1 of 28

KEEPING STUDENTS IN SCHOOLS

& OUT OF COURTS

EQUITY CAUCUS

April 2025

KIET PHAM / 04.17.2025

2 of 28

Agenda

quick intros
mission statement and agreements review
restorative agreement
guest speaker
checkout/reflections
exit ticket

3 of 28

NAME

PRONOUNS

YEAR IN PROGRAM

INTROS

4 of 28

MISSION STATEMENT

AGREEMENTS

5 of 28

RESTORATIVE AGREEMENT

In our shared space, our main goal is to build understanding, awareness, and capacity to advocate for marginalized youth and families. As we engage in these conversations, recognize that regardless of intent, we may say or do something that may be hurtful to another individual or group of individuals in our community group.

In our development as advocates, we will make restorative efforts when harm is done to understand and further grow personally and professionally.

As a community we understand that there are multiple ways to engage in restorative conversations that include, but are not limited to:

Having one-on-one conversations with one another
Contacting Dr. Matlack or Monique to mediate a conversation
Having access to Equity Caucus slides during meetings to leave an anonymous comment/concern
Contacting Dr. Matlack or Monique if there is a concern I need to directly address with them

6 of 28

DR. TAWANDA BRASWELL

HOW I

GOT HERE

SCHOOL-TO-PRISON PIPELINE

JUVENILE LEGAL-INVOLVED YOUTH

7 of 28

Y

O

U

8 of 28

TYPES OF OFFENSE

MALUM PROHIBITUM

Offenses not inherently bad, but illegalized because an action is prohibited.

Victim is typically “society”

E.g., jaywalking

drug or weapon possession

MALUM

IN SE -

Offenses inherently bad, but do not directly cause physical/psychological harm or harm in small magnitue

E.g., theft, burglary

simple assault

MALUM

IN SE +

Offenses inherently bad, but directly cause physical/psychological harm in larger magnitue

E.g., aggravated assault

armed robery, rape

9 of 28

THE LEGAL SYSTEM

?

10 of 28

AND THEN THERE IS

INTERSECTIONALITY

11 of 28

THE SWISS CHEESE MODEL

12 of 28

THE SEQUENTIAL INTERCEPT MODEL

2a

2b

3a

0

SCHOOLS & COMMUNITIES

1

INITIAL CONTACT W/ LAW ENFORCEMENT

2

INITIAL REFERRAL TO JUVENILE LEGAL SYSTEM

DETENTION

COURT APPEARANCE

3

JUDICIAL PROCESSING

PROBLEM-SOLVING COURTS

PLACEMENT

3b

RE-INTEGRATION

4

https://minaretfoundation.com/2024/06/25/strengthening-community-partnerships-and-justice-systems/

The Sequential Intercept Model has been used to identify relevant “intercepts,” which are specific

points in the criminal justice process at which individuals with mental illnesses could

be diverted to alternative treatment or programming that is more appropriate for their needs.

The underlying philosophy of the SIM is that while people with mental illness should be

held accountable for criminal behavior (assuming that their actions are not directly

caused by their disorder), they should not be arrested or detained in the criminal justice

system simply because of their illness or lack of access to appropriate treatment. The SIM particularly highlights opportunities for implementing community-based treatment for justice-involved individuals with mental illness as a means of reducing further penetration into the criminal justice system.

In addition to being less costly than treatment provided in

correctional settings, community-based treatments more appropriately address the needs of individuals with mental health issues. They

can provide more targeted treatment than can the criminal justice system, which

handles individuals with a wide variety of needs. There is a humanitarian value to community-based treatment, particularly for individuals who come into contact with the criminal justice system due to behavior caused by their mental illness. These individuals are at relatively

low risk of reoffending if their behavioral health issues are addressed, and it is therefore

in their best interest, as well as the public’s, to provide this group with access to

alternative treatments.

For the purpose of this presentation, we will focus on intercepts 0, 1, and 4 where we can exercise discretion and schools are most relevant.

I will briefly describe intercepts 2 and 3 and provide resources you can take home and utilize in your future practice.

Youth under the age of 8 years cannot be found guilty of offenses under RCW 9A.04.050 and will not be detained.

13 of 28

DISCRETION

THIS IDEA OF

14 of 28

SCHOOLS &

COMMUNITIES

INTERCEPT 0

SOMEONE TO COME

&

A PLACE TO GO

15 of 28

MANIFESTATION DETERMINATION

16 of 28

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH

SCREENERS

17 of 28

SOLUTION-FOCUSED

BRIEF THERAPY

SOLUTION-FOCUSED

THERAPY TOOLKIT

18 of 28

CONTACT WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT

INTERCEPT 1

19 of 28

LAW ENFORCEMENT

PUBLIC SAFETY EDUCATION

COUNSELOR/

MENTOR

20 of 28

DIVERSION PROGRAMS

PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL

DIVERSION PROGRAM

KING COUNTY

PARTNERSHIP FOR YOUTH JUSTICE

https://www.hca.wa.gov/assets/program/crisis-services-best-practices-summary.pdf

To combat this trend, schools could apply the SIM and divert students into alternative programming, such as after-school treatment programs or in-school behavior management programs implemented by the school faculty, rather than excluding students from educational settings. These diversion programs should aim to identify and treat the underlying causes of students’ behavior, such as mental health issues and family factors.

