U. S. Department of Justice

A glimpse of the challenges we faced-and what we achieved together-can be found in this latest edition of The FBI Story, our annual collection of news and feature articles from the Bureau's public website. Here you can read about some of our most successful recent major investigations and operations. These include a three-day nationwide sweep targeting child prostitution in which we identified and rescued more than 100 young victims and arrested more than 150 pimps;the rescue of a 5-year-old boy held captive in a heavily armed bunker in Alabama; and the uncovering of the largest domestic bribery and bid-rigging scheme in the history of federal contracting cases-one that siphoned more than $30 million dollars of taxpayer money. This edition of The FBI Story also highlightssome of the Bureau's remarkable capabilities. You will find a multi-part series on our eliteHostage Rescue Team-which marked its30th anniversary this past year-and a featureon the Terrorist Explosive Device AnalyticalCenter (TEDAC)-an FBI-established, multiagencyoperation that celebrated its 10th anniversary in 2013. For the FBI, 2013 was a year of transition, as my predecessor, Robert S. Mueller, III, completed his extraordinary 12-year tenure at the helm of the Bureau. Director Mueller guided the FBI in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks and spearheaded the Bureau's transformation into an intelligence driven, threat-focused agency capable of confronting today's global security threats. Following Bob Mueller is both a great challengeand a tremendous privilege. In my first monthsas Director, I have been meeting with our partners in the law enforcement and intelligence communities both in the United States and abroad. I want to ensure that we maintain open lines of communication about the work we are doing in our respective communities so that we can continue to build strong relationships to carry us into the future. Those same open and honest lines of communication are equally crucial for our private sector partners and the citizens we serve. Ilook forward to working with all of you in the months and years to come.

In its role as advisor to the President, the Congress, and the Office of Juvenile Justiceand Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) on juvenile justice issues, the Federal Advisory Committee on Juvenile Justice (FACJJ) established subcommittees to develop recommendations for consideration by the full FACJJ that address four areas of major concern to the juvenile justice community. The Evidence-Based Youth Justice Practices Subcommittee's recommendations relate to the study, dissemination, and effective implementation of youth justice-focusedprograms. The subcommittee looked at the need for evidence-based programs and evidence-based practices, referring to both as EBPs, and the need to bridge the gap between research and practice. The subcommittee stressed that more needsto be done to integrate positive youth development outcomes into EBP work alongwith reducing negative behaviors. The subcommittee encourages the integration of EBPs into the larger justice framework that views youth, the community, and those affected by crime as equally important customers of the juvenile justice system. The FACJJ recommends that OJJDP take a leadership role in assessingstrategies for implementing EBPs systemwide, promoting the development of new practice strategies and resources, emphasizing the need to implement practices and programs based on research about what works, collaborating with other agencies and organizations that work with and support youth and families, and supporting EBPs that can reduce racial disparities in the juvenile justice system.

I am pleased to present the Juvenile Accountability Block Grants (JABG) Program Report to Congress for fiscal years 2006 and 2007. During my time as Administrator, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and its partners at the State and local levels have instituted many improvements to the program; one of our most important achievements was the introduction and implementation of a system to measure the performance of local accountability efforts. In 2003, OJJDP introduced a series of JABG performance measures to better determine how well local accountability-based programs were meeting their goals. OJJDP disseminated a set of quantitative performance indicators to the States and directed them to collect data from their local subgrantees and to report annually on the outputs and outcomes of their efforts to hold juvenile offenders accountable for their offenses and to improve local juvenile justice systems. This Report presents the results and analysis from the third and fourth rounds of performance measurement data collected from the States and territories and analyzed by OJJDP. OJJDP is encouraged by what the performance data reveal. States and local governments have embraced the performance measurement initiative, with more States submitting performance measurement data for these reporting cycles than for the first two cycles. The data show that grantees are using their JABG funds to make a difference in the specific outcomes that OJJDP and the Office of Justice Programs deem important. More communities are using evidence-based practices, accountability programming, and interagency communications in juvenile justice systems across the Nation. While the amount of JABG funds allocated to recipients tends to be modest, these funds play a critical role in helping programs and agencies maintain existing services.

According to data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, from 1991 to 2000, arrests of girls increased more (or decreased less) than arrests of boys for most types of offenses. By 2004, girls accounted for 30 percent of all juvenile arrests. However, questions remain about whether these trends reflect an actual increase in girls'delinquency or changes in societal responses to girls' behavior. To find answers to these questions, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention convened the Girls Study Group to establish a theoretical and empirical foundation to guide the development, testing, and dissemination of strategies to reduce or prevent girls' involvement in delinquency and violence. The Girls Study Group Series, of which this bulletin is a part, presents the Group's findings. The series examines issues such as patterns of offending among adolescents and how they differ for girls and boys; risk and protective factors associated with delinquency, including gender differences; and the causes and correlates of girls' delinquency.

