Transforming juvenile justice through strategic financing

“Juvenile justice systems in the United States—responsible for addressing legal violations by youth under a certain age (typically age 18)—operate under a variety of complex financial structures that reflect an interplay of federal, state, and local policies. These systems rely on diverse funding sources, each playing a critical role in supporting operations, programs, and services. While state and local funding form the backbone of financial support to juvenile justice systems,  additional funding sources—such as federal funding, fines and fees, and philanthropic contributions—also play a role. However, there is limited information available regarding juvenile justice financing,  particularly information synthesized across states and localities. As a result, variations in financing among juvenile justice systems are not well understood, limiting opportunities to examine how different structures support (or limit) communities’ juvenile justice objectives—for example, reducing recidivism, expanding community-based alternatives to incarceration, and increasing access to rehabilitative services. This lack of clarity hinders opportunities to strategize and allocate resources effectively, improve program quality, and achieve safe communities.

    [Related: Podcasts explain latest trends in youth justice]

To enhance understanding of juvenile justice system financing, the Annie E. Casey Foundation funded Child Trends to conduct a mixed-methods study of juvenile justice systems’ financing across select states and localities.

Key Findings

• Our study’s findings, presented in the brief, reveal notable variation in both the financing and expenditures of juvenile justice services across and within the five states, impacting how services are delivered and how funding is allocated between state and local levels.

• Conversations with state and local juvenile justice system leaders highlight several challenges with budget structures and funding streams, including limited flexibility and discretion in spending, shifts in funding due to changes in political leadership, and difficulties carrying over unspent funds.

• The brief also presents a proposed roadmap for strategic juvenile justice financing. Strategic financing requires intentional planning, diverse stakeholder involvement, an advocacy and communication strategy, and a continuous quality improvement plan.”