This report highlights Rhode Island’s juvenile hearing boards (JHBs). It includes a history of JHBs in Rhode Island, a description of their operations, a summary of facilitators and barriers, and recommendations for Rhode Island and others interested in using JHBs. It also includes case studies of JHBs in three Rhode Island localities: Central Falls, Pawtucket, and Providence.

Why This Matters

Juvenile justice system involvement can be harmful to young people, and it is not an effective strategy for improving outcomes for them and reducing offending. Community-based prevention, deflection, and diversion strategies, on the other hand, have shown promise in reducing young people’s contact with the system, reducing system involvement, and promoting positive youth outcomes.

Juvenile hearing boards are one such unique and promising intervention. These boards are a precourt community-based deflection intervention used in Rhode Island as an alternative to petitioning to family court young people arrested (or detained but not arrested) by police for certain status offenses and misdemeanors. Community members volunteer to serve on these boards and hold hearings for referred cases. They hear the facts of each case and ask the young person and their parent or guardian questions about the incident, their needs, and their interests. They then confer and decide on sanctions for the young person. Sanctions are typically designed to be restorative, addressing the root causes of the behaviors that led to the young person’s contact with the JHB and supporting their connection to the community. If the young person agrees to the sanctions and follows them successfully, their case is dismissed or expunged. If they are unsuccessful, their case can be referred to family court.

While JHBs are a unique intervention that is only used in three states, components of the intervention are similar to other interventions, such as restorative justice circles and alternative courts (e.g., teen courts, truancy courts, drug courts). Jurisdictions implementing interventions similar to JHBs may find the key takeaways and recommendations in this report beneficial. The report also outlines how JHBs operate, which may be of benefit to states and local governments interested in implementing JHBs in their communities.

Key Takeaways

We identified recommendations for the state of Rhode Island, Rhode Island for Community and Justice (a nonprofit organization that works across the state), and local city councils, mayors, and JHBs.

Recommendations for the state of Rhode Island: 

• provide state-level support to local JHBs to support administrative tasks, case management, and connections to services
• consider building state-level oversight related to the referral process for JHBs 

Recommendations for Rhode Island for Community and Justice: 

• prioritize peer networking and learning
• continue providing onboarding and other training for JHB members
• expand the case manager position to more JHBs, when city-level support is not available
• review language used by JHBs and revise it to align with restorative principles 

Recommendations for local city councils, mayors, and juvenile hearing boards: 

• revise ordinance language to match best practices and local concerns
• connect referring law enforcement officers to, and train them on, the JHB
• train JHB members on the ordinance and how to report concerns
• set aside funding for the JHB if possible

How We Did It

This analysis draws from program and document reviews, site visits, and in-person and virtual semistructured interviews with 23 interest holders, including program leadership, program staff, program partners, and criminal legal system actors.