31.303—Substantive requirements.

(a) Assurances. The State must certify through the provision of assurances that it has complied and will comply (as appropriate) with sections 223(a)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), (21), (22), and (25), and sections 229 and 261(d), in formulating and implementing the State plan. The Formula Grant Application kit provides a form and guidance for the provision of assurances. OJJDP interprets the section 223(a)(16) assurance as satisfied by an affirmation that State law and/or policy clearly require equitable treatment on the required bases; or by providing in the State plan that the State agency will require an assurance of equitable treatment by all Formula Grant subgrant and contract recipients, and establish as a program goal, in conjunction with the State Advisory Group, the adoption and implementation of a statewide juvenile justice policy that all youth in the juvenile justice system will be treated equitably without regard to gender, race, family income, and mentally, emotionally, or physically handicapping conditions. OJJDP interprets the section 223(a)(25) assurance as satisfied by a provision in the State plan for the State agency and the State Advisory Group to promulgate policies and budget priorities that require the funding of programs that are part of a comprehensive and coordinated community system of services as set forth in section 103(19) of the JJDP Act. This requirement is applicable when a State's formula grant for any fiscal year exceeds 105 percent of the State's formula grant for FY 1992.

(b) Serious juvenile offender emphasis. Pursuant to sections 101(a)(10) and 223(a)(10) of the JJDP Act, OJJDP encourages States that have identified serious and violent juvenile offenders as a priority problem to allocate formula grant funds to programs designed for serious and violent juvenile offenders at a level consistent with the extent of the problem as identified through the State planning process. Particular attention should be given to improving prosecution, sentencing procedures, providing resources necessary for effective rehabilitation, and facilitating the coordination of services between the juvenile justice and criminal justice systems.

(c) Deinstitutionalization of status offenders and non-offenders. Pursuant to section 223(a)(12)(A) of the JJDP Act, the State shall:

(1) Describe its plan, procedure, and timetable covering the three-year planning cycle, for assuring that the requirements of this section are met. Refer to § 31.303(f)(3) for the rules related to the valid court order exception to this Act requirement.

(2) Describe the barriers the State faces in achieving full compliance with the provisions of this requirement.

(3) Federal wards. Apply this requirement to alien juveniles under Federal jurisdiction who are held in State or local facilities.

(4) DSO compliance. Those States which, based upon the most recently submitted monitoring report, have been found to be in full compliance with section 223(a)(12)(A) may, in lieu of addressing paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section, provide an assurance that adequate plans and resources are available to maintain full compliance.

(5) Submit the report required under section 223(a)(12)(B) of the Act as part of the annual monitoring report required by section 223(a)(15) of the Act.

(d) Contact with incarcerated adults. (1) Pursuant to section 223(a)(13) of the JJDP Act the State shall:

(i) Separation. Describe its plan and procedure, covering the three-year planning cycle, for assuring that the requirements of this section are met. The term contact includes any physical or sustained sight or sound contact between juvenile offenders in a secure custody status and incarcerated adults, including inmate trustees. A juvenile offender in a secure custody status is one who is physically detained or confined in a locked room or other area set aside or used for the specific purpose of securely detaining persons who are in law enforcement custody. Secure detention or confinement may result either from being placed in such a room or area and/or from being physically secured to a cuffing rail or other stationary object. Sight contact is defined as clear visual contact between incarcerated adults and juveniles within close proximity to each other. Sound contact is defined as direct oral communication between incarcerated adults and juvenile offenders. Separation must be accomplished architecturally or through policies and procedures in all secure areas of the facility which include, but are not limited to, such areas as admissions, sleeping, and shower and toilet areas. Brief and inadvertent or accidental contact between juvenile offenders in a secure custody status and incarcerated adults in secure areas of a facility that are not dedicated to use by juvenile offenders and which are nonresidential, which may include dining, recreational, educational, vocational, health care, sally ports or other entry areas, and passageways (hallways), would not require a facility or the State to document or report such contact as a violation. However, any contact in a dedicated juvenile area, including any residential area of a secure facility, between juveniles in a secure custody status and incarcerated adults would be a reportable violation.

