Publications

Documents

• Opens in new window5 Ways Juvenile and Family Court Judges Can Use Public Health Data and Resources to Address Substance Use Disorders
  

  Juvenile and family court judges are leaders and conveners in their communities. Judges need information (data) to accomplish varied activities in their roles – from making individual-level decisions about evidence-based services to convening stakeholder groups that are able to affect change in their jurisdictions. Juvenile and family court judges use data about their jurisdiction, such as rates on permanency, victimization, substance use disorders (SUDs), and overdoses. However, judges may lack guidance regarding how their data compares to other national public health data. This added layer of analysis and comparison can be useful to judges in their roles as leaders and conveners, especially when addressing substance use in their communities. In this technical assistance bulletin are five ways judges can use national data and resources to improve policy and practice.

• Opens in new windowCivil Protection Order Process: Considerations for Safe and Effective Responses by Courts to the COVID-19 Pandemic
  

  The guidance is intended to assist judicial officers and courts as they design creative and effective solutions to the problems imposed by the COVID-19 emergency. In addition to describing how judicial officers can assume a leadership role in promoting a collaborative response to the pandemic, this document provides examples of concrete strategies that courts and communities can implement to maximize the accessibility and effectiveness of the CPO system despite the impediments.

• Opens in new windowCollateral Consequences of Juvenile Court Involvement: Obstacles to Opportunities
  

  This bench card, created in partnership by the NCJFCJ and the National Juvenile Defender Center and funded by the State Justice Institute, is intended to assist judges in considering the consequences of juvenile court involvement that may adversely affect public safety and positive youth development. The bench card is not intended to impinge upon or alter constitutional or statutory responsibilities of the court. Judges and attorneys have different ethical responsibilities but share the goal of ensuring that youth are acting knowingly and voluntarily when admitting or pleading to an offense.

• Opens in new windowJudicial Awareness of Resilience in Family Court: Some Initial Considerations
  

  This is the second in a series of technical assistance briefs on resilience by the Resource Center on Domestic Violence: Child Protection and Custody (RCDV:CPC), a project of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ). The first brief focused on clarifying and refining the concept of resilience, provided an overview of the research on this important topic, and offered some initial considerations as courts attempt to reinforce resilience further in applicable cases. Much of the first brief focused on issues particularly relevant to child abuse and neglect proceedings, and that remains the case in this brief. However, this brief will also touch upon how the topic of resilience applies, to a limited extent, in some custody and divorce matters, and emphasize the importance of family court judges becoming even more aware of how courts are considering resilience or protective factors even though, in cases like custody and divorce, direct application of these factors may not be standard or may be quite different.

• Opens in new windowRedefining Judicial Leadership: Stories of Transformative Practice
  

  Through the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) funding, the Implementation Sites Project was developed to replicate the infrastructure pioneered by the National Council of Juvenile and Court Judges (NCJFCJ) Model Courts Project. Designated sites have committed to develop and implement a judicially-led collaborative seeking to implement system reform efforts to improve the child abuse and neglect case process with the goal of improving safety, permanency, and well-being outcomes for children. These sites strive to adhere to, and implement, all aspects of the best practices outlined in the Enhanced Resource Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases while adopting the Key Principles of Permanency Planning for Children

• Opens in new windowSustaining the Change: Lessons Learned from Judicial Leaders
  

  The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges’ (NCJFCJ) think tank series brings judges together to share knowledge and provide insights on issues of relevance to court improvement and collaborative systems change. The judges invited to participate in think tanks are former and current Model Court Lead Judges. These national judicial leaders have considerable experience leading system-wide collaborative stakeholder teams to design and implement program, practice, and policy changes to improve outcomes for children and families involved in the foster care system. The NCJFCJ think tank series aims to tap into the wealth of the Lead Judges’ knowledge base and experience to provide a lessons learned resource to other jurisdictions engaged in collaborative court improvement efforts.

• Opens in new windowVoices from the Bench: Judicial Perspectives on Handling Child Sex Trafficking Cases
  

  Domestic Child Sex Trafficking (DCST) is a form of human trafficking and a complex problem in the United States. DCST refers to the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a minor for the purpose of a commercial sex act. Historically, the juvenile justice system has viewed and treated survivors of DCST as delinquent youth. However, as courts have learned about the risk factors of early childhood trauma and adolescent brain development, they have started to respond to trafficked children as victims, not criminals. Courts across the country are implementing victim-centered approaches to exploited and trafficked children. Some jurisdictions have created specialty DCST (also referred to as Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children or CSEC) courts, while others have modified court practices and implemented trauma-informed and responsive protocols.