The one-size fits all response of zero tolerance policies disregards the fact that thousands of students have been deeply affected by traumatic events in their homes or neighborhoods. Many have experienced poverty, hunger, unstable

family lives, and street violence.

PYJ is a diversion program. We may offer it for youth's first time or low-level offenses instead of court. One of our 10 volunteer-run Community Accountability Boards (CAB) meets with the youth and family. They talk about the incident that led to the referral and create a Diversion Agreement.

CABs promote restorative practices, healing interventions, collaboration, and community engagement. The key role of the CAB is to balance the needs of victims, communities, and youth accused of an offense. The goal is to heal all involved while also building skills and addressing risk factors.

PYJ and CABS follow the court’s Juvenile Therapeutic Response & Accountability Court model, which uses trauma-Informed practices to create a web of support to honor the dignity, agency, belonging, and safety of young people.

PYJ also serves students referred by schools. This partnership is an alternative to the traditional school discipline process. The PYJ school-based program interrupts the school-to-prison pipeline. Engagement is optional for students and their families, and the court is not a part of the process. CAB members meet with students and help them resolve the issue that brought the referral.

21 of 28

INITIAL REFERRAL TO JUVENILE LEGAL

INTERCEPT 2

JUDICIAL PROCESSING

INTERCEPT 3

JUVENILE DETENTION INTAKE CRITERIA

22 of 28

INTERCEPT 4

REINTEGRATION

23 of 28

Engage in reflective & restorative practices

Knowledge about the JL system

Meeting with youth, family, educational staff, JL staff

Therapy to facilitate change and address mental health needs

Special education & juvenile legal intersection

Transfer of educational records

REENTRY PRACTICES

MATHUR ET AL. (2017)

Provide EBP and instruction

Monitor progress

24 of 28

ACTIVITY

WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Activity Setup

Divide the audience into 3 groups.

Each group gets a different scenario (Intercept 0, 1, or 4).

Groups will have 5–7 minutes to discuss:

What is happening in this scenario?

What would you, as a school psychologist, do?

What tools/resources would you use from what we’ve talked about today?

🧠 Knowledge Check Scenarios

🟣 Group 1: Intercept 0 – Prevention

Scenario:

A middle school has seen a rise in suspensions for “disruptive behavior” in 6th grade. A particular student, Malik, who has ADHD and recently lost a family member, is referred for evaluation after being suspended twice for talking back to teachers. Teachers note he’s “defiant” and "withdrawn."

Guiding Questions:

What prevention strategies or tools might you use (e.g., trauma-informed practices, behavioral screeners)?

How might systemic bias be playing a role?

What could you advocate for at the school or district level?

🔵 Group 2: Intercept 1 – Initial Law Enforcement Contact

Scenario:

At a high school, security was called for a fight between two students. One of the students, Ava, who has an IEP and is often bullied, was restrained by a school resource officer and taken to the station. No charges were filed, but she missed a week of school and is now afraid to return.

Guiding Questions:

What could have been done differently to avoid Ava’s contact with law enforcement?

What is your role after this incident as a school psychologist?

How might you use or advocate for diversion programs or policy change?

🟢 Group 3: Intercept 4 – Reentry

Scenario:

Jamari, a 10th grader, is returning to school after 4 months in juvenile detention. He has a learning disability and struggled academically before his incarceration. He wants to graduate but is behind in credits and feeling overwhelmed.

Guiding Questions:

What would a strong reentry plan look like for Jamari?

What services or teams would you coordinate?

What specific tools or practices (e.g., restorative practices, family engagement, vocational programming) would you use?

🗣️ Debrief (8–10 minutes)

After group discussion:

Have each group share highlights (1–2 min per group).

Ask the audience:

“What stood out to you across these scenarios?”

“Which intercept do you think you can impact the most in your role?”

25 of 28

REFLECTION

26 of 28

WHO DO YOU LEAN ONTO?

27 of 28

FOR ANOTHER

CONVERSATION

RISK FACTORS

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES THROUGHOUT

ANYTHING ELSE?

28 of 28

EXIT TICKET

LAST MEETING:

MAY 22

want to join the team? contact Monique before May

mearmen2@uw.edu