while
juvenile arrests for violent crimes declined 22% for males between 1997 and 2006, they declined only 12%
for females.
We know who the next juvenile delinquent girl is—most girls who end up in DYS were previously served in DCF:
✜✜ For example, in 2006, while nearly 55% of the total DYS committed population (both boys and girls) had
received services from the Department of Social Services prior to commitment, 75% of the girls committed to
DYS reported receiving services from DSS. (Massachusetts Department of Youth Services, 2006)
To successfully rehabilitate and reintegrate juvenile delinquents, we must truly understand
and address the social and economic conditions that negatively impact their families.
More than 40% of the families of DYS committed juveniles were receiving Department of Transitional Assistance
(DTA) at the time of commitment.
✜✜ More than 50% of the biological mothers and more than 60% of biological fathers of DYS committed juveniles were unemployed at the time of their child’s commitment.
✜✜ Fewer than half of the biological mothers and fathers of DYS committed juveniles had completed the 12th
grade.
Girls are suffering with higher rates of depression, body image disorders and suicidal tendencies and these problems increase for girls in the juvenile justice population:
✜✜ Nationally, female juvenile delinquents are much likelier than boys to experience post traumatic stress
disorder, suicidal behavior, disassociate disorder, and borderline personality disorder.
✜✜ Nationally, adolescents in detention facilities are ten times more likely to suffer from psychosis than adolescents in the general adolescent population, and girls are more often diagnosed with major depression than boys
(29.2% of girls compared to 10.6% of boys).
✜✜ Among Massachusetts high school students in 2007, a significantly larger percentage of females than males
reported feeling so sad or depressed daily for at least two weeks during the previous year that they discontin-
82
ued usual activities (31% vs. 17%).
✜✜ Among Massachusetts high school girls in 2007, 22% of girls reported non-suicidal harm to themselves (compared to 12% of boys) and 16% reported seriously considering suicide (compared to 9% of boys).
✜✜ Nationally, more than half of all girls in detention have reported attempting suicide (of those, 64% have attempted more than once). Risk of suicide for lesbian girls is three times greater than for heterosexual girls.
✜✜ Statewide, female high school students were less likely than male students to be definitely overweight (only
7% to boys 15%), however female students were more likely to perceive themselves as overweight and more
likely to be trying to lose weight, 36% of females perceived themselves to be overweight and 63% were reported that they were trying to lose weight.
The consequences of not completing high school are higher for girls than boys in any jurisdiction, and girls in Boston and Chelsea are at much higher risk of dropping out than girls statewide:
✜✜ While girls consistently have lower school dropout rates than boys, being a female dropout is even more economically risky than being a male dropout because females who fail to graduate from high school have higher
rates of unemployment, make significantly lower wages, and are more likely to need to rely on public support
programs.
✜✜ Girls from Boston and Chelsea are less likely to graduate from high school in four years and are approximately twice as likely to drop out of school.
Girls tend to act violently differently than boys:
✜✜ Twice as many high school boys than girls report they bullied or pushed someone around, but girls don’t
consider the relational aggression they commit as bullying. Girls’ bullying can take the form of rumor spreading, secret-divulging, alliance building, backstabbing, ignoring, excluding from social groups and activities,
verbally insulting, and using hostile body language (i.e., eye rolling and smirking).
✜✜ Girls in the juvenile justice system are more likely to be person offenders, while boys are more likely to be
property offenders.
This report presents data and recommended promising practices for both
community and public girl-serving entities. It also represents the beginning of
a conversation about how we can better serve and support high risk and systeminvolved girls, both in the community and in government agencies.
83
8 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H341
H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418
The Girls’ Initiative is hopeful that the release of this report will assist
in the passage of H3418, An Act to Establish a Special Commission
on Gender-Responsive Programming for System-Involved Girls and
that the Commonwealth adopt the following recommendations:
1. That the Commonwealth adopt a general value statement
on serving girls.
2. That all relevant state agencies incorporate gender-
specific training.
3. That the Commonwealth collect data by gender among
relevant agencies and makes available to the public.
4. That
the Commonwealth issue recommended
policies, standards, procedures and criteria for girls’
programming.
5. That the Commonwealth propose an implementation
plan for incorporating those criteria within the relevant
state agencies.
6. That the Commonwealth issue a bi-annual report on the
status of system involved girls.
84
18 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H34
8 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H3418 H34
We recommend that funders, communities, and community agencies
in Boston and Massachusetts will focus their resources and best efforts
to adapt and improve the gender-responsive practice goals, guiding
principles, and innovative ideas described in this report for the benefit
of all our girls, especially those at high risk. We invite researchers to
identify and address any knowledge gaps reflected in this report and the
findings detailed above. For example,
✜✜ Do sufficient effective gender-responsive programs exist
to address the current population of middle-school girls?
Are sufficient numbers of girls at high risk engaging in
these programs?
✜✜ Do sufficient trauma and mental health treatment services
exist to address current numbers of impacted girls, and are
they accessing these services?
✜✜ Exactly where in the Key Juvenile Justice Decision
Points and Options are girls of color disproportionately
represented, and what are the causes of this reality?
✜✜ How can we better serve girls in protective custody, so that
fewer of them become delinquent later?
Since middle school has been highlighted as the most vulnerable age for
girls, we recommend that further research is needed on best practices
targeting girls this age, addressing school-related issues, health and
mental health, violence, and sexual abuse. We suspect that there are
not adequate resources devoted to middle school youth in general, and
we encourage that greater resources be allotted. And finally, we invite
our communities to redouble our efforts together to address the specific
challenges described above.
85
Appendix
Appendices 1-7: Girls’ Initiative Grantees
Appendix 1: Boston Urban Youth Foundation
Boston Urban Youth Foundation (BUYF), founded in 1992, is a nonprofit,
faith-based organization that seeks to improve school engagement, attendance,
graduation rate, and college access through early prevention strategies for
chronically truant middle school students in the Boston Public Schools (BPS)
with the goal to motivate, mobilize, and equip the youth with the skills and
supports needed to complete high school, then access and graduate from
college.
Building Futures One Kid at a Time
John Hopkins studied BPS 6th graders from 1996-2006 and found that 6th
graders who attend school less than 90% only have an 18% graduation rate.
BUYF works with the truant youth in school, out-of-school, and year-round through its Building Futures Educational
Initiative program. The youth development methodology of:
1. Case Management – insuring that young people don’t fall though the
Missi on: Help hi gh-risk , low cracks
incom e m inor ity yout h de velop
2. Vision Casting – casting a vision for themselves and their futures
spiritua lly, e m otionally,
3. Positive Peer Group –
acad emic ally, and econ om ical ly.
providing an alternative peer group
Pur pose: Instill hope, visi on, an d
__ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___
for positive support
positi ve futures among hi gh-risk
4. Academic Skill-Building –
youth
Nu mbe r of G irls Served
individual assessment, tutoring,
__ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___
School Year
200 9-2010: 200
and intensive planning for success
2010 -2011: 300
5. Life Coaching – caring adult
engaging
the life of high risk youth
De mogra phi cs o f BU Y F G irls
Staff called Life Success Coaches (LSC) are placed in the middle schools to
74% Afr ican-Am eric an/Carib bean
coach and manage the truant students to improve attendance, engagement,
26% Hispan ic/Lat ino
and performance. Once out of middle school, students continue to be
Mul t ipl e R is k F ac t ors fo r
mentored throughout their high school and college careers. BUYF has
Dro ppi ng Ou t
achieved a 53% reduction in truancy among those served versus a 7%
•
70% Histo ry o f Truancy (15+
truancy reduction rate for truant students who didn’t participate in the
abse nc es)
•
30% DSS involved
BUYF program.
•
•
•
•
86
45% Cou rt involved
30% Gang -involved
80% Chr onic dif ficulties in
school
40% Ov erag e for gra de level
BUYF operates a co-ed program, but has program activities focused on highrisk girls. The truant girls are paired with a female Life Success Coach.