(ii) In those instances where accused juvenile criminal-type offenders are authorized to be temporarily detained in facilities where adults are confined, the State must set forth the procedures for assuring no sight or sound contact between such juveniles and confined adults.

(iii) Describe the barriers which may hinder the separation of alleged or adjudicated criminal type offenders, status offenders and non-offenders from incarcerated adults in any particular jail, lockup, detention or correctional facility.

(iv) Those States which, based upon the most recently submitted monitoring report, have been found to be in compliance with section 223(a)(13) may, in lieu of addressing paragraphs (d)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this section, provide an assurance that adequate plans and resources are available to maintain compliance.

(v) Assure that adjudicated delinquents are not reclassified administratively and transferred to an adult (criminal) correctional authority to avoid the intent of separating juveniles from adult criminals in jails or correctional facilities. A State is not prohibited from placing or transferring an alleged or adjudicated delinquent who reaches the State's age of full criminal responsibility to an adult facility when required or authorized by State law. However, the administrative transfer, without statutory direction or authorization, of a juvenile offender to an adult correctional authority, or a transfer within a mixed juvenile and adult facility for placement with adult criminals, either before or after a juvenile reaches the age of full criminal responsibility, is prohibited. A State is also precluded from transferring adult offenders to a juvenile correctional authority for placement in a juvenile facility. This neither prohibits nor restricts the waiver or transfer of a juvenile to criminal court for prosecution, in accordance with State law, for a criminal felony violation, nor the detention or confinement of a waived or transferred criminal felony violator in an adult facility.

(2) Implementation. The requirement of this provision is to be planned and implemented immediately by each State.

(e) Removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups. Pursuant to section 223(a)(14) of the JJDP Act, the State shall:

(1) Describe its plan, procedure, and timetable for assuring that requirements of this section will be met beginning after December 8, 1985. Refer to § 31.303(f)(4) to determine the regulatory exception to this requirement.

(2) Describe the barriers that a State faces in removing all juveniles from adult jails and lockups. This requirement excepts only those alleged or adjudicated juvenile delinquents placed in a jail or a lockup for up to six hours from the time they enter a secure custody status or immediately before or after a court appearance, those juveniles formally waived or transferred to criminal court and against whom criminal felony charges have been filed, or juveniles over whom a criminal court has original or concurrent jurisdiction and such court's jurisdiction has been invoked through the filing of criminal felony charges.

(3) Collocated facilities. (i) Determine whether or not a facility in which juveniles are detained or confined is an adult jail or lockup. The JJDP Act prohibits the secure custody of juveniles in adult jails and lockups, except as otherwise provided under the Act and implementing OJJDP regulations. Juvenile facilities collocated with adult facilities are considered adult jails or lockups absent compliance with criteria established in paragraphs (e)(3)(i)(C)(1) through (4) of this section.

(A) A collocated facility is a juvenile facility located in the same building as an adult jail or lockup, or is part of a related complex of buildings located on the same grounds as an adult jail or lockup. A complex of buildings is considered “related” when it shares physical features such as walls and fences, or services beyond mechanical services (heating, air conditioning, water and sewer), or the specialized services that are allowable under paragraph (e)(3)(i)(C)(3) of this section.

(B) The State must determine whether a collocated facility qualifies as a separate juvenile detention facility under the four criteria set forth in paragraphs (e)(3)(i)(C) (1) through (4) of this section for the purpose of monitoring compliance with section 223(a) (12)(A), (13) and (14) of the JJDP Act.

