Financing Options

How Can States Invest in Reducing Juvenile Detention?

  • Redeploy existing resources. Reform can be funded through shifts in existing resources. Cook County established home detention by adding youth pre-trial supervision duties to probation staff who supervised post-trial cases.
  • Reinvest savings. Policymakers can shift savings from reduced detention costs to programs or practices that achieve better results.  Multnomah County, Ore., used community supervision to close three 16-bed detention units, redirecting $12 million in savings to detention alternatives. [i]
  • Maximize federal funds.  Federal grants available through the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) can be used for community-based alternatives and supervision programs. New Jersey used Title II funds to support JDAI alternatives to detention  [ii] New Mexico uses Medicaid funds for mental health services to youth in pre-trial detention for up to 60 days. [iii] In 34 states, youth in detention are ineligible based on a misinterpretation of a federal rule.[iv]
  • L everage private funding.  All JDAI sites have received funds from the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Some sites received grants from the California Endowment to improve health services. Other JDAI sites used Robert Wood Johnson Foundation grants to improve substance abuse services.
  • Invest state general funds.  States fund positions, community services, alternatives to detention and research on detention reforms.

[i] DeMuro, Paul. “ Pathways to Juvenile Detention Reform Series.”Consider the alternatives: Planning and implementing detention alternatives. Baltimore, Md.: Annie E. Casey Foundation,1999.
[iii] Kelly, J. “Medicaid’s buried treasure for juvenile justice: Detention center creates a clinic with money you think you can’t get.” Youth Today, April 1, 2008.  http://youthtoday.org/publication/article.cfm?article_id=1680
[iv] Ten states declared that youth in pre-trial detention are eligible (Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont and Wisconsin), five states stated youth in detention were ineligible with some exceptions (Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, South Carolina, and Virginia), and one state failed to respond (West Virginia).