Each female LSC has a caseload of 50 girls. The girls participate in local
college tours, community service projects, Club each week, small groups,
cultural activies, and other mentoring activities. The LSCs conduct home visits and schedule one-on-one time with
each girl to figure out the root case on why they are not attending school.
The BUYF’s Building Futures Educational Initiative school partnership is the only program of its kind in
Boston which proactively focuses on truant at-risk youth beginning while they are still in middle school (6-8
grade). Most programs are reactive--focusing on teens after she drops out, incarceration, drug use, teenage
pregnancy. etc.
Since 1992 BUYF has had a tremendous impact on high-risk girls and our early intervention program model has a
proven track record: BUYF was highlighted twice in the Catalogue for Philanthropy as one of 100 excellent nonprofit organizations in Massachusetts, and listed in the Pathways to College Network CD-ROM as an exemplary
program that gets low-income minority students into college. Both the 2005 report commissioned by the Boston
High Risk Youth Network and the Harvard Graduate School of Education’s 2003 study identified the BUYF as an
Appendix 2: Bridge Over Troubled Waters
Bridge Over Troubled Waters
47 West Street,
Boston MA 02111
617-423-9575
www.bridgeotw.org
Bridge Over Troubled Waters’ mission is to enable high-risk, runaway and homeless youth to achieve a healthy and
productive adulthood through prevention, intervention, and education services. Serving 2,433 youth ages 14 – 24
each year, Bridge offers a comprehensive range of health, educational, career and housing services. Bridge is the only
agency in the Boston area to provide a continuum of age-appropriate services.
Bridge can help youth with basic survival services such as food, healthcare and a safe place to go to get off the
streets.
1. Day Program: Visit the second floor of the Bridge building for a free breakfast or lunch. You can shower, use the
lockers, do your laundry, attend a workshop and find someone to talk to.
2. Medical and Dental Care: The Bridge Mobile Medical Van can be found at Park Street, Copley Square and
Harvard Square every weekday evening. Volunteer medical staff offer basic first aid, referrals and health advice.
You can also receive dental care at our 47 West Street office. To make an appointment, call 617-423-9575 or TTY
617-423-9575 ext. 355.
3. Counseling: Get help for substance abuse, family & peer relationships, survival needs and other crisis intervention
services. Bridge counselors are here to support you and listen to you.
87
Appendix 3: Ella J. Baker House
Ella J. Baker House
411 Washington St
Dorchester, MA 02124
(617) 282-6704
www.ellajbakerhouse.org
We mentor, monitor and minister to high-risk youth and the community so that youth may avoid violence, achieve
literacy and gain access to jobs. The Baker House serves all youth and their families, regardless of religious belief
or church-affiliation.
The Ella J. Baker House is a non-profit, community-based organization created by the Azusa Christian Community,
and led by Reverend Eugene F. Rivers, 3d. We were the cover for Newsweek’s June 1998 article “God vs. Gangs”
about the impact of faith-based organizations on stemming youth violence.
Since 1988, we have provided direct service to thousands of high-risk youth and their families bty working and
living in Dorchester’s Four Corners neighborhood in Boston, Massachusetts. We have developed creative strategies
and partnerships to serve the pressing needs of our neighbors and clients. We combine a settlement-house-style
community youth center with direct outreach in the streets, courts and correctional facilities.
Our Strategy:
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
Being there: substituting responsible adults for the neighborhood thug/drug dealer as role models for kids
Sanctuary: a safe, orderly and clean haven from violence and other negative environmental pressures
Opposing the culture that celebrates ignorance and violence
Zero tolerance for violence; we will support law enforcement’s suppression of violent offenders.
Holistic approach: looking at the youth’s entire situation, their assets and liabilities, and connecting with the
youth’s parent/guardian, teacher, probation officer and other key figures in the youth’s life.
Our Work:
✜✜ Operation 2006 reduces juvenile violence through faith community and law enforcement agency collaboration.
Baker House staff, law enforcement personnel, clergy and lay volunteers share street-level information on the
activities and culture of high-risk youth. The most at-risk youth are then met with the message: “violence will not
be tolerated in the City of Boston, we are here to provide you with alternatives, it is your decision”.
✜✜ Year-round mentoring, case management, court and school advocacy to high-risk youth: (a) youth on probation
referred by the Court; (b) kids that regularly come to the Drop-in/Home Help Center and Computer Lab. This
work involves over 300 kids a year. Plus presentations to groups at schools and Dept. of Youth Services centers,
reaching thousands of young people each year.
✜✜ Summer programs: Academic Sports Camp (70-80 kids) and Science Literacy Camp (30 kids); “X-Ops”, a summer
outreach program for high-risk young reaching over 1,700 through basketball competitions.
✜✜ Coordinating a growing roster of ministers and commissioned lay workers doing Thursday night home visits with
the local police. The Baker House’s coordinator is the Police Department’s key contact for coordinating with more
than 30 home visitors.
✜✜ Helping young adult offenders re-enter the community from jail onto a positive path – 200 cases a year. Some
become part of our outreach team doing presentations at schools and youth correctional facilities, reaching over
thousands of youth. The younger kids listen to our team.
✜✜ Weekly strategy meetings at Baker House for clergy, law enforcement and youth serving agencies in Four Corners
to review “hot spots” and what needs to be done.
88
Appendix 4: Generation Excel Youth Program
Generation Excel Youth Program
215 Forest Hills Street
Jamaica Plain, MA 02130
Phone: 617-524-7900
www.generationexcel.org
Our Mission
Generation Excel is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit corporation that uses threads of love, hope and action to mend the fabric
of our communities. Founded in 1992 by Rev. Ray Hammond and Gloria White-Hammond, two physicians who
followed their call to the work of spiritual renewal, social justice and systemic change, Generation Excel’s mission
is: “To provide direct services and opportunities for growth to underserved low-income at-risk and high-risk youth
and their families”.
Transformation Strategy -- Generation Excel transforms the lives of youth by employing a six point
ENRICHMENT strategy.
1. Educational enhancement - Academic support and active learning opportunities.
2. Nurturing development - Social and cultural development through performing arts, work readiness training,
physical fitness, fieldtrips and exposure to caring professionals.
3. Raising leaders – Youth leadership development, community services, work experience and youth
entrepreneurship opportunities.
4. Intentional mentoring - Long-term group and individual mentoring support, peer mentoring and follow-up
care.
5. Creating wellness – Culturally competent group and individual mental health support.
6. Helping families – Parental training and support, educational and social services advocacy.
Generation Excel Background/History
Generation Excel started as the Youth Intervention Project (YIP), a trailblazing effort by Bethel AME Church to
meet the needs of at-risk, inner-city young women and men. Bethel Church began YIP in 1992 as a new way to
reach inner-city youth, especially those caught up in gangs or violence. YIP launched new recreational, educational,
and mentoring programs and engaged in youth outreach, advocacy, and mediation. YIP grew and developed as it
worked with community providers and listened to the responses and ideas of young people. YIP also supported three
other organizations that offered programs: Young Graffiti Masters, Project Turn Around and Straight Ahead of West
Roxbury District Court. YIP, along with the other programs, offered complementary options for youth of varied age,
gender and need, along with a range of options for Bethel members and other people, to serve as volunteers.
In 1996-97 YIP expanded to offer six separate programs and had defined and maintained a clear target population for
each program;
1) Brighter Horizon, for court-involved young men, 2) The Fatherhood Program, for court-involved fathers, 3)
Project Turnaround, which exclusively targeted court-involved men, 4) Do The Write Thing, for at-risk middle
and high school girls, 5) The Street Outreach for Success (SOS), to reach out to at-risk and high-risk youth and their
families, 6) The Summer Basketball League, which offered positive recreational alternatives to hanging out on the
streets of afflicted neighborhoods.
89
Appendix 5: Roca Inc
Roca Inc.
