Youth diversion away from the criminal justice system for those accused of delinquent behavior is increasing nationwide, according to the Sentencing Project.
A March 2024 report by Senior Research Fellow, Youth Justice, Richard A. Mendel, and a Diversion Working Group of experts documented the significant progress of recent youth diversion opportunities.
“This momentum to make diversion a centerpiece of juvenile justice reform is encouraging given powerful research showing that youth who are diverted from the justice system are far less likely to be arrested for subsequent offenses,” wrote Mendel.
Diversion for youth offenders has long been an option in the juvenile justice system. The report also noted that diversion has frequently been misused.
Youth who would reap the most benefits — those who pose manageable risks to public safety — have not been sufficiently diverted. Instead, they endured prosecution and sanctions in the juvenile courts.
“Research studies consistently find that being arrested in adolescence substantially increases the likelihood of future justice system involvement,” wrote Mendel. “It reduces future success in school and work.”
Diversion policies have been established nationally using several approaches. Many states have enacted significant new laws and programs to mandate and expand diversion.
Kansas mandated the Immediate Intervention Program for youth accused of a first-time misdemeanor in 2022, yielding a 92% success rate.
New Hampshire created several behavioral health interventions, which screened all youth referred to juvenile court. Most youth have been diverted to behavioral health programs instead of court interventions.
In 2022, 72% of assessed youth were recommended to non-court interventions. The report noted that new delinquency cases dropped 50% between 2018 and 2022.
San Francisco offers enrollment in a community-based diversion program for all youth misdemeanor cases. This includes restorative justice and support programming such as mental health counseling, tutoring, employment, community service, and life skills workshops.
“Too often, young people enter the delinquency court system not because they have committed serious offenses, but rather because they face acute needs and require support,” wrote Mendel. “In these cases, youth should be served outside the court system by human service agencies with expertise in addressing young people’s needs.”
In North Dakota, youth accused of status offenses, such as running away, truancy, or alcohol possession, are removed from the jurisdiction of the state’s juvenile delinquency courts and referred to a “Human Service Zone.”
Connecticut removed all status offenses from the courts and has routed those youth offenders to the state’s network of Youth Service Bureaus, away from the justice system.
Restorative justice diversion programs have increased. They require youth offenders “to focus on and repair the harm caused by their misconduct, and often include face-to-face meetings with victims,” wrote Mendel.
Restorative justice directly addresses the needs of victims, increasing victim approval with the justice system. It would also benefit youth by building empathy.
States such as Colorado, Nebraska, and Minnesota have invested heavily in these programs.
Pre-arrest diversion has expanded. Los Angeles County has a network of community-based diversion programs under its Department of Youth Development. It has offered pre-arrest diversion for up to 80% of youth delinquents.
“State and local leaders across the country… are recognizing and acting on the evidence that arresting youth and prosecuting youth in the court system is often counterproductive,” wrote Mendel.
Success rates of diverted youth have risen as diversion practices have improved.
Youth are “far more likely to succeed in education and employment than comparable youth who are arrested and prosecuted in juvenile court,” cited the report.
