Text Resize

-A +A

Public Safety Indicators

Monitoring and reporting public safety outcomes are key parts of the agency’s efforts to enhance the safety of youth and the community. DYRS regularly assesses its performance using a host of public safety indicators, including reconviction and re-arrest rates.  In addition to helping the agency determine whether it is meeting its public safety mission, evaluating these outcomes allows DYRS to develop targeted strategies for improving its supervision and treatment services.

This section presents the agency's most current outcomes with respect to reconviction and re-arrest trends.

Reconvictions

One way to measure DYRS’ performance toward meeting its public safety mission is to determine how many of the agency’s youth are found involved, or guilty, of a new offense. This is the "recidivism rate." The formal definition of recidivism used in this and other DYRS reports is:

A committed youth has recidivated if he or she is convicted in Washington, DC, of a new juvenile or adult offense which occurred within one year of being placed in or returned to the community.

Although there are different ways to measure recidivism, the agency’s method—re-adjudication or re-conviction within one year of community placement—is consistent with other jurisdictions and the recommended definition set forth by juvenile justice experts.

Reconviction Rates by Initial Placement Type

The re-conviction rates within one year of community-placement for youth committed to DYRS, by fiscal year of commitment to the agency and initial placement type.

  FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011*
All Community-Based Placements  40%  22%  20%  38%  46%  42%  37%  30%
Home  50%  25%  24%  36%  54%  42%  44%  43%
Community-Based Residential Facilities 37% 20% 15% 42% 38% 42% 35% 28%
All Secure Placements 27% 29% 20% 41% 44% 42% 40% TBD
Oak Hill^ 29% 26% 18% 45% 51% - - N/A
New Beginnings - - - - - 45% 35% TBD
Residential Treatment Centers 25% 31% 25% 27% 34% 41% 42% TBD
*FY2011 data reported only for youth with initial community-based placements. Data for youth placed in out-of-community placements is pending.
^In FY2009, 12 youth began their treatment at Oak Hill, then transferred to New Beginnings when it was opened in June 2009. Eight other youth were placed initially at New Beginnings.

Reconviction Rates by Type of Re-Offense

The rate of youth re-convicted within one year of community-placement, by fiscal year of commitment to the agency and type of re-offense.

Offense Type FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011* Grand Total
Violent Offenses 12% 13% 7% 17% 25% 23% 17% 17% 17%
Violent Felony 7% 7% 5% 9% 17% 15% 9% 12% 11%
Violent Misdemeanor 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 3% 5% 3% 3%
Weapons 2% 3% 1% 3% 3% 4% 3% 1% 3%
Threats Felony 0% 1% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1%
Threats Misdemeanor 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Drug Offenses 12% 3% 4% 7% 8% 7% 5% 2% 6%
Drug Felony 8% 2% 2% 2% 4% 3% 1% 0% 3%
Drug Misdemeanor 4% 0% 2% 4% 2% 4% 4% 3% 2%
Property Offenses 4% 8% 8% 14% 9% 13% 10% 13% 10%
Property Felony 0% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 4% 2% 2%
Property Misdemeanor 2% 1% 1% 5% 2% 4% 5% 3% 3%
Unauthorized Use of Vehicle 2% 5% 6% 7% 4% 4% 4% 2% 4%
Other Offenses 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 4% 2%
Persons in Need of Supervision 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0%
Other 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 5% 2%
No Re-Conviction 69% 74% 80% 61% 55% 58% 62% 70% 65%
*FY2011 data reported only for youth with initial community-based placements. Data for youth placed in out-of-community placements is pending. ‘PINS’ indicates “Person in Need of Supervision.”

Re-arrest Trends

While DYRS uses the one-year re-conviction rate as its primary recidivism measure, in 2012 the agency also began to track, in the aggregate, all arrests of DYRS youth. Unlike the standard recidivism measure, however, re-arrest rates do not account for the fact that young people are innocent until proven guilty in a court. Last year, fewer than half of all re-arrests of DYRS youth resulted in a re-conviction, which demonstrates the importance of considering final outcomes when using re-arrest to measure public safety performance. Nevertheless, comparing arrest rates from year to year can provide a snapshot of change in new contacts with the justice system.

Re-Arrest Rates of DYRS Youth as a Portion of Citywide Arrests of Individuals Age 20 and Younger

Re-arrests of youth committed to DYRS as a percentage of citywide arrests of individuals age 20 and younger. The table indicates both percent of all arrests and percent of individuals arrested, with quarterly and calendar year-end totals

  2011 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Total 2012 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Total
% of Citywide Arrests 10.7% 8.1% 10.0% 7.4% 9.1% 6.3% 7.2% 6.7% 6.2% 6.6%
% of All Youth Arrested Citywide 10.5% 7.2% 10.1% 7.2% 8.5% 6.0% 6.8% 6.5% 6.6% 6.4%

Re-Arrest Rates of DYRS Youth as a Portion of All DYRS Committed Youth

The percentage of youth committed to DYRS who are arrested, quarterly and calendar year-end totals.

  2011 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Total 2012 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Total
% of DYRS Committed Youth Arrested  13.2% 10.4% 15.2% 8.9% 33.0% 7.5% 10.4% 9.0% 9.5% 25.0%

Re-arrest Rates by Offense Type

The number of unique DYRS youth re-arrested, by offense type, quarterly and calendar year-end totals. Because an individual youth may have multiple arrests with different offense types, the total count of youth arrested may be smaller than the sum of youth arrested for specific offense types.

Offense Type 2011 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Total 2012 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2012 Total
Violent Offenses 65 50 66 43 205 42 40 36 34 144
Drug Offenses 25 20 25 15 81 9 14 10 8 40
Property Offenses 38 30 51 27 132 17 27 28 17 79
Other Offenses 38 31 36 19 117 16 28 16 23 72
All Offenses 150 113 160 96 415 77 98 81 80 271