101 Park St
Chelsea, MA 02150
(617) 889-5210
www.rocainc.org
Roca is a vision and value-led organization committed to serving the most disenfranchised and disengaged young
people ages 14-24 in the communities of Chelsea, Revere, and East Boston, Massachusetts. In the course of its
twenty-one year history, Roca has won nationwide respect and recognition for its effective and innovative approaches
to helping young people live self-sufficiently and out of harm’s way. Roca’s mission is to help disengaged and
disenfranchised young people move out of violence and poverty.
Launched in 1988 from a single grant from the Teen Challenge Fund of Massachusetts, a passionate group of young
people and adults started Roca to address teen pregnancy prevention and violence in Chelsea. In just two decades,
Roca has helped more than 15,000 young people make positive, profound changes in their lives, created a nationally
acclaimed model of transformational relationships as a vehicle for youth development, and has pioneered effective
local, regional, and national relationships with government, state, religious, health, and community partners. We are
committed to rigor in outcomes, continuous learning from best practices, and excellence in our programming, staff
development, management, and leadership.
Roca has developed a comprehensive and strategic intervention model designed to support sustainable behavior
changes that enable high risk young people and young parents to move toward the outcomes of economic independence
and living out of harm’s way. Roca’s intervention model is based on an evidence based framework for change used
in medical and mental health fields and includes:
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
✜✜
Transformational relationships (Roca’s intensive case management model);
relentless outreach and follow up;
life skills, educational and pre-vocational, and employment programming; and,
work with institutional partners.
Roca works intensively with more than 600 young people a year and provides less intensive services to over 150
young people. These young people are in gangs, on the streets and in and out of prison; some have dropped out of
school or are close to it; they are young parents, some as young as 12 and others with several children; and many are
immigrants, far from home, left with memories of unspeakable violence.
Emerging as a national model, Roca’s impact can be seen throughout its programming. In FY 2008, Roca served
608 young people through transformational relationships, 350 through other services and 24,500 through outreach
activities. Of those engaged in transformational relationships in this fiscal year, 67% were actively engaged in
competency building programming. Of Roca’s in-school youth, 90% have remained in school and, of those that were
out of school, 62% were re-engaged in educational programming. Roca worked with 167 young people through its
transitional employment. Of those who completed the program, 65% were placed in unsubsidized jobs.
90
Appendix 6: Roxbury Youthworks, Inc.
Roxbury Youthworks, Inc.
100 Warren St # A
Roxbury, MA 02119-3209
(617) 427-8095
www.roxburyyouthworks.org
Mission
Roxbury Youthworks, Inc. (RYI) is a community-based nonprofit organization whose mission is to create healthy
families and strong communities; to inspire young men and women to recognize and develop their strengths; and
to prepare them to lead independent and self-sufficient lives. RYI combats the roots of juvenile delinquency in the
inner-city neighborhoods of Boston by providing innovative support services to court-involved and other youth up
21 years of age.
History
RYI was founded in 1981 by the Honorable (ret.) Julian Houston out of Roxbury District Court. Today it provides
community-based, non-residential services to youth involved with the Department of Youth Services (DYS) and the
Department of Children and Families (DCF). Most notably, Roxbury Youthworks is:
✜✜ the Lead Agency for the Dimock Street Area Office and a network provider with the Department of Children and
Families (DCF);
✜✜ the sole service provider of the Metro Region’s District Re-Entry Centers with the Department of Youth Services
(DYS);
✜✜ a partner with DCF to provide the only Life Coaches for at risk youth and victims of commercial sexual exploitation
through the GIFT Program.
Population
Each year RYI assists over 700 youth and their family members. Our clients are African-American, Cape Verdean,
Hispanic, Portuguese and Caucasian. We serve all of Greater Boston: the majority of our clients live in Roxbury,
Dorchester, West Roxbury, South Boston, Hyde Park, Jamaica Plain, Roslindale, Mattapan, Brighton, Allston and
Chelsea.
Programs
Our youth come from diverse cultures and neighborhoods, speak different languages and have a variety of needs.
Many of our young people deal with issues such as: addiction, gang violence, homelessness, mental illness, teen
pregnancy, neglect or abuse. Our programs meet their diverse needs:
✜✜ The Edge is a family stabilization program that provides DCF youth and families support through at least once a
week visits; informal family mediation; and psycho-educational groups.
✜✜ The GIFT Program (Gaining Independence for Tomorrow) reduces the continued victimization perpetrated on
young women, men and transgendered youth through sexual exploitation and other social and emotional factors.
✜✜ Our District Re-entry Centers (DRCs) guide youth who are transitioning from DYS secure treatment facilities and
residential placements back to their home and community.
✜✜ The Female Focus Initiative (FFI) is Boston’s only female adolescent program that works with high-risk females
reintegrating into the community from a detention center.
Impact
Roxbury Youthworks’ greatest achievement is the number of youth successfully served who have gone on to cultivate
positive relationships with families and their communities.
91
Appendix 7: The Youth Advocacy Project (YAP)
THE YOUTH ADVOCACY PROJECT (“YAP”)
Ten Malcolm X Boulevard
Roxbury, MA 02119-1776
Phone: (617) 989-8100
www.youthadvocacyproject.org
The Youth Advocacy Project (YAP) is a unit of the Massachusetts’ Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS), the
state-wide public defender agency. Since its inception in 1992, YAP has helped to revolutionize juvenile delinquency
representation by developing a multi-disciplinary Youth Development Approach to advocacy. YAP addresses each
case on multiple levels by providing expert legal representation to indigent youth; social workers to conduct social
service needs assessments, case management and community-based referrals; a psychologist to conduct psychological
assessments; and a community-relations coordinator involved in several forms of community outreach. Over the
years, YAP has been at the forefront of child advocacy by applying the Youth Development Approach, an assets-based
model instead of a risk-based model. When honoring YAP as the first ever juvenile defender agency to receive their
Outstanding Achievement award, the National Legal Aid & Defender Association stated: “[YAP] has no equal in
Boston and is viewed as a paradigm for defender programs nationally.”
YAP provides expert advocacy to needy children in accessing special education services and avoiding school exclusion
(via the EdLaw Project); trains private attorneys throughout the state in matters crucial to juvenile law practice (via the
Juvenile Defense Network); helps to eliminate the barriers faced by at-risk youth to accessing appropriate communitybased programs and services (via the Community Notebooks initiative); and educates the community about the legal
rights of children (via Know the Law workshops). In October 2009, CPCS will expand juvenile representation in
Massachusetts with the formation of the statewide Youth Advocacy Department (YAD). YAD will lead, train, and
support the entire juvenile defense bar as they represent young people during periods of legal crisis. YAD believes
that defense attorneys have the unique opportunity to effect a “course correction” by addressing their clients’ many
life needs as well as their immediate legal needs.
Over its 17-year history YAP has provided children with legal representation in over 7,000 juvenile cases, has advocated
in over 750 related administrative proceedings, and has provided technical assistance on juvenile issues in 4,000
instances. In addition to legal representation and social services assessments, YAP collaborates with communitybased agencies on several initiatives and offers workshops on the law. Over 95 percent of YAP’s clients are children
of color; all are between the ages of seven and 21, with 65 percent between the ages of 12 and 15. Nearly 80 percent
are boys. Over 70 percent of its clients live in Roxbury, Dorchester or Mattapan, and all are from families living
at or below the poverty line. Typically, nearly 80 percent experience chronic difficulties in school, over 40 percent
are truant, over 35 percent are substance abusers, 20 percent are children of an incarcerated parent, 10 percent are
pregnant or a parent, and nearly five percent are homeless.
YAP has a tremendous impact on its clients. In addition to addressing the legal issues confronting its youth, YAP also
focuses on life circumstances (family, school, physical and mental health, adult nurturing relationships, and out of
school time) thus helping to ensure both legal and life success for its clients.
