b. BPD should consider implementing the Massachusetts Screening Tool for Law Enforcement (MASTLE): an objective, validated screening instrument that is designed to assist police officers in making the decisions identified above. The MASTLE can be accessed for implementation at no cost. Limited training and technical assistance from the tool’s developer, the National Youth Screening and Assessment Project, may also be available to support implementation.
c. DJS should consider amending its practice of screening all youth who appear at the BCJJC for detention admission using the Detention Risk Assessment Instrument, even youth who will ultimately be diverted prior to DJS referral through the BPD Diversion Program. This will limit young people’s exposure to the detrimental impact and collateral consequences associated with generating unnecessary DJS and court records.
d. BPD should develop a training and messaging strategy to increase officer knowledge and understanding of new policies and protocols for interacting with youth, the purpose of the juvenile court system, details of juvenile justice process, and the purpose of secure detention. Clear and consistent messaging for officers will help to mitigate the obdurate frustration that officers reportedly experience when they perceive that young people are not being held accountable by the system.
e. Conduct a case processing analysis of adult-charged youth in detention to identify why time spent in detention for these youth has doubled from 2014 to 2018 and develop policies and programs to address the causes of delays.
2. Programs and Conditions
a. The City should partner closely with DJS and the Baltimore JDAI Oversight Board to assess the continuum of Secure Detention Alternative established by DJS and the extent to which it meets existing needs.
b. The City and its appropriate offices and agencies should partner with DJS to identify additional programs for youth in detention, in particular youth charged as adults, that can help young people build skills and connections that will help them succeed following release and return to their communities.
c. To the extent that there are gaps in the existing Secure Detention Alternatives Continuum
