FY 1998 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Compliance Monitoring Report

This report was superseded by an amended FY 1998 compliance monitoring report prepared by Eric W. Weatherby, Juvenile Probabation Officer IV, Alaska Division of Juvenile Justice, July 2001.The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) mandates removal of status offenders and nonoffenders from secure detention and correctional facilities, sight and sound separation of juveniles and adults, and removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups. In Alaska, 3 instances of status offenders held in secure detention were recorded in FY 1998, compared with 485 violations in the baseline year of CY 1976. 2 separation violations were recorded in FY 1998, representing a 99.8% reduction from the CY 1976 baseline of 824 violations. 57 jail removal violations were projected (52 (actual), representing an 93% reduction from the CY 1980 baseline.Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Family and Youth ServicesA. General Information / B. Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / C. Full Compliance Request / D. Progress Made in Achieving Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / E. Separation of Juveniles and Adults / F. Removal of Juveniles from Adult Jails and Lockups / G. De Minimis Request: Substantive / APPENDICES / I. Method of Analysis / II. Fiscal Year 1998 Violations by Offense Type and Location / III. Common Offense Acronym

FY 1999 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Compliance Monitoring Report

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) mandates removal of status offenders and nonoffenders from secure detention and correctional facilities, sight and sound separation of juveniles and adults, and removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups. In Alaska, 12 instances of status offenders held in secure detention were recorded in FY 1999, compared with 485 violations in the baseline year of CY 1976. No separation violations were recorded in FY 1999, representing a 100% reduction from the CY 1976 baseline of 824 violations. 69 jail removal violations were projected (56 actual), representing an substantial reduction from the CY 1980 baseline. Originally completed March 2000; revised April 2000.Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Family and Youth ServicesA. General Information / B. Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / C. De Minimis Request / D. Progress Made in Achieving Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / E. Separation of Juveniles and Adults / F. Removal of Juveniles from Adult Jails and Lockups / G. De Minimis Request: Substantive / APPENDICES / I. Method of Analysis / II. Fiscal Year 1999 Violations by Offense Type and Location / III. Common Offense Acronym

Disproportionate Representation of Minorities in the Alaska Juvenile Justice System: Phase I Report

The disproportionate processing of minorities in the justice system has been noted with growing concern nationally as well as at the state level. In Alaska, as in other states, the primary basis for concern is that minorities are overrepresented among the adult prison population. The realization that this disproportionality appears in other justice system venues has led nationally to a number of research initiatives with a focus on the overrepresentation of juveniles. This report analyzes referral data from the Alaska Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS) for 1992-1995 to provide a statistical overview of disproportionate minority contact in the Alaska juvenile justice system, providing comparative data for referrals of Alaska Native, African American, and white youth.Cook Inlet Region Inc. Alaska Division of Family and Youth Services.Disproportionality Literature / Research Methodology / Referral Events / Referral Outcomes / Analysis of Individuals / Summary and Conclusion / Bibliography / Appendix A: Referrals and Referral Distribution / Appendix B. Factors Significantly Associated with Intake Decisions / Appendix C. Logistic Regression Finding

Brady Statute Data: Persons Who are Subject to a Court Order Restraining Them from Threatening or Committing Acts of Domestic Violence or Abuse

Currently, Alaska law enforcement agencies do not obtain data on four noncriminal categories prohibited by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 from obtaining firearms. This, the second of four reports on these categories, describes how persons subject to a domestic violence restraining order can be identified within an Alaska context and discusses possible procedures, problems, and solutions associated with data collection. The state is rapidly moving to the point where all individuals who meet the Brady definition for this category will be identified, the information housed in a separate database, and reported to federal agencies. AS 18.65.540 provides for a central registry of Domestic Violence Protective Orders, a product of the (state) Domestic Violence Prevention and Victim Protection Act of 1996.Bureau of Justice Statistics, United States Department of Justice Grant No. 96-RU-RX-K026Introduction / Background / Civil Protection Orders / Handgun Applications / New Policies / Conclusion / References / Appendix A: APSIN Screen

Brady Statute Data: Establishing Noncriminal Classifications for the Alaska Department of Public Safety

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 prohibits the purchase of firearms by persons in certain noncriminal categories. These reports describe potential data sources for the identification of mental committments, addicted substance abusers, illegal aliens, and persons who have been the subject of a domestic violence restraining order and discusses possible procedures, problems, and solutions associated with data collection for the purpose of Brady background checks. Lack of infrastructure for collecting certain types of data, incompleteness of information, and state constitutional protections, including the guarantee of privacy, are the chief obstacles to completely meeting the provisions of the Brady Act in Alaska.Bureau of Justice Statistics, United States Department of Justice Grant No. 96-RU-RX-K026Background / Needs and Benefits / Goals and Objectives / Project Design / Findings by Classification / Conclusio

Brady Statute Data: Adjudicated Mental Defectives and Involuntary Mental Commitments