92
Appendix 8: JJDPA Explanation
Federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act
The federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) of 2002 authorizes the Office
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to administer the JJDPA Formula Grants
program to support state and local delinquency prevention and intervention efforts and juvenile justice
system improvements. States may use their Formula Grants funds to support programs related to
delinquency prevention and reduction, juvenile justice system improvement, research, evaluation,
statistical analysis, and training and technical assistance (Hsia, 2003). Gender-Specific Services is
one of the 35 program areas allowable under the JJDPA Formula Grant Program. Other relevant
program areas include Child Abuse and Neglect and Mental Health Services.
The JJDPA of 2002 requires that states receiving federal JJDPA Formula Grant funding submit a plan
for carrying out their juvenile justice and delinquency prevention work. As part of this plan, states
must provide an analysis of juvenile delinquency problems and needs, a description of the services
to be provided, and a description of performance goals and priorities. The Act states that “a plan for
providing needed gender-specific services for the prevention and treatment of juvenile delinquency”
be included in this analysis. Additionally, the Act states that the plan shall “provide assurance that
youth in the juvenile justice system are treated equitably on the basis of gender, race, family income,
and disability.”
In past years, Massachusetts has chosen “Gender-Specific Services” as one of its program areas for
granting. The Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee (JJAC) and the Massachusetts Executive Office
of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS) are responsible for maintaining compliance with the JJDPA
and for allocated funds from OJJJDP. In 2007, the JJAC and EOPSS awarded over $1 million in
Formula Grant funding to programs across the state. Over 20% of the granted funding was awarded to
gender-specific programs that exclusively served girls (Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee, 2007).
Unfortunately, in more recent years, the Formula Grant funding has been used to fund secure prearraignment detention centers across the state in order to maintain compliance with the JJDPA core
requirement, which states that juvenile cannot be securely detained or confined in adult jails and
police lockups for more than six hours.
93
Appendix 9: Youth Development Framework (from EOHHS)
94
Appendix 10: Key Juvenile Justice
Decision Points and Options
Key Juvenile Justice Decision Points and Options





A police officer approaches a juvenile
o Let the juvenile stay where he/she is, Take the juvenile home, or Informal questioning
o Formal field investigation
o Take the juvenile into the police station for protective custody or for investigative detention
o Issue a summons to appear in court
o Arrest
A juvenile is arrested
o Juvenile is sent directly to court for complaint filing and arraignment
o Juvenile is sent home while awaiting complaint filing and arraignment
o Juvenile is sent to alternative lockup program (ALP) while awaiting complaint filing and arraignment
o Juvenile placed in cell for up to six hours while awaiting complaint filing and arraignment ( ALP placement)
An application for complaint is filed with clerk
o Probable cause determined, complaint issued, sent to arraignment
o Probable cause determined but no complaint issued, diverted from system
o No probable cause – no complaint issued
Arraignment in court
o Charges dismissed
o Released on personal recognizance to guardian while awaiting trial
o Bail set
 Bail paid, juvenile home while awaiting trial
 Bail set, bail not paid, juvenile held in detention while awaiting trail
o 58A Dangerousness Hearing
 Dangerous – held for trial
 Not dangerous – bail hearing
Disposition, Plea Bargain or Admission to Sufficient Facts
o Not delinquent or Not a youthful offender
o Pre-trial probation
o Admits to sufficient facts and given a “continuance without a finding,” placed on probation with date to
appear in court
o Adjudicated delinquent
 Probation
 Suspended DYS commitment
 DYS commitment
• Secure or Non-secure confinement
• Place in community with conditions
o Adjudicated youthful offender
 Adult sentence
 Combination sentence (commit to DYS until age 21 & concurrent adult suspended sentence)
 DYS commitment until age 21
• Secure or Non-secure confinement
• Place in community with conditions
95
Appendices 11-12:
Girls’ Initiative 2008 Community Meetings (Agendas)
A GIRLS’ INITIATIVE COMMUNITY MEETING – SEPTEMBER 9, 2008
Exploring Positive Youth Development and Gender Specific Programming Content
A dialogue among community and faith based organizations seeking to better serve girls at high risk
AGENDA
12:00-12:15pm
Registration, Networking, Lunch
12:15-12:45pm
Welcome and Introduction: Girls’ Initiative, Youth Policy Initiative, and Positive Youth Development Framework
Kalya Hamlett, BMA, Girls’ Initiative Project Director
Sylvia Johnson, Hyams Foundation, Associate Director
Lynne Lyman, Girls’ Initiative Policy Consultant
Josh Dohan, Youth Advocacy Project, Executive Director
12:45-1:45pm
Panel: Programming through a gender-specific lens within the Positive Youth Development Framework (Facilitator: Kalya Hamlett)
• Health: Francine Sherman, Boston College Law School, Director of the Juvenile Rights Advocacy
Project
• Relationships/Mentoring: Sharon Daura, Big Sister Association of Greater Boston Training Services
Manager
• Mental Health and Trauma: Courtney Grey, Boston Public Health Commission, Director of Youth
Development Network
• Safety/Environment: Meg MacPherson, Roca, Director of Programming and Operations
• Education/Economic Opportunity: Jacqueline Posley, Boston Day and Evening Academy, Student
Support Counselor
• Community Engagement: Giovanna Negretti, Oiste?, Executive Director
1:50-2:50pm
96
Break-out Groups
Safety/Environment: Room A
Facilitators: Meg MacPherson and Maria Alves, RYI, Director of Girls Services
Note taker: Roca
Educational and Economic Opportunity: Room B
Facilitators: Kalya Hamlett and Chris Troy, BUYF, Executive Director
Note taker: BUYF (Shameka Gregory)
Community Engagement: Room C
Facilitator: Josh Dohan
Note taker: YAP (Eli Pimentel)
Health and Mental Health: Room D
Facilitators: Francine Sherman, Courtney Grey
Note taker: YAP (John DeSerio)
Relationships: Room E
Facilitators: Sharon Daura and Mia Roberts, Big Sister Association of Greater Boston, Chief Operating Officer
Note taker: BMA (Ellen Bass)
A GIRLS’ INITIATIVE COMMUNITY MEETING – OCTOBER 21, 2008
Administration and Management of Gender Specific Programming
A dialogue among community and faith based organizations seeking to better serve girls at high risk
AGENDA
12:00-12:15pm
Registration, Networking, Lunch
12:15-12:45pm
Welcome and Introduction
1) Context and Realities in Greater Boston; 2) Oregon as an Example
Kalya Hamlett, BMA, Girls’ Initiative Project Director
Sylvia Johnson, Hyams Foundation, Associate Director
Lynne Lyman, Girls’ Initiative Policy Consultant
12:45-2:00pm
Break-out Groups
(session descriptions on page 2)
Policies and Values: Room A
Group Leader: Francine Sherman, Boston College Law School, Director of the Juvenile Rights
Advocacy Project
Note taker: Josh Dohan
Evaluation and Assessment: Room B
Group Leader: Janie Ward, Professor of Education and Chair of Africana Studies, Simmons
College
Note taker: Sylvia Johnson
Program Design Through a Gender Responsive Lens: Room C
Group Leader: Maria Cheevers, BMA Technical Assistance Consultant for the Girls’
Initiative
Note taker: Lynne Lyman
Staffing: Room D
Group Leader: Anisha Chablani, Deputy Director, Roca
Note taker: Meg MacPherson
2:00-3:00pm
Panel Discussion
Report back on small group discussion and further expertise on each content area.
• Francine Sherman
• Janie Ward
• Maria Cheevers
• Anisha Chablani
Questions and Comments
97
Appendix 13: Girls’ Initiative September 9, 2009 Conference:
“Practice, Policy, and Promise”
(Agenda and Workshop Offerings)
The Hyams Foundation, United Way of Massachusetts Bay, Merrimack Valley, and The Boston Foundation
The Girls’ Initiative Conference
September 9, 2009~Simmons College
PRACTICE, POLICY, AND PROMISE
Responding to the needs of high risk and system-involved girls
AGENDA
8:00 a.m.