The biennial Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement provides the nation with a detailedpicture of juveniles in custody-age, race, gender, offenses, adjudication status, and more. Conducted by the U. S. Bureau of the Census for the Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention, the census surveys both public and private juvenile residential placement facilitiesin every state. This Bulletin presents the latest available national and state-level data from the census, portrayingthe 134,011 youth held in 2,939 facilities on October 27, 1999. Because the censusdoes not survey adult facilities, the Bulletin draws on other sources for statistics on offendersyounger than 18 who were held in jails and adult prisons. It also examines imposition of the death penalty for crimes committed by offenders when they were younger than 18. Clear, comprehensive, reliable statistical information on juveniles in custody, such as thatpresented in this Bulletin, is an invaluable resource for policymakers and juvenile justice professionals. This information is essential not only for planning and operating juvenile residential facilities but also for understanding and preventing delinquency.

Although youth suicide in the community has been identified as a major public health problem, juvenile suicide in confinement has received scant attention. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) awarded a contract to National Center on Institutions and Alternatives to conduct the first national survey on juvenile suicide in confinement. The primary goal was to determine the extent and distribution of juvenile suicides in confinement (i.e., juvenile detention centers, reception centers, training schools, ranches, camps, and farms). The survey gathered descriptive data on the demographic characteristics of each victim, the characteristics of the incident, and the characteristics of the juvenile facility in which the suicide took place. The study identified 110 juvenile suicides occurring between 1995 and 1999. Data was analyzed on 79 cases. Of these 79 suicides, 41.8 percent occurred in training school/secure facilities, 36.7 percent in detention centers, 15.2 percent in residential treatment centers, and 6.3 percent in reception/diagnostic centers. Almost half (48.1 percent) the suicides occurred in facilities administered by state agencies,39.2 percent took place in county facilities, and 12.7 percent occurred in private programs. Highlights of the data include: - More than two-thirds (68.4 percent) of victims were Caucasian.- A substantial majority (79.7 percent) of victims were male.- Average (mean) age of victims was 15.7, with more than 70 percent of victims ages 15-17.- A sizable number (38.0 percent) of victims were living with one parent at time of confinement.- More than two-thirds (69.6 percent) of victims were confined for nonviolent offenses.- Approximately two-thirds (67.1 percent) of victims were held on commitment status at time of death, with 32.9 percent on detained status; the vast majority (79.3 percent) of victims held in detention centers were on detained status.- A substantial majority (78.5 percent) of victims had a history of prior offenses; most of these (72.7 percent) were of a nonviolent nature.- With the exception of detention centers, deaths were evenly distributed during a more than 12-month period, with the same number of suicides occurring within the first 3 days of confinement as occurring after more than 10 months of confinement; only 3.8 percent of all suicides occurred within the first 24 hours of confinement.- All detention center suicides occurred within the first 4 months of confinement, with more than 40 percent occurring within the first 72 hours

This report describes the relationship between nonfatal violent victimization and household poverty level as measured by the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. Data are from the National Crime Victimization Survey. In 2008-12- Persons in poor households at or below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) (39.8 per 1,000) had more than double the rate of violent victimization as persons in high-income households (16.9 per 1,000). Persons in poor households had a higher rate of violence involving a firearm (3.5 per 1,000) compared to persons above the FPL (0.8-2.5 per 1,000). The overall pattern of poor persons having the highest rates of violent victimization was consistent for both whites and blacks. However, the rate of violent victimization for Hispanics did not vary across poverty levels. Poor Hispanics (25 3 per 1,000) had lower rates of violence compared to poor whites (46.4 per 1,000) and poor blacks (43.4 per 1,000). Poor persons living in urban areas (43.9 per 1,000) had violent victimization rates similar to poor persons living in rural areas (38.8 per 1,000). Poor urban blacks (51.3 per 1,000) had rates of violence similar to poor urban whites (56.4 per 1,000). Violence against persons in poor (51%) and low-income (50%) households was more likely to be reported to police than violence against persons in mid- (43%) and high income(45%) households.

This policy guide will assist correctional administrators, medical and mental health staff, training coordinators, line staff, and policymakers as they craft policies to address the treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex individuals (LGBTI) in custodial settings. It may also help agencies that are paying greater attention to the needs of LGBTI individuals as they work to implement the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) standards, which require correctional agencies to safely screen, classify, and house lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender inmates as well as those who have intersex conditions. By integrating information about LGBTI individuals into policies, practices, and organizational culture, agencies will be better able to meet the needs of LGBTI inmates and increase the comfort level of staff who work with this population on a daily basis. This guide includes information that will help adult correctional facilities and juvenile justice agencies to assess, develop, or improve policies and practices regarding LGBTI individuals in their custody. The guide is not meant to be a quick reference for writing policies appropriate for all agencies and/or facilities. It is intentionally vague on "how to" advice and "plug and play" policy guidance. Guides for writing policies exist in many forms. Rather, the purpose of this guide is to (1) define agencies' obligations to LGBTI populations, both legally and in accordance with PREA standards, (2) begin a dialogue within agencies regarding the safety and treatment needs of LGBTI populations, and (3) guide agencies in asking good questions about practices and implementation strategies for meeting the needs of LGBTI populations. Agencies need policies to address the treatment of LGBTI individuals in custodial settings to meet constitutional and other obligations to provide humane treatment to those in their custody. Additionally, strong policies can help mitigate the risk of liability to the agency and its staff in the event of an incident or litigation. Part of the mission for all correctional agencies is to provide safe and secure environments for all individuals in their care and custody. State and federal law imposes legal obligations on correctional and juvenile agencies for the treatment of all persons in custody, with specific provisions for LGBTI populations.