Currently, Alaska law enforcement agencies do not obtain data on four noncriminal categories prohibited by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 from obtaining firearms. This, the first of four reports on these categories, describes how adjudicated mental defectives and involuntary mental commitments can be identified within an Alaska context and discusses possible procedures, problems, and solutions associated with data collection. The report discussed federal statutory definitions of the terms adjudicated as a mental defective, committed to a mental institution, and legal authority; compares these terms with those current in Alaska Statues and used by social service and mental health agencies in the state; and describes, in general, data held by federal, state, local, and private agencies in Alaska. At present, there is no clear or cost-effective way to create and maintain a database for either of the two categories with any accuracy: besides technical difficulties in getting different databases to "talk" to each other, records are not kept on mentally ill individuals, and even if they were, access would be prohibited in the face of federal and state laws regarding privacy.Bureau of Justice Statistics, United States Department of Justice Grant No. 96-RU-RX-K026Introduction / Adjudicated Mental Defectives / Involuntary Mental Commitments / References / Appendix A: Mental Health Commitments (Civil Commitments) / Appendix B: Forms USed in the Alaska Court System During the Involuntary Mental Commitment Proces

FY 1995 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Compliance Monitoring Report

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) mandates removal of status offenders and nonoffenders from secure detention and correctional facilities, sight and sound separation of juveniles and adults, and removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups. In Alaska, 13 instances of a status offender held in secure detention were recorded in FY 1995, compared with 485 violations in the baseline year of CY 1976. 11 separation violations were recorded and 23 projected in FY 1995, representing a 97.3% reduction from the CY 1976 baseline of 824 violations. 143 jail removal violations were projected, representing an 83% reduction from the CY 1980 baseline. Originally completed Feb 1996; revised June 1996.Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Family and Youth ServicesA. General Information / B. Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / C. De Minimis Request / D. Progress Made in Achieving Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / E. Separation of Juveniles and Adults / F. Removal of Juveniles from Adult Jails and Lockups / G. De Minimis Request: Numerical / H. De Minimis Request: Substantive / APPENDICES / I. Method of Analysis / II. FY95 Violations by Offense Type and Location / III. Common Offense Acronym

Brady Statute Data: Establishing Noncriminal Classifications for the Alaska Department of Public Safety—Executive Summary

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 prohibited the purchase of firearms by persons in certain noncriminal categories. This executive report summarizes study findings on potential data sources for the identification of mental committments, addicted substance abusers, noncitizens in the U.S. illegally or unlawfully, and persons who have been the subject of a domestic violence restraining order and briefly discusses possible procedures, problems, and solutions associated with data collection for the purpose of Brady background checks. Lack of infrastructure for collecting certain types of data, incompleteness of information, and state constitutional protections, including the guarantee of privacy, were the chief obstacles to completely meeting the provisions of the Brady Act in Alaska.Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.Department of Justice. Grant No. 96-RU-RX-K026Background / Needs and Benefits / Goals and Objectives / Project Design / Findings by Classification / Conclusio

Brady Statute Data: Persons Who Are Illegally or Unlawfully in the United States

Currently, Alaska law enforcement agencies do not obtain data on four noncriminal categories prohibited by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 from obtaining firearms. This, the fourth of four reports on these categories, describes how undocumented immigrants who are unlawfully in the United States can be identified within an Alaska context and discusses possible procedures, problems, and solutions associated with data collection. It was found that the most feasibile means for obtaining information for the purposes of Brady background checks would be the Verification Information System (VIS) of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). However, project researchers received no response from INS to inquiries about requirements of access to VIS.Bureau of Justice Statistics, United States Department of Justice. Grant No. 96-RU-RX-K026.Introduction / Background / Definitions / INS Records Availability / Determining an Individual's Classification for Brady / Verification Process / Conclusion / Appendix A: U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service Guide to Commonly Used Documents Used to Identify Persons Eligible for Benefits Under the Immigration and Naturalization Act / Appendix B: U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Statement of Intent to Obtain a Handgun(s

A Preliminary Examination of Minority Referrals to the Alaska Juvenile Justice System

This paper is a based on the report Disproportionate Representation of Minorities in the Alaska Juvenile Justice System: Phase I Report by N.E. Schafer, Richard W. Curtis, and Cassie Atwell (Anchorage, AK: Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage, Sep 1997).The disproportionate processing of minorities in the justice system has been noted with growing concern nationally as well as at the state level. In Alaska, as in other states, the primary basis for concern is that minorities are overrepresented among the adult prison population. The realization that this disproportionality appears in other justice system venues has led nationally to a number of research initiatives with a focus on the overrepresentation of juveniles. This paper analyzes referral data from the Alaska Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS) for 1992–1995 to provide a statistical overview of disproportionate minority contact in the Alaska juvenile justice system, providing comparative data for referrals of Alaska Native, African American, and white youth.This study was made possible by a gift from Cook Inlet Region, Inc. and was conducted in collaboration with the Alaska Division of Family and Youth Services.[Introduction] Disproportionality Literature / Research Methodology / Referral Events / Referral Outcomes / Analysis of Individuals / Summary and Conclusion / Bibliography / APPENDICES / A: Referrals and Referral Distribution / B. Factors Significantly Associated with Intake Decisions / C. Logistic Regression Finding