Registration/breakfast/networking
9:00 a.m. Opening/Welcome
• Dr. Diane Raymond, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences, Simmons College
• Tammy Tai, Program Officer, The Hyams Foundation
• David Wright, Executive Director, Black Ministerial Alliance of Boston
9:20 a.m. Report Presentation: Lynne Lyman, Public Cause Consulting
Report on High Risk Girls and Gender-Specific Programming
9:50 a.m. Morning workshop (see offerings below)
11:30 a.m.
Keynote Presentation
Presenter: Dr. Marcia Morgan, Criminal Justice Consultant, migima, LLC
12:15 p.m.
Lunch
12:45 p.m. Afternoon workshop (see offerings below)
2:25 p.m.
Keynote Presentation:
Presenter: Marlene Sanchez
Executive Director, The Center for Young Women’s Development
3:20 p.m.
Brainstorming: What’s missing? What’s next?
3:40 p.m.
Close/Distribution of Report
4:00 p.m.
Networking
98
The Girls’ Initiative Conference
September 9, 2009~Simmons College
PRACTICE, POLICY, AND PROMISE
WORKSHOPS
Morning Workshop
Men Working w/Girls
Workshop room
Special functions Room
Presenter
Dr. Martin Pierre
Staff Development
Education Advocacy
Mentoring
Ministering to Girls
Best Practices of Gender
Responsiveness
Curriculum Development &
Training
Kotzen Room
Kotzen Room
LeFavour Hall 222
Shepard Room
LeFavour Hall 223
Anisha Chablani
Marlies Spanjaard
Mia Roberts
Rev. Virginia Ward
Venus Rodriguez & Marlene
Sanchez
Dr. Marcia Morgan
Afternoon Workshop
Adolescent Development
Workshop room
Special Functions Room
Presenter
Dr. Penny Haney
Mentoring
Policy and Advocacy
Organizational Assessment
Mia Roberts
Lynne Lyman
Dr. Marcia Morgan
Youth Culture
LeFavour Hall 222
LeFavour Hall 201
Linda Paresky Conference
Room
Student Activities Room
Sexual Exploitation
Shephard Room
Best Practices of Gender
Responsiveness
LeFavour Hall 223
Katie Carlson & Elizabeth
Meffen
Venus Rodriguez & Marlene
Sanchez
Linda Paresky Conference
Room
Sapna Padte
99
Appendix 14: Letters and Fact Sheets
Used for Legislative Advocacy
(GI legislation co-sponsor request - template email)
Dear Representative ___________________
I am writing today to ask you to co-sponsor a very important piece of legislation sponsored by Rep. Coakley-Rivera
that does not involve any budget allocation, An Act to Establish a Special Commission on Gender-Responsive
Programming for System-Involved Girls.
I live in your district (my organization is in your district) and I have appreciated your support over the years (I do not
live in your district, but I have appreciated your support of issues important to those of us working to improve the
lives of families and young people in the Commonwealth).
I know you agree that all young people deserve to have equal access to programs and services that will help them
achieve their potential and be successful. The criminal justice system was designed for boys, and yet now girls are the
fastest growing segment of the juvenile justice population. While few would deny that it is critical to provide “equal
access” to services and treatment for boys and girls involved with the justice system, how we get to equal is more
complex than it may appear to be on the surface. “Equal” does not mean gender neutral.
Not only is female adolescent development extremely different that male, but what brings girls to the juvenile justice
system is very different as well: history of sexual abuse, suicidal behavior, disassociate disorder, post traumatic stress
disorder, and borderline personality disorder.
There has been growing consensus over the past 15 years among youth development advocates and academics that
gender specific programming at all levels can have far more promising and successful results for girls involved in high
risk behavior. States such as Oregon and Florida initiated this approach over a decade ago and have seen remarkable
results in terms of improved outcomes and reduced recidivism for girls, all while controlling costs.
The establishment of this Commission would begin the process of having our state give this issue the attention and
investment it warrants.
I respectfully request that you co-sponsor this bill by calling Maureen Ferris in Coakley-Rivera’s office at 617-7222011.
Attached you will find the bill as well as a fact sheet on who in the community is behind this and why. Please do not
hesitate to contact me for further information.
Thank you in advance for your consideration and thank you for the great work you do every day on behalf of the
people of Massachusetts
100
GIRLS’ INITIATIVE - YPI
FACT SHEET FOR LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL (UPDATED 4-19-09)
The Girls’ Initiative is advancing its first piece of legislation: H3418 - An Act to Establish a Special Commission
on Gender-Responsive Programming for System-Involved Girls
--sponsored by Cheryl Coakley-Rivera of Springfield
--co-sponsored by:
• Kay Khan, Newton House Chair of the Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities
• Liz Malia, Boston
• Marty Walz, Boston/Cambridge
• Alice Wolf, Cambridge
• Gloria Fox, Boston
• Carl Sciortino, Medford/Somerville
• Ellen Story, Amherst/Granby
• Christine Canavan, Brockton
• William Brownsberger, Belmont/Arlington/Cambridge
• Willie Mae Allen, Boston
• Linda Dorcena Forry, Boston
• Senator Karen Spilka, Framingham
Who is behind the Girls’ Initiative?
• Initiated by the Hyams Foundation in January of 2003, the Girls’ Initiative is a response to the problem of the
growing number of girls entering the juvenile justice system.
• The long-term goal of the initiative is to promote positive outcomes for high risk and/or already systeminvolved girls and to reduce the rates of involvement and recidivism of girls in the juvenile justice system,
particularly for girls of color.
• Currently the Girls’ Initiative is focusing on the YPI (Youth Policy Initiative) funded through The Boston
Foundation, which will: Advocate for changes in policy/regulation in favor of a gender specific approach
when working with girls.
How has girls’ involvement in the juvenile justice system changed?
• Nationally, over the past 30 years the fastest growing segment of the juvenile justice population has been girls
(now accounting for as many as 1 out of every 3 referrals1 ).
In Massachusetts:
• The number of girls arrested tripled between 1991 and 2001 (CfJJ).
• From 1993 until its peak in 2003, the number of girls in the DYS committed population rose over 300% (from
124 to 514). And while the number of girls in the DYS committed population in 2008 dropped to 291, it is
still over twice as much as it was fifteen years ago.
1 National Council of Crime and Delinquency: www.iamforkids.org/publications/front_burner/jj_10_17_2008.asp
101
Why focus on girls?
• The criminal justice system was designed for boys. Girls are different from boys, which necessitates genderspecific responses for them.
• Girls are three times more likely than boys to have experienced sexual abuse, which is an underlying factor in
subsequent high-risk behaviors that lead to delinquency; 70% of female delinquents have a history of sexual
abuse (OJJDP).
• Female juvenile delinquents are much likelier than boys to experience post traumatic stress disorder,
suicidal behavior, disassociate disorder, and borderline personality disorder (CfJJ: National Mental Health
Association).
• More than half of all girls in detention have reported attempting suicide (of those, 64% have attempted more
than once). Risk of suicide for lesbian girls is three times greater than for heterosexual girls (OJJDP).
• 75% of the girls committed to DYS reported receiving services from DSS (DYS).
What is “gender-responsive” and why do we need it?
• Girls are entering the criminal justice system and other government institutions with very different personal
profiles than boys.
• The issues girls struggle with as they go through female adolescent development warrant a decidedly different
approach than taken with boys.
• Whereas boys engaged in risky behaviors are often externally aggressive, girls tend to internalize their anger
and be self-destructive exhibited in such risk indicators as eating disorders, depression, dating/sexual abuse,
substance abuse and prostitution.
• Gender-responsive programming intentionally allows gender to affect and guide services, through site selection
and environment, staff selection and training, program development and content, and organization values and
policies.
• There has been growing consensus over the past 15 years that gender specific programming at all levels can
have far more promising and successful results for girls involved in high risk behavior.
• States such as Oregon and Florida initiated a similar process over a decade ago and have seen remarkable
results in terms of improved outcomes and reduced recidivism for girls, all while controlling costs.
