Administering Agencies

The operation and administration of youth court programs vary considerably across the nation, creating obstacles to locating programs. According to the Teen Court Program Survey administered by APPA in 1994, agencies operating and administering youth court programs include:

• juvenile courts; 

• juvenile probation departments;

• law enforcement; 

• private, nonprofit organizations; and 

• schools. 

Often the availability of human and financial resources, as well as the position of the person who initially became interested in the youth court concept, drives where these programs are located within a given community.

The following section discusses briefly some of the characteristics of youth court programs operated by these different entities.

Juvenile Justice System-Based
Examples of youth courts operating within juvenile justice agencies include those that are programs of law enforcement, juvenile probation, and district or municipal courts. In Beaverton, Oregon, the Beaverton Police Department operates the Beaverton Youth Peer Court. In Erie, Pennsylvania, their Peer Jury Program is a program within the juvenile probation department. In Texas, many youth court programs are sponsored by city-governments and serve as a dispositional alternative for municipal court judges. 

Funding for many juvenile justice-based youth court programs are incorporated within or absorbed as part of the agency's or government's overall budget. Staffing for the program may be incorporated as a part of a police officer or probation officer's job duties, or if funds allow, a new position may be created to coordinate the program. Youth courts in juvenile justice system-based agencies have direct access to referrals -- either at the point of initial contact by police, screening by juvenile probation or intake, or appearance before a juvenile or municipal court judge. As a part of the juvenile justice system, staff within these programs understand the juvenile justice system process and have more ready access to information (e.g., re-arrests, adjudications) to which other entities may not be privy. Juvenile justice system-based youth court programs also have a more direct tie to the formal court process as an enforcement tool or follow-up mechanism for situations when offenders do not comply with program requirements. However, time and budgetary constraints, competing demands on staff time, and changing political climates within government agencies can present challenges to juvenile justice system-based youth court programs in some jurisdictions.

Community-Based 
A number of youth court programs are incorporated as, or operated by, private nonprofit organizations. For example, the LaPorte Teen Court Program in Indiana is administered by the LaPorte County Youth Services Bureau, a nonprofit organization whose mission includes connecting youth to positive programs and services, while the Sarasota Teen Court Program in Florida is incorporated as a nonprofit agency itself. When set within an agency that provides other services for youth (e.g., counseling services, educational workshops, tutoring), youth court programs have direct access to vital referral sources for volunteers and defendants participating in their program. In addition, youth courts run as part of a community agency or located in a community settings often have direct links and ties to other youth serving organizations from which resources can be tapped to help complement and augment the youth court program's services. 

Community-based youth court programs are not part of the juvenile justice system and often have to prove their credibility and work diligently at building trust. For community-based youth court programs to be successful, there must be cooperation and coordination among the nonprofit entity and the juvenile justice system. This is especially evident when it comes to receiving referrals for the program, having a system for recompense for cases that do not comply with the youth court program's requirements, and gaining access to information needed to ascertain the success of the program. 

Since youth court programs in community-based settings are not as directly subject to changes in political climates, they may enjoy greater flexibility and creativity when it comes to program management and operations. However, youth court programs operated by private nonprofit organizations often do not have a consistent and secure funding base. They have to look to outside sources of funding (which can change from year to year) to keep the program operating. Although some community-based youth courts may receive a portion of their program funding from government coffers, other typical funding sources include grants from private foundations and community organizations (e.g., local bar association, Junior League), individual donations and revenues from fund-raisers and special events. 

School-Based
The interest in school-based youth court programs appears to be increasing. There are a number of juvenile justice system- or community-based youth court programs that receive referrals from schools for school disciplinary problems, unlawful acts committed on school property, or truancy. However, there also are school-based youth court programs that are operated by and/or contained within the schools themselves. Obviously, schools have direct access to a pool of youth volunteers from which they can draw. Subject matter related to volunteer training may be incorporated as a part of a class curricula (e.g., unit of social studies or civics class) that all youth in a certain grade get exposed to, addressed through an elective class, or treated as an extracurricular activity after school. Hearings may be conducted during or after school hours on school premises or may be conducted in the local courthouse after school hours. 

School-based youth court programs offer teachers and school administrators with an alternative disciplinary action and can sometimes be used in lieu of suspension or expulsion. For example, in Des Moines, Iowa, Hoyt Middle School has operated a student court for 6-8th graders for the past four years. Their program handles mostly minor school disciplinary problems (e.g., losing temper, name calling, throwing food, running or pushing in the hall) and excessive tardiness. 

Sometimes, when youth court programs are contained within the school setting, limited resources can place restrictions on the types and level of services or sentencing options that are available for offenders who are sentenced by the program. Also, time and budgetary constraints placed on teachers or school administrators charged with overseeing the youth court program may limit the scope of what the youth court program can accomplish.