Summary

Many of the specific factors underlying DMC traverse more than one domain. For example, single parents, usually mothers, tend to have lower socioeconomic status, are under more economic stress, and have less time for parental supervision than do members of twoparent families. People who live in highly populated urban areas tend to have lower socioeconomic status and to face higher local crime rates than those who live in less populated urban or suburban areas. Lower socioeconomic communities have a smaller tax base, which translates into schools with fewer resources and neighborhoods with fewer social programs. Inadequate education makes it more difficult to secure high-paying or stable employment and contributes to continued low socioeconomic status and economic stress. Racial bias, whether found in the juvenile justice system or the broader community, further complicates the analysis. When minority group members have experienced or witnessed bias within the justice system, a belief that the system is unfair leads to distrust and affects individual behavior related to that system, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of disparate treatment. Although the specific causal chains remain unclear, it is apparent that the underlying factors in these four domains contribute to DMC both individually and in combination.

Another important message from this initiative is that the assessment of DMC in secure facilities must be expanded to include actions that contribute to disproportionate minority representation that occurs throughout the juvenile justice system. Both previous research and the experiences of the pilot States show that confinement decisions are affected not only by the four domains discussed but also by bias that can occur at all juvenile justice decision points. The assessment of minority overrepresentation must examine all juvenile justice decision points, and intervention strategies must account for them.

While specific DMC outcomes varied by State and community, the DMC initiative had several universal effects, including the development of automated systems for monitoring DMC activities, increased community collaboration, the institutionalization of DMC awareness, and the improvement of local services. Possibly the most important effect was a greater understanding within the pilot communities of the complexity and pervasiveness of DMC issues and the realization that serious efforts to address DMC require numerous resources, including time, money, technical assistance, and above all, commitment.

As of early 1998, all of the pilot States were continuing their concerted efforts to identify DMC problem areas, to assess juvenile justice decision points, and to develop and implement plans to address the factors underlying minority overrepresentation within the State and local juvenile justice systems. In some States, DMC community-based programs showing early promise were provided State funding to continue or expand. In other States, the fact that efforts to increase cultural awareness and diversity within the juvenile justice system have succeeded is evidenced by increased numbers of minority staff. In Marion County, OR, an internship program for college students designed to increase the number of minority juvenile justice staff is being revised to provide interns more access to supports within the system and is slated for expansion throughout the entire State. Finally, all of the pilot States are in various stages of developing and testing integrated information systems. To date, States have reported that even limited implementation of such systems has increased the efficiency of information gathering and works well for those counties willing to use them.

As pilot State DMC efforts continue, outcomes also are expected to become more distinct. Today�s small changes in juvenile justice system operations and community juvenile services provision are expected to have a ripple effect as they develop into larger, systemwide, and communitywide changes.

Disproportionate Minority Confinement: Lessons Learned From Five States	OJJDP Bulletin • December 1998