I 112th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 3170 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES October 12, 2011 Mr. Murphy of Connecticut (for himself and Mr. Platts) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce A BILL To amend the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to provide incentive grants to promote alternatives to incarcerating delinquent juveniles.

1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Promoting Alternatives to Truancy and Incarceration by Encouraging New and Comprehensive Efforts (PATIENCE) Act of 2011.

2.

Promoting alternatives to incarceration

Section 222 of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5632) is amended by adding at the end the following: (e)

Incentive Grants

(1)

Incentive grants funds

The Administrator shall make grants totaling at least 5 percent of the funds appropriated for this part in each fiscal year as incentive grants to States. The Administrator shall make such incentive grants consistent with the provisions of subsection (a) and shall condition such grants upon— (A)the State’s support for evidence-based or promising programs, prioritizing programs that address the mental health treatment needs of juveniles; (B)the State’s support of reforms that reduce or eliminate the State-supported use of dangerous practices; (C)the State’s support for reforms that ensure that seclusion in secure detention or correctional facilities is limited to situations in which seclusion is the least restrictive measure sufficient to address a youth’s danger to self or others, used only for the amount of time necessary and is terminated when there is no longer an immediate danger to the youth or others, or imposed only after applicable due process; and (D)the demonstration by the State of an improvement of public safety and rehabilitation of delinquent and at-risk youths. (2)

Demonstration required

The State shall make the demonstration required by paragraph (1)(D) by using accurate and reliable data reported annually showing both— (A)a reduction in either recidivism or offenses by youths under age 18, using arrest data; and (B)(i)an increase in the use of least restrictive placement for juveniles as appropriate for community safety; (ii)an increase in the safety of youths in the delinquency or criminal justice system; or (iii)a decrease in racial and ethnic disparities in the delinquency system. (3)

Expenditure of grant

Of the amount of a grant received under this subsection by a State— (A)not less than 30 percent shall be used to fund implementation efforts described in subparagraph (1)(A); and (B)not more than 20 percent shall be used to conduct research to evaluate reforms described in paragraph (1) that are evidenced-based programs. (4)

Definitions

For purposes of this subsection— (A)the term evidence-based means with respect to a program that the program is demonstrated with relevant evidence, normed and validated for a diverse population, to be either— (i)exemplary, such that it is implemented with a high degree of fidelity and demonstrates robust empirical findings using a conceptual framework and an experimental evaluation design of the highest quality (a random assignment control trial); or (ii)effective, such that it is implemented with sufficient fidelity that it demonstrates adequate empirical findings using a sound conceptual framework and a quasi-experimental evaluation design of high quality (comparison group and quasi-experimental group); and (B)the term promising means with respect to a program that the program demonstrates effectiveness using reasonable, limited findings, and that has underway a more appropriate evaluation that meets the criteria for determining evidence-based programs. .