(C) Each of the following four criteria must be met in order to ensure the requisite separateness of a juvenile detention facility that is collocated with an adult jail or lockup:

(1) Separation between juveniles and adults such that there could be no sustained sight or sound contact between juveniles and incarcerated adults in the facility. Separation can be achieved architecturally or through time-phasing of common use nonresidential areas; and

(2) Separate juvenile and adult programs, including recreation, education, vocation, counseling, dining, sleeping, and general living activities. There must be an independent and comprehensive operational plan for the juvenile detention facility which provides for a full range of separate program services. No program activities may be shared by juveniles and incarcerated adults. Time-phasing of common use nonresidential areas is permissible to conduct program activities. Equipment and other resources may be used by both populations subject to security concerns; and

(3) Separate staff for the juvenile and adult populations, including management, security, and direct care staff. Staff providing specialized services (medical care, food service, laundry, maintenance and engineering, etc.) who are not normally in contact with detainees, or whose infrequent contacts occur under conditions of separation of juveniles and adults, can serve both populations (subject to State standards or licensing requirements). The day to day management, security and direct care functions of the juvenile detention center must be vested in a totally separate staff, dedicated solely to the juvenile population within the collocated facilities; and

(4) In States that have established standards or licensing requirements for juvenile detention facilities, the juvenile facility must meet the standards (on the same basis as a free-standing juvenile detention center) and be licensed as appropriate. If there are no State standards or licensing requirements, OJJDP encourages States to establish administrative requirements that authorize the State to review the facility's physical plant, staffing patterns, and programs in order to approve the collocated facility based on prevailing national juvenile detention standards.

(ii) The State must determine that the four criteria are fully met. It is incumbent upon the State to make the determination through an on-site facility (or full construction and operations plan) review and, through the exercise of its oversight responsibility, to ensure that the separate character of the juvenile detention facility is maintained by continuing to fully meet the four criteria set forth in paragraphs (e)(3)(i)(C) (1) through (4) of this section.

(iii) Collocated juvenile detention facilities approved by the State and concurred with by OJJDP before December 10, 1996 may be reviewed by the State against the regulatory criteria and OJJDP policies in effect at the time of the initial approval and concurrence or against the regulatory criteria set forth herein, as the State determines. Facilities approved on or after the effective date of this regulation shall be reviewed against the regulatory criteria set forth herein. All collocated facilities are subject to the separate staff requirement established by the 1992 Amendments to the JJDP Act, and set forth in paragraph (e)(3)(i)(C)(3) of this section.

(iv) An annual on-site review of the facility must be conducted by the compliance monitoring staff person(s) representing or employed by the State agency administering the JJDP Act Formula Grants Program. The purpose of the annual review is to determine if compliance with the criteria set forth in paragraphs (e)(3)(i)(C) (1) through (4) of this section is being maintained.

(4) Those States which, based upon the most recently submitted monitoring report, have been found to be in full compliance with section 223(a)(14) may, in lieu of addressing paragraphs (e) (1) and (2) of this section, provide an assurance that adequate plans and resources are available to maintain full compliance.

(f) Monitoring of jails, detention facilities and correctional facilities. (1) Pursuant to section 223(a)(15) of the JJDP Act, and except as provided by paragraph (f)(7) of this section, the State shall:

(i) Describe its plan, procedure, and timetable for annually monitoring jails, lockups, detention facilities, correctional facilities and non-secure facilities. The plan must at a minimum describe in detail each of the following tasks including the identification of the specific agency(s) responsible for each task.

(A) Identification of monitoring universe: This refers to the identification of all residential facilities which might hold juveniles pursuant to public authority and thus must be classified to determine if it should be included in the monitoring effort. This includes those facilities owned or operated by public and private agencies.

(B) Classification of the monitoring universe: This is the classification of all facilities to determine which ones should be considered as a secure detention or correctional facility, adult correctional institution, jail, lockup, or other type of secure or nonsecure facility.

(C) Inspection of facilities: Inspection of facilities is necessary to ensure an accurate assessment of each facility's classification and record keeping. The inspection must include:

(1) A review of the physical accommodations to determine whether it is a secure or non-secure facility or whether adequate sight and sound separation between juvenile and adult offenders exists and

(2) A review of the record keeping system to determine whether sufficient data are maintained to determine compliance with section 223(a) (12), (13) and/or (14).