H3418 seeks the following outcomes:
1. That the Commonwealth adopt a general value statement on serving girls.
2 That all relevant state agencies incorporate gender-specific training.
3. That the Commonwealth collect data by gender among relevant agencies and makes available to the
public.
4. That the Commonwealth issue recommended policies, standards, procedures and criteria for girls’
programming.
5. That the Commonwealth propose an implementation plan for incorporating those criteria within the
relevant state agencies.
6. That the Commonwealth issue a bi-annual report on the status of system involved girls.
For further information, please contact the Girls’ Initiative Project Manager, Kalya Hamlett at (617) 445-2737
102
Appendix 15: H3418
HOUSE DOCKET, NO. 1242
FILED ON: 1/13/2009
HOUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No. 3418
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
_______________
PRESENTED BY:
Cheryl A. Coakley-Rivera
_______________
To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in General
Court assembled:
The undersigned legislators and/or citizens respectfully petition for the passage of the accompanying bill:
An Act establishing a special commission on gender-responsive programming for systeminvolved girls.
_______________
PETITION OF:
NAME:
DISTRICT/ADDRESS:
Cheryl A. Coakley-Rivera
William N. Brownsberger
Kay Khan
Christine E. Canavan
Carl M. Sciortino, Jr.
Elizabeth A. Malia
Martha M. Walz
Alice K. Wolf
Gloria L. Fox
Ellen Story
Willie Mae Allen
Linda Dorcena Forry
Karen E. Spilka
10th Hampden
24th Middlesex
11th Middlesex
10th Plymouth
34th Middlesex
11th Suffolk
8th Suffolk
25th Middlesex
7th Suffolk
3rd Hampshire
6th Suffolk
12th Suffolk
Second Middlesex and Norfolk
103
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
_______________
In the Year Two Thousand and Nine
_______________
AN ACT ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL COMMISSION ON GENDER-RESPONSIVE
PROGRAMMING FOR SYSTEM-INVOLVED GIRLS.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority
of the same, as follows:
1
2
Section 1. A special commission shall be appointed to investigate and study methods of instituting
gender-responsive programming for system-involved girls, hereinafter referred to as “the commission”.
3
Section 2.
4
5
The commission shall make recommendations to the Governor and General Court to improve the
effectiveness of services for system-involved girls by any or all of the following means:
6
7
a. conducting a national review of gender-responsive programming implementation successes and
challenges by other state’s juvenile justice systems;
8
9
b. conducting a national review of the published reports, curricula, and best practices for gender-specific
programming by government, foundations, and non-profit organizations;
10
11
c. conducting a national review of leading indicators that leads to girls becoming involved in criminal
justice systems;
12
d. conducting a review of all relevant state training curricula;
13
14
e. conducting a review of all relevant state agencies’ methods of data collection and aggregation by
gender and race;
15
16
f. analyzing and evaluating all relevant state contracts with private or community-based vendors for the
purpose of confirming that there is a consistent approach to the delivery of girls’ programming;
17
g. analyzing and reporting the rates of recidivism for girls within an agency as well as between agencies.
18
h. tracking and analyzing educational attainment of system-involved girls;
104
19
20
i. holding at least 3 regional community-wide meetings to solicit the input of community members and
agencies serving high-risk girls; and,
21
j. establishing a mechanism for incorporating the opinion and values of young
22
system-involved girls.
23
Section 3.
24
The commission shall be comprised of the following members appointed by the Governor:
25
26
a. 8 community members who are geographically representative and who represent current state vendors
that provide direct services to high-risk girls;
27
28
b. 2 members of the Massachusetts Senate appointed by the Senate President, 1 of whom shall serve as
co-chair of the commission;
29
30
c. 2 members of the Massachusetts House of Representatives appointed by the Speaker of the House, 1 of
whom shall serve as co-chair of the commission; and,
31
32
33
34
d. the Secretaries of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services, the Department of Elementary
and Secondary Education ; the Commissioner of Probation, the Department of Youth Services, the
Department of Children and Families, the Department of Mental Health, and the Department of Public
Health; and the Chief Counsel for the Committee for Public Counsel Services, or their designees.
35
Section 4. Meetings and Reports.
36
a. The Commission shall meet monthly.
37
b. The Commission may seek assistance from other organizations or individuals on a pro bono basis.
38
39
40
c. The Commission shall file bi-annual reports with the Clerk of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of
Representatives, and the Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities not later
than June 30th of 2010, and every year thereafter no later than June 30th.
41
42
43
d. The Commission shall present to said committees recommendations concerning the adoption of gender
responsive practices in programs, both community-based and state-wide, serving high-risk and systeminvolved girls.
105
Bibliography
Adams, B., Puzzanchera, C., and Kang, W. (2008). "Easy Access to NIBRS: Victims of Domestic Violence,
2005." Available: http://ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/ezanibrsdv/.
Acoca, L. (October 1999). Investing in Girls: A 21st Century Strategy. Juvenile Justice, Volume VI, No. 1.
Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/jjjournal1099/invest1.html
Acoca, L., & Dedel, K. (1998). No Place to Hide: Understanding and Meeting the Needs of Girls in the
California Juvenile Justice System. San Francisco, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
American Association of University Women. (2001). Beyond the Gender Wars: A Conversation about Girls,
Boys and Education. Washington, D.C.: American Association of University Women. Retrieved August 25,
2009 from http://www.aauw.org/research/upload/BeyondGenderWar.pdf.
American Psychological Association. (2007). Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls.
APA Talk Force on the Sexualization of Girls. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Austin, J., Johnson, K. & Weitzer. R. (2005) Alternatives to Secure Detention and Confinement of Juvenile
Offenders. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. U. S. Department of Justice Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
BOSTnet (2008). Gender-Responsive Programming as a Pathway to Quality, State of the Field: Volume 3,
Issue 2 – 2008. Build the Out-of-School Time Network (BOSTnet), 11 Beacon St., Ste. 1000, Boston, MA
02108; www.bostnet.org.
Boston Public Health Commission. (May 2008). The Health of Boston 2008. Retrieved March 29, 2009,
from http://www.bphc.org/reports/pdfs/report_246.pdf.
Boston Public Health Commission. (2007). Boston Natality 2007: A Review of 2005 Birth Data. Boston,
MA: Boston Public Health Commission Research Office. Retrieved April 13, 2009, from
http://www.bphc.org/about/Documents/Boston%20Natality%202007.pdf.
Boston Public Health Commission. (March 2007). Substance Abuse in Boston. Boston: Boston Public Health
Commission Research Office. Retrieved March 9, 2009, from
http://www.bphc.org/reports/pdfs/report_223.pdf.
Boyce, Erica J. (2000). Lessons Learned: Evaluating the Changes in Perception of Participants of Girls
E.T.C (Girls Equitable Treatment Coalition) Workshops 1997: Guidelines for Female-Specific Programs,
Colorado Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Council, Division of Criminal Justice, Office of
Research and Statistics, Denver, CO, February 2000.
Call, K. T. and Mortimer, J. T. (2001). Arenas of Comfort in Adolescence: A Study in Adjustment in Context.
Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood, Marketing to Children Overview, retrieved April 10, 2009
from http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/factsheets/facts.htm
Carnegie Council on Adolescence Development, 1995.
106
CASA (National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University) (2003). The Formative
Years: Pathways to Substance Abuse Among Girls and Young Women Ages 8-22. February 5, 2003, New
York, New York.
Center for Disease Control National Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) 2007. Retrieved September 8,
2008 from www.cdc.gov/yrbss.
Citizens for Juvenile Justice “Just Facts” Fact Sheet (May 2008) 101 Tremont Street, Ste 1000, Boston, MA
02108. www.cfjj.org.
Citizens for Juvenile Justice (2005). Girls in the Massachusetts Juvenile Justice System, Fact Sheet, June
2005. 101 Tremont Street, Ste 1000, Boston, MA 02108. www.cfjj.org.
