Legislation that Attorney General Brian Schwalb crafted to address issues at the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services (DYRS) recently made its way to the D.C. Council’s Committee on Recreation, Libraries and Youth Affairs, chaired by D.C. Councilmember Trayon White (D-Ward 8).
If approved, the legislation, titled the Recidivism Reduction, Oversight and Accountability for DYRS Act of 2024 (ROAD Act), will increase accountability for the agency that runs the Youth Services Center (YSC), a youth detention center grappling with overcrowding, violence, and substance use among youth residents.
“The responsibility of rehabilitation, consequences and making sure kids don’t commit crime again lies with DYRS. I haven’t been satisfied with the outcomes,” Schwalb told The Informer.
“We’ve been watching very closely..focusing on some of the data that the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CCJC) pushed out and our own observations. The things we hear from advocates, parents and families. The cases coming back into our office. Some legislative changes were necessary.”
A Tug of War Between the Executive and Judiciary
Elements of Schwalb’s legislation include the establishment of a permanent oversight entity within the Office of the D.C. Auditor (ODCA); a requirement that DYRS develops an individualized rehabilitation plan prior to a depositional hearing; the provision of services to residents within 30 days of a deposition order’s entry; the development of a discharge and reentry plan when a child receives placement outside of their parent or guardian’s home; and the refinement of a depositional order every four months if a child doesn’t t receive appropriate service.
If passed, the ROAD Act would also amend the DYRS Establishment Act of 2004 to explicitly outline DYRS’ duties as developing and updating individualized rehabilitation plans, monitoring and ensuring safety of contracted facilities, and conducting oversight of facility compliance.
Schwalb introduced the ROAD Act, via D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), weeks after D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) introduced the UPLIFT Amendment Act, which includes a provision narrowing down consent decrees and deferred disposition agreements so that more youths charged with violent crimes would go before a judge.
During a roundtable that the D.C. Council’s Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety conducted during the latter part of May, Schwalb criticized the UPLIFT Amendment Act as an infringement on his powers and detrimental to what he called an overextended YSC.
Schwalb expanded upon those points while speaking to The Informer, saying that he aims to leverage pre-commitment tools while securing improvements to DYRS. His approach, he told The Informer, is based on data.
“Residents trust my office to keep them safe, which is my number one priority,” Schwalb said. “It’s not for the council or the mayor to dictate to the attorney general how to exercise that discretion. If residents aren’t happy with how I exercise discretion, they have a democratic remedy.”
The D.C. Auditor Calls for Strong Oversight
CCJC’s 2018 cohort study of the juvenile justice system found that 92.7% of young people committed to DYRS are re-arrested, with nearly half of them convicted of a new offense — primarily release violations or property crimes. Among those who received interventions by the Office of the Attorney General — including consent decrees and deferred disposition agreement — a little more than half reoffended during or within two years of the intervention’s completion.
As Terri Odom, director of Family Court Social Services Division, explained to community members at the D.C. Dream Center in Southeast in early May, 75% of youth who come into contact with law enforcement for alleged crimes are not detained. They instead would most likely have a delayed disposition — an agreement to avoid conviction if certain conditions are met.
This process, which Odom said has increased in frequency since 2021, follows behavioral health and sex trafficking screenings, along with a risk assessment to determine whether a young person would reoffend or not return to court. During the May 9 event at D.C. Dream Center, Odom acknowledged what she called an ongoing battle to make District residents embrace the process, especially since there’s not a “large gap” in distance between those alleged to have committed a crime and their alleged victims.
However, Bowser remains adamant about leveraging DYRS facilities as a tool in crime prevention.
Last month, she reportedly said, in response to the ROAD Act, that she’s not willing to work with Schwalb on this matter. Her focus, she told reporters, lies with ensuring that young people are in “secure detention.” These comments came in the aftermath of an ODCA report revealing that DYRS and Child and Family Services Agency have failed to identify and support “crossover youth” — known as young people who are involved in the welfare system and juvenile justice system.
D.C. Auditor Kathleen Patterson emphasized to The Informer that oversight is essential in ensuring that DYRS provides services. Last year, Ward 8 D.C. Councilmember White, and D.C. Councilmembers Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), Christina Henderson (I-At large) successfully introduced an emergency declaration resolution to extend the life of the Office of Independent Juvenile Justice Facilities Oversight (OIJJFO) into 2024.
The Fiscal Year 2025 Local Budget Act, the second vote of which the council conducts on June 12, includes funding for OIJJFO within ODCA. The accompanying Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Support Act, which the council will vote on at a date to be determined, includes a provision that requires OIJJFO to, in addition to its oversight duties, produce and submit a plan to the D.C. Council about the continuation of its activities beyond Fiscal Year 2025.
“The important thing is that there’s oversight of juvenile justice facilities. Where it’s housed could be a number of other places,” Patterson said. “It’s the responsibility of the council and its oversight committee to make sure that what’s happening [at DYRS] is consistent with law. That’s the job of the legislature. It’s important that services are provided and there’s a check.”
At Least One Person Says There’s Room for Improvement in the ROAD Act
A DYRS budget oversight hearing conducted earlier this year shed light on a lengthy placement process that delays YSC residents’ connection to rehabilitation, along with the implementation of programs, assessments and care. That situation, in part, caused YSC’s resident population to skyrocket to levels beyond what the facility could accommodate.
In its responses to pre-hearing questions, DYRS officials said that 45.3% of newly committed young people navigate a complete case planning process within 90 days of their commitment start date. That metric falls well below the performance target of 80%.
Additionally, officials made note of “challenges” with effective and complete use of assessment results, which they said highlights the need for additional training.
The Informer unsuccessfully attempted to gather comment from DYRS Director Sam Abed about whether Schwalb’s bill adequately addressed issues at YSC. Similarly, Ward 8 Councilmember White’s office also didn’t answer questions about when he plans to conduct hearings about the ROAD Act or whether he agrees with the tenets of the legislation.
The Council for Court Excellence (CCE), with whom ODCA conducted its report about “crossover youth,” researches adult and juvenile justice systems to better understand where they can improve. While CCE policy director Tracy Velázquez commended Schwalb for prioritizing independent oversight DYRS in the ROAD Act, she questioned the extent to which the bill addressed the issue of why assessments weren’t taking place in a timely fashion.
Once that question is answered, she said, then DYRS could make significant improvements in youth outcomes and reduction of recidivism.
“We need to understand the challenges that DYRS is facing in terms of ensuring that young people get the services they need,” Velázquez said. “For example, a lot of crossover youth had challenges growing up. We want them to be healthy and have a career, take care of their loved ones, and be a positive force in the community… As we consider outcomes for DYRS, we do need to keep in mind that these are young people who are still mentally and emotionally developing.”
