Improving and Expanding Youth Diversion
By: Suzy Champlin, Development and Communications Intern
Diversion programs play a critical role in the juvenile justice system, balancing the need for accountability and addressing the root causes of youth misbehavior while avoiding the harmful impacts of system involvement and youth incarceration. Diversion is a broad category of interventions that is used to address youth misbehavior at the community level, and outside of the formal court system. Research shows that diversion programs are effective in reducing youth incarceration and recidivism, decreasing spending by avoiding the costs associated with court involvement and improving overall public safety. Sending a youth into the legal system often unnecessarily saddles a youth with a court record which carries a number of collateral consequences that can hamper their future, while diversion offers the opportunity for a youth to receive needed services and support, reflect on their actions and take responsibility without that harm. Despite the proven benefits, diversion programs are still underutilized which can perpetuate existing racial disparities throughout the juvenile justice system and lead to young people unnecessarily experiencing the court system. Expanding diversion programs and increasing pathways to their use is essential in improving both equity in the system and youth outcomes.
There are two kinds of diversion: pre-arrest and post-arrest. Pre-arrest diversion is more informal than post-arrest, and it can take many different forms. For example, addressing misbehavior in school with a counselor intervention rather than a school resource officer making an arrest is considered a form of pre-arrest diversion. Post-arrest diversion requires more formal policy implementation, as it involves a youth being referred to a program to resolve the matter rather than being sent into the court system after an arrest or summons. Research by the Sentencing Project shows that the most effective post-arrest youth diversion programs involve restorative justice practices, in which youth are encouraged to reflect on their behavior and take responsibility for their actions, rather than face punitive consequences. Restorative justice programs often involve the youth’s family and the victim of the youth’s offense engaging in a process focused on healing and accountability. These programs are more constructive than incarceration because they encourage youth self-reflection and are frequently more satisfying to victims because they offer a greater possibility of closure¹.
Youth offenses, the vast majority of youth offenses are low-level, often stem from behavior that is best addressed through diversion programs. Actions like disorderly conduct, theft, or minor fights are often much better addressed in restorative justice programs rather than in the punitive juvenile court system. Diversion programs are also more developmentally appropriate for youth than incarceration. When youth exhibit delinquent behavior, it is due to a lack of self-reflection and ability to conceptualize long-term consequences. Additionally, due to their stage of cognitive development, adolescents are more impulsive, risk-taking, and sensation-seeking than adults. Given what is known about adolescent development. Diversion programs can connect young people to pro-social activities and counseling services that can help young people address underlying trauma, manage strong emotions and process how their actions impact others. Incarceration, on the other hand, simply imposes punishment without dealing with these root causes of behavior, often leading to recidivism and a cycle of offending that leads to worse youth outcomes and public safety.
Diversion programs have been proven to be effective in producing positive outcomes. Youth who participate in diversion programs have better outcomes than youth formally processed in the court system in several areas, such as the likelihood of pre-arrest, the likelihood of subsequent incarceration, school enrollment or employment, high school graduation within five years, and youth perception of future opportunities¹. Furthermore, the benefits of diversion programs extend beyond youth and their families. Diversion programs require less government spending than youth incarceration and are proven to be more monetarily beneficial to the community. For example, a cost-benefit analysis done on diversion programs found that every $1 spent to divert youth created $10.60 to $25.60 of benefit for the community².
Despite these proven benefits, diversion programs are often underutilized. From 2005 to 2021, the share of youth diverted out of the court system stayed relatively constant¹, despite an increased understanding of diversion’s advantages. Internationally, compared to other industrialized countries, the United States has underutilized diversion in addressing youth offenses. When diversion is utilized, white youth are more likely to be diverted than Black and Latino youth. At the national level in 2019, 52% of white youth were diverted as compared to only 40% of Black youth and 44% of Latino youth. Unfortunately, these racial disparities have worsened over the past two decades. In 2005, white youth were 20% more likely than Black youth to be diverted. In 2021, that number increased to 31%¹. These numbers reflect existing disparities in the juvenile justice system, where youth of color are more likely to become justice-involved and incarcerated than their white peers. In Massachusetts, Black and Latino youth are both disproportionately subjected to formal arraignment in the juvenile court: Black youth make up only 10% of the 12-17 year old population but 26% of cases formally arraigned in juvenile court, while. Latino youth make up 18% of the youth population and 28% of those arraigned. Comparatively, White youth are significantly underrepresented at the arraignment stage, making up only 33% of those arraigned despite making up 64% of the 12-17 youth population. Unequal treatment of this kind has long-term impacts, as youth processed through the courts are more likely to be involved in future arrests, have poorer school attendance and higher dropout rates. This underutilization and lack of equity in referring youth to diversion must be addressed, as this lack of fairness deprived youth, especially youth of color, of the opportunities for growth and learning without the black mark of being involved in the system.
In order to ensure that as many youth as possible experience the benefits of diversion, it is necessary to increase the number of jurisdictions that effectively and fairly utilize diversion. Existing diversion programs must collect data and examine current practices and policies to ensure that racial disparities are identified and addressed and that young people engaged in similar conduct receive the same opportunities to address their behavior outside of the legal system. These goals can be accomplished through policy changes, including increased funding, eliminating diversion program fees for youth and their families, broader eligibility criteria, limiting the types of cases that are categorically ineligible for diversion, ending the practice of requiring an admission of guilt, and simplifying participation rules for parents and families. There is also a need to craft clearer diversion guidelines and create infrastructure to collect data on who is diverted, thus creating sounder accountability mechanisms. These investments are well worth it, as bolstering diversion can dramatically decrease the number of youth who are supervised and incarcerated in the juvenile system while improving youth outcomes and safety in their communities.
For more information on the benefits of diversion:
From First Offense to Future Arrests: The Impact of Probation on Youth by Pew Charitable Trusts