Coalition for Juvenile Justice. (2006). Applying Research to Practice: What are the Implications of
Adolescent Brain Development for Juvenile Justice? Retrieved December 10, 2008 from
http://juvjustice.org/media/resources/resource_138.pdf.
Cooney, S. M., Small, S. A., O’Conner, C. (January 2008). Girls in the Juvenile Justice System: Toward
effective gender-responsive programming. What Works, Wisconsin – Research to Practice Series. Issue #7.
Crime and Justice Institute (2004). From Incarceration to Community: A Roadmap to Improving Prisoner
Reentry and System Accountability in Massachusetts. Prepared by Ginger Martin and Cheryl Roberts.
Boston, MA: Crime and Justice Institute. Retrieved March 15, 2009, from
http://cjinstitute.org/./files/reentryrpt_1.pdf.
Dyer, Susan K. (2001). Beyond the “Gender Wars”: A Conversation About Girls, Boys, and Education.
American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, 1111 Sixteenth Street N.W..
Washington DC, 20036.
Fazel, S., Doll, H., and Langström, N. (September 2008). Mental Disorders Among Adolescents in Juvenile
Detention and Correctional Facilities: A Systematic Review and Metaregression Analysis of 25 Surveys.
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Volume 47, Issue 9, pp 1010-1019.
Florida Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability, an Office of the Florida
Legislature (March 2005). Gender Specific Services for Delinquent Girls Vary Across Program, But Help
Reduce Recidivism. Report No. 05-13.
Florida Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability, an Office of the Florida
Legislature. (December 2005). Gender Specific Services for Delinquent Girls Vary Across Prevention,
Detention and Probation Programs. Report No. 05-56.
Florida Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability, an Office of the Florida
Legislature (April 2006). Health and Hygiene Costs Higher for Girls’ Juvenile Justice Residential Programs.
Report No. 06-41.
Florida Statutes, Chapter 2004-333: Section (1) of section 985.02 is amended and subsection (8) is added,
retrieved October 17, 2008.
Ford, J. D., Chapman, J. F., Hawke, J. and Albert, D. (June 2007). Trauma Among Youth in the Juvenile
Justice System: Critical Issues and New Directions, Research and Program Brief. National Center for Mental
107
Health and Juvenile Justice. Retrieved July 5, 2009 from
http://www.ncmhjj.com/pdfs/Trauma_and_Youth.pdf.
Gilligan, Carol (1982). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Gilligan, Carol and Brown, Lyn Mikel (1992). Meeting at the Cross Roads: Women’s Psychology and Girls’
Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.
Greene, Peters, & Associates. (October 1998). Guiding Principles for Promising Female Programming: An
Inventory of Best Practices. United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Washington, DC:,.
http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org/pubs/principles/contents.html.
Haney, Penny, Ph.D. (2009). Adolescent Girls’ Brain and Psychosocial Development, presentation at Hyams
Foundation Girls Initiative Workshop on February 19, 2009. Originally presented at MA Juvenile Bar
Association Annual Meeting October 20, 2006
Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center. (October 25, 2007). 2006 Boston Youth Survey Fact Sheet:
School Violence and Safety. Retrieved March 25, 2009, from
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hyvpc/files/2006_BYS_School_findings.pdf.
Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center. (April 2, 2008). What Kind of World Do You Want to Live in?
Results on Weapon Carrying from the Boston Youth Survey. Retrieved March 25, 2009, from
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hyvpc/files/Fact_Sheet_2006_BYS_Gun_Carrying.pdf.
Holman, B. & Ziedenberg J. (2006). The Dangers of Detention: The Impact of Incarcerating Youth in
Detention and Other Secure Facilities. A Justice Policy Institute Report.
Hubbard, Dana Jones and Pratt, Travis C. (July 2002). A Meta-Analysis of the Predictors of Delinquency
Among Girls. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, Volume 34, Issue 3, p 1–13,
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a903832742~db=all~order=page
Hsia, H. (September 2004). OJJDP Formula Grants Program Overview. OJJDP Fact Sheet. Washington,
D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of
Justice. Retrieved August 22, 2009 from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/fs200402.pdf.
Interagency Working Group on Youth Programs. (n.d.). “Program Tool Risk Factors.” Retrieved February
10, 2009, from http://www.findyouthinfo.gov/cf_pages/programtool-factors.cfm.
Iowa Commission on the Status of Women (January 1999). Providing Gender-Specific Services for
Adolescent Female Offenders: Guidelines and Resources. Iowa Commission on the Status of Women,
Department of Human Rights. Lucas State Office Building, Des Moines, IA 50319.
Linn, S. (2008). The Case for Make Believe: Saving Play in a Commercialized World. New York: New
Press, p. 175, as cited in Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood. (n.d.). Marketing to Children
Overview. Retrieved August 25, 2009 from
http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/factsheets/overview.pdf.
Lupton, M. J, Delaney, J. and Toth, E.(1988). The Curse: a Cultural History of Menstruation. Chapter 18.
First University of Illinois Press.
108
Massachusetts Department of Children and Families. (2008). 2007 Child Maltreatment Statistics. Boston
MA: Department of Children and Families.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2008). Health and Risk Behaviors of
Massachusetts Youth, 2007: The Report.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2008 Graduation Rate Report
(DISTRICT) for All Students, Retrieved March 9, 2009, from
http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/state_report/gradrates.aspx.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 4-Year Graduation Rate and Cohort
2008 Four-Year Graduation Rates - State Results, Retrieved March 9, 2009, from
http://www.doe.mass.edu/infoservices/reports/gradrates/08_4yr.html.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. 2006-07 SSDR Files. Retrieved
December 15, 2008, from http://www.doe.mass.edu/infoservices/research/?yr=2007&section=ssdr.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Cohort 2007 4-Year Graduation Rates State Results. Retrieved January 28, 2009, from
http://www.doe.mass.edu/infoservices/reports/gradrates/07_4yr.html.
Massachusetts Department of Public Health. (January 2008). Suicides an Self-Inflicted Injuries in
Massachusetts: Data Update. The Surveillance Program. Retrieved May 4, 2009, from
http://www.mass.gov/Eeohhs2/docs/dph/com_health/injury/suicide_bulletin.pdf.
Massachusetts Department of Public Health. (Feb. 11, 2009). State Health Officials Release 2007 Birth
Report: Mass. compares favorably on teen birth rate, low birth weight, and other measures. Cesarean birth
rates still high, and gestational diabetes on the rise. Press Release. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from
http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eohhs2pressrelease&L=4&L0=Home&L1=Government&L2=Departments+
and+Divisions&L3=Department+of+Public+Health&sid=Eeohhs2&b=pressrelease&f=090211_birth_report
&csid=Eeohhs2.
Massachusetts Department of Youth Services. (Feb. 15, 2006). DYS Public Information Packet.
Massachusetts Department of Youth Services. (n.d.). Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative:
Massachusetts Detention Utilization Study, Suffolk and Worcester Counties. Presentation handed out at a
JDAI meeting.
Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety. (2004). Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Data and
Information. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety.
Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security. (March 2007). 2007 Formula Grant Three
Year Plan.
Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security. (March 2008). 2008 Formula Grant Three
Year Plan.
Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security. (April 2008). Youth as Victims of Sexual
Assault: Using Medical Provider Data to Describe the Nature and Context of Sexual Crime Perpetrated on
109
Youth Victims. Accessed March 25, 2009, from:
http://www.mass.gov/Eeops/docs/eops/Publications/youth_victims_sex_assault_2000_to_2006.pdf.
Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee. (2007). Report to the Governor and State Legislature.
Boston, MA: Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee.
Massachusetts Office of the Commissioner of Probation. (May 26, 2009). Probation Statistics Show
Sharp Increase in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases: Mental Illness and Substance Abuse are Leading Factors
[Press Release]. Retrieved August 29, 2009 from http://www.mass.gov/courts/probation/pr052709.html.
