3.b. Seek modification of the Court Reform Act to permit certain

commingling with an amendment to read that commingling shall be avoided

wherever feasible.

3.c. Acquire added Youth Homes, with already appropriated funds, to

bring the Youth Group Home capacity from 127 to 172.

3.d. If Maple Glen with its 240 capacity must be used for the new category of persons in need of supervision, given that it may not be possible to obtain modification of the "no commingling" provisions of the Court Reform Act, then Oak Hill and Cedar Knoll should be given added total capacity of 240 through the use of relocatable structures.

3.e.

Construct a new Receiving Home by spring, 1973 with a capacity

of approximately 200, based on the assumption that once the current large backlog of juvenile cases has been disposed of, the heavy influx of detained juveniles will abate from its present 350 to about 200.

-8

III. AVAILABLE SPACE AND FUTURE DEMANDS: DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The

The reason this study of space in juvenile and adult institutions and of the demands to be placed on it in the next 18 months was undertaken was because it was assumed that the steady rise in the populations of these institutions not only would continue but would rise at a more rapid rate in the immediate future. bases for that assumption which are explored in some detail in this section of the report, were generally that added judges, a determination on the part of both the courts and U.S. Attorney to prosecute more felony cases, and the impact of the changes in criminal procedure and criminal law contained in the new Court Reform and Criminal Procedures Act would surely add to the numbers

of those detained and committed.

Two analyses were therefore undertaken and in completed form are presented here. The first is an analysis of the supply factor. It analyzes available space in existing institutions, so that there is presented here a clear picture of available resources to be used to meet the demand. This analysis was designed to fix in a single report current information on institutional capacity, something which had not been accomplished before. Further, it was recognized that rated usage, present usage, budgeted capacity, intensive usage, planned augmentation of space resources, planned construction of new facilities, possible

-9

emergency augmentation to meet a temporary crisis, limiting factors, and work needed for augmentation all also needed to be taken into account since unless these variables were presented, with their effects, it would not be possible to plan rationally. For example, since the new Receiving Home is not expected to be completed until early 1973, it is not possible to count on the availability of this facility to meet immediate needs over the next 18 months. Or, as another example, if the Social Services Administration were able to have added staff for its facilities at the Children's Center in Laurel, it could increase its capacity considerably. Finally, as a third example,

if added halfway house facilities can be made available in the next 18 months, it will not be necessary to add as much capacity at the Lorton facility.

The second analysis is of the demand factor. It is an analysis of projections of institutional populations over the next 18 to 30 months. This analysis was designed to fix in a single report current data and information on probable trends in institutional population. Since it was recognized that straight line projections, based solely on what had happened in the past, would fail to take account of major new elements in the situation, such as added judges, more police, changes in policy, and changes in criminal law and procedures, the Department of Corrections and the Social Services Administration found it essential to state what assumptions they thought ought to be used as the bases for the development

-10

of population projections. Similarly, vigorous efforts were
made to obtain statements of policy and assumptions from the
U.S. Attorney, Metropolitan Police Department, and Court of
General Sessions, all of whom were most cooperative. It never-
theless must be recognized that the projections do not represent
anything like ultimate certainty about what will happen. They
are best estimates, based on the best information available at
the time they were developed. The assumptions on which the
projections are based are included here, so that it is made as
clear as possible why certain trend lines have been established.

The supply and demand analyses, when compared, show that the supply of space has already been exhausted for most of the institutions as of the date of this report, and that there is likely to be

a continuing and even more rapid rise in institutional population in most of the facilities in the immediate future. There

appear to be three major areas of great concern for the next six to eighteen months, which are: (1) a very rapid rise in the numbers of detained juveniles, leading to overcrowding of the present Receiving Home, spillover into two of the institutions at the Children's Center in Laurel, and no immediate relief in sight; (2) a continuing rise in the numbers of young adults committed to the Department of Corrections under the Youth Act, resulting in overcrowding at the Youth Center at Lorton, and spillover into the Correctional Complex at Lorton of these cases; and

-11

(3) a rise which is expected to accelerate sharply upward shortly in the numbers of adult felons committed to the Department of Corrections, resulting in some present overcrowding in the Correctional Complex, and the prospect of serious overcrowding in the near future.

These problem areas for the immediate future do not, of course, exhaust the list of problems, but they are those which are most intensively addressed by this report, since the report is designed to focus on the short run.

In

In the following two parts of this section of the report, the space analysis, which presents the facts about the supply of space, is presented, and the population projections, which present the best estimates of population trends, are presented. the following section, the problem areas which emerge from the comparison of the two analyses are analyzed, alternatives are set forth, and recommendations developed.

B. The Supply Variable: Analysis of the Real Capacity of Juvenile and Adult Institutions.

The chart on the next two pages is for the most part self explanatory. It lists in the first chart all the institutions operated by the Department of Corrections within the District of Columbia and at Lorton, Virginia. It also lists in the second

chart all institutions operated by the Social Services Administration in the District and Laurel, Maryland, as well as those