Administrators of Child Advocacy Centers(CACs) must possess a number of skills, including knowing how to conduct anevaluation. This resource book, writtenexpressly for CAC administrators, is designedto give administrators who havevarying amounts of evaluation experiencethe knowledge they will need to conducteither one-time or ongoing evaluations. This manual can also be used by thosewho contract with an external evaluator;it will be helpful in educating externalevaluators about the issues surroundinga CAC evaluation. Evaluation is essential. It is the only way toensure that a program is benefiting, not harming, the people it is designed to help (Thompson and McClintock 1998). There was a time when reducing the number of interviews to one was the ultimate goal of a CAC. Research has shown, however, that it is sometimes beneficial and necessary to interview children more than once (for example, by using the extended forensicassessment) (Carnes 2001; Carnes, Wilson, and Nelson-Gardell 1999; Myers, Saywitz, and Goodman 1996). The evaluations presented in this book focus on the National Children's Alliance membership standards, excluding organizational structure. (CACs vary in their protocols regarding these standards.) These standards encompass seven core components (among others): - Child-friendly facility.- Multidisciplinary team.- Child investigative interview.- Medical examination.- Mental health services.- Victim advocacy.- Case revie

For young offenders, law enforcement is often the entry point into the juvenile justice system. When a juvenile is apprehended for the first time for violating the law, it is the police officer who determines the nature of the offender's initial involvement with the justice system. Law enforcement agencies track the volume and characteristics of crimes that are reported to them. Since some crimes are never reported, however, and other crimes remain unsolved, law enforcement data alone are generally insufficient to fully assess the community's delinquencyproblem. Law enforcement agencies, however, also report arrest statistics that can be used to monitor the flow of juveniles into the justice system. These arrest statistics are the most frequently cited source of information on juvenile crime trends. This Bulletin describes the extent and characteristics of juvenile arrests. It provides arrest rates for violent and property crimes, drug and weapon offenses, and violations of alcohol, curfew, and loitering laws. Arrests and arrest trends for males and females and for diverseracial groups are compared. The Bulletin also details the characteristics of the victims and theperpetrators of homicides committed by juveniles. Using data compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, this Bulletin offers the reader awealth of information on law enforcement and juvenile crime.

JAIBG funds may be used to develop programs in any of 12 program purpose areas established by Congress. The first of these areas-"building, expanding, renovating, or operating temporary orpermanent juvenile correction or detentionfacilities, including training of correctionalpersonnel"-addresses construction, operation, and training. Before beginning construction, however, jurisdictions should complete a master plan, determine what type of facility will bestmeet their needs and expectations, and reach a decision to construct. Master planning is a key component because it establishes the specific policies to prevent and reduce crowding and control the length of stay (DeMuro and Dunlap,1998). To provide practitioners practical guidance and advice on best practices under JAIBG Program Purpose Area 1, this paper addresses five main themes: construction decisions, master planning, facility development, operations, and training

Both affluent and low-income families struggle with the same issues concerning how to raise a child successfully. Many parents feel alone, too busy to connect with their children, and lacking in support from other adults. Using parent-professional collaborative teams, the Families and Schools Together (FAST) program systematically reaches out to entire families and organizes multifamily groups to increase parent involvementwith at-risk youth. Developed in 1987 by Dr. Lynn McDonald of Family Service, a nonprofit family counseling agency in Madison, WI, FAST helps at-risk youth (ages 3 to 14) build relationships through a research- and family therapy-based, multifamily group approach to preventing juveniledelinquency (McDonald, 1993, 1997; 1998; McDonald and Billingham, 1998; McDonald et al., 1991). FAST has been especially successful at involving low-income, stressed, and isolated parents. For several years, the founder of FAST conducted court-ordered, in-home, family therapy with drug- and alcohol-involved and violent youth who had been significantly involved in the court system. She applied family therapy techniques fordelinquents that were developed, researched, and published by James Alexander, Ph. D. (1973; Alexander and Parsons, 1973, 1982) and SalvadorMinuchin, M. D. (1979). Using these approaches,75 percent of delinquent youth could alter their circumstances in 3 months of two to three family sessions per week, with 24-hour backup coverage (McDonald, 1993). This therapeutic work developed into the FAST program for early intervention. The FAST program works withschool teachers to identify elementary school children about whom they have developmental or behavioral concerns