Miller, Niki (2003). Consideration of Gender Specific Factors in the Development of Adolescent Alcohol and
Other Drug Interventions and Treatment, New Hampshire. Downloaded here on August 10, 2009:
http://www.nhtwr.org/publications/adogirls6-29-04_copyright.pdf
Mills, Mary: Florida Department of Juvenile Justice. Phone Conversation on 6/11/08.
National Association of School Psychologists. (2005). Girls Bullying Girls: An Introduction to Relational
Aggression. Parenting Perspectives. Retrieved May 4, 2009, from
http://www.teachersandfamilies.com/open/parent/ra2.cfm.
National Council on Crime and Delinquency (2007). “FACT SHEET: Girls in Juvenile Justice. Oakland,
CA. Retrieved February 17, 2009, from http://www.iamforkids.org/promises/promise5/Girls_Fact_Sheet.pdf.
National Council on Crime and Delinquency (July 2006). A Rallying Cry for Change; Charting a New
Direction in the State of Florida’s Response to Girls in Juvenile Justice. Oakland, CA. Written by Vanessa
Patino, Lawanda Raviora, Angela Wolf.
National Council on Crime and Delinquency (March 1, 2006). The Spiral of Risk: Health Care Provision to
Incarcerated Women. Oakland, CA.
National Women’s Law Center. (2007). When Girls Don’t Graduate We All Fail: A Call to Improve High
School Graduation Rates for Girls. Washington, D.C.: National Women’s Law Center. Retrieved April 10,
2009, from http://www.nwlc.org/pdf/DropoutReport.pdf.
Nevins, Aaron, Legislative Aide to House Majority Whip Ellyn Bogdanoff, Florida House of
Representatives, District 91, 1421 South Andrews Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316-1839, Phone: (954)
762-3757. Phone conversation on 10/17/08.
Oregon Department of Human Services, policy #DHS-010-004: Gender-Specific Services for Children and
Youth, approved 12/22/2004 and effective 1/1/2005, retrieved May 9, 2008 from
http://www.dhs.state.or.us/policy/admin/exec/010_004.htm.
Oregon Laws, https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/417.270.html
Oregon Youth Authority (OYA), Report on House Bill 3576 (ORS 417.270): Equal Access to Services for
Female and Male Youth, Feb 12, 2007.
Oregon Legislative Assembly, 1993. House Bill 3576. Portland, OR.
PACE Center for Girls, Inc. 2005-2006 Annual Report. One West Adams Street
110
Suite 301, Jacksonville, FL 32202. Retrieved from: http://www.pacecenter.org/annual-reports.html.
Patton, P. & Morgan, M. (July 2002). How to Implement Oregon’s Guidelines to Gender-Responsive
Programming for Girls, Oregon Criminal Justice Commission Juvenile Crime Prevention Program and the
Oregon Commission on Children and Families.
Pittman, K. J. and Wright, M. (August 1991). A Rationale for Enhancing the Role of the Non-School
Voluntary Sector in Youth Development, Prepared for Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development,
Executive Summary, p. ii.
Resnick, M.D., M. Ireland, I. Borowsky. (November 2004). Youth Violence Perpetration: What Protects?
What Predicts? Findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Journal of Adolescent
Health. Volume 35, Issue 5, Pages 424.e1-424.e10. Retrieved June 17, 2009, from
http://www.jahonline.org/article/PIIS1054139X0400165X/fulltext.
Robinson, L. T., & Ward, V. J. (1991). Women, Girls and Psychotherapy: Reframing Resistance.
Rust, Bill. (1999). “Juvenile Jailhouse Rocked: Reforming Detention in Chicago, Portland, and Sacramento.”
ADVOCACY. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Sherman, Francine T. (2007). Access to Community Healthcare for Youth in the Juvenile Justice System:
Initial Lessons from the Massachusetts Health Passport Project in “Women, Girls & Criminal Justice. Vol. 8
No. 6, October/November 2007.
Sherman, Francine T. (2005). Detention Reform and Girls: Challenges and Solutions, a Pathways to Juvenile
Detention Reform Report of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, 701 St. Paul Street, Baltimore, MD 21202.
Skowyra, K. R. and Cocozza, J. (2007). Blueprint for Change: A Comprehensive Model for the Identification
and Treatment of Youth with Mental Health Needs in Contact with the Juvenile Justice System. Delmar, NY:
Policy Research Associates, Inc. Retrieved July 5, 2009, from
http://www.ncmhjj.com/Blueprint/pdfs/Blueprint.pdf.
Snyder, Howard N. (November 2008). Juvenile Arrests 2006, Juvenile Justice Bulletin, US Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved
November 20, 2008 from http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/publications/PubAbstract.asp?pubi=243205.
Spatz Widom, C. (2003). Understanding Child Maltreatment and Juvenile Delinquency: The Research.
Arlington, VA: Child Welfare League of American. Retrieved August 29, 2009 from
http://www.cwla.org/programs/juvenilejustice/ucmjd03.pdf.
Sum, A., Khatiwada, I., McLaughlin, J. & Tobar, P. (January 2007). An Assessment of the Labor Market,
Income, Health, Social, Civic, and Fiscal Consequences of Dropping Out of High School: Findings for
Massachusetts Adults in the 21st Century . Boston, MA: Northeastern University Center for Labor Market
Studies. Retrieved July 19, 2009 from
http://www.clms.neu.edu/publication/documents/boston_youth_transition_paper_2006.pdf.
United States Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General,. (January 2001).
Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General. Retrieved January 4, 2009, from
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/youthviolence/toc.html.
111
United States Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) of 2002, Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention as amended, Pub. L. No. 93-415 (1974). Retrieved June 3, 2009 from
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/about/jjdpa2002titlev.pdf.
United States Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (October 1998). Juvenile Female
Offenders: A Status of the States Report. Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved August, 25, 2009 from
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/pubs/gender/state-or.html.
United States Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (n.d.). Formula Grant Program Areas.
Retrieved August 24, 2009 from http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/programs/formulaareas.html.
United States Office of National Drug Control Police, Executive Office of the President (February 2006).
Girls and Drugs: A New Analysis: Recent Trends, Risk Factors and Consequences. Retrieved June 27, 2009,
from http://www.theantidrug.com/pdfs/girls_and_drugs.pdf.
United Way of Massachusetts Bay, Today’s Girls…Tomorrow’s Leaders. Guidelines and Guiding
Principles, 2008-2009. 51 Sleeper Street, Boston, MA 02210.
Veysey, B. M. (July 2003). Adolescent Girls with Mental Health Disorders Involved with the Juvenile
Justice System. Research and Program Brief. National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice.
Retrieved July 5, 2009 from http://www.ncmhjj.com/pdfs/Adol_girls.pdf.
Wheeler, K. A., Oliveri, R., Towery, I. D., Mead, M. in collaboration with the Girls’ Coalition Leadership
Council (2005). Where Are the Girls? The State of Girls’ Programming in Greater Boston, a report pf the
Girls’ Coalition of Greater Boston, 2005. Boston, MA.
Women’s Health Information. (May 2009). Menstrual Cycles: What Really Happens in those 28 Days?!
Retrieved July 5, 2009 from http://www.fwhc.org/health/moon.htm.
Zahn, M. A, Hawkins, S.R., Graham, P.W., and Williams, J. (January 2009). The Girls Study
Group Bulletin: Resilient Girls – Factors that Protect Against Delinquency. Washington, DC: United States
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
OJJDP. NCJ 220124.
Zahn, M. A., S. R. Hawkins, J. Chiancone, & A. Whitworth. (October 2008). The Girls Study Group-Charting the Way to Delinquency Prevention for Girls. Washington, DC: United States Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved April
9, 2009 from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/223434.pdf.
Zahn, M. A., et. al.. (May 2008). The Girls Study Group: Understanding and Responding to Girls’
Delinquency – Violence by Teenage Girls; Trends and Context. Washington, DC: United States Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
112
THE HYAMS FOUNDATION, INC.
113