(D) Data collection and data verification: This is the actual collection and reporting of data to determine whether the facility is in compliance with the applicable requirement(s) of section 223(a) (12), (13) and/or (14). The length of the reporting period should be 12 months of data, but in no case less than 6 months. If the data is self-reported by the facility or is collected and reported by an agency other than the State agency designated pursuant to section 223(a)(1) of the JJDP Act, the plan must describe a statistically valid procedure used to verify the reported data.

(ii) Provide a description of the barriers which the State faces in implementing and maintaining a monitoring system to report the level of compliance with section 223(a) (12), (13), and (14) and how it plans to overcome such barriers.

(iii) Describe procedures established for receiving, investigating, and reporting complaints of violation of section 223(a) (12), (13), and (14). This should include both legislative and administrative procedures and sanctions.

(2) For the purpose of monitoring for compliance with section 223(a)(12)(A) of the Act, a secure detention or correctional facility is any secure public or private facility used for the lawful custody of accused or adjudicated juvenile offenders or nonoffenders, or used for the lawful custody of accused or convicted adult criminal offenders. Accused status offenders or nonoffenders in lawful custody can be held in a secure juvenile detention facility for up to twenty-four hours, exclusive of weekends and holidays, prior to an initial court appearance and for an additional twenty-four hours, exclusive of weekends and holidays, following an initial court appearance.

(3) Valid court order. For the purpose of determining whether a valid court order exists and a juvenile has been found to be in violation of that valid order all of the following conditions must be present prior to secure incarceration:

(i) The juvenile must have been brought into a court of competent jurisdiction and made subject to an order issued pursuant to proper authority. The order must be one which regulates future conduct of the juvenile. Prior to issuance of the order, the juvenile must have received the full due process rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.

(ii) The court must have entered a judgment and/or remedy in accord with established legal principles based on the facts after a hearing which observes proper procedures.

(iii) The juvenile in question must have received adequate and fair warning of the consequences of violation of the order at the time it was issued and such warning must be provided to the juvenile and to the juvenile's attorney and/or legal guardian in writing and be reflected In the court record and proceedings.

(iv) All judicial proceedings related to an alleged violation of a valid court order must be held before a court of competent jurisdiction. A juvenile accused of violating a valid court order may be held in secure detention beyond the 24-hour grace period permitted for a noncriminal juvenile offender under OJJDP monitoring policy, for protective purposes as prescribed by State law, or to assure the juvenile's appearance at the violation hearing, as provided by State law, if there has been a judicial determination based on a hearing during the 24-hour grace period that there is probable cause to believe the juvenile violated the court order. In such case the juveniles may be held pending a violation hearing for such period of time as is provided by State law, but in no event should detention prior to a violation hearing exceed 72 hours exclusive of nonjudicial days. A juvenile alleged or found in a violation hearing to have violated a Valid Court Order may be held only in a secure juvenile detention or correctional facility, and not in an adult jail or lockup.

(v) Prior to and during the violation hearing the following full due process rights must be provided:

(A) The right to have the charges against the juvenile in writing served upon him a reasonable time before the hearing;

(B) The right to a hearing before a court;

(D) The right to legal counsel, and the right to have such counsel appointed by the court if indigent;

(E) The right to confront witnesses;

(F) The right to present witnesses;

(G) The right to have a transcript or record of the proceedings; and

(H) The right of appeal to an appropriate court.

(vi) In entering any order that directs or authorizes the placement of a status offender in a secure facility, the judge presiding over an initial probable cause hearing or violation hearing must determine that all the elements of a valid court order (paragraphs (f)(3) (i), (ii) and (iii) of this section) and the applicable due process rights (paragraph (f)(3)(v) of this section) were afforded the juvenile and, in the case of a violation hearing, the judge must obtain and review a written report that: reviews the behavior of the juvenile and the circumstances under which the juvenile was brought before the court and made subject to such order; determines the reasons for the juvenile's behavior; and determines whether all dispositions other than secure confinement have been exhausted or are clearly inappropriate. This report must be prepared and submitted by an appropriate public agency (other than a court or law enforcement agency).

(vii) A non-offender such as a dependent or neglected child cannot be placed in secure detention or correctional facilities for violating a valid court order.

(4) Removal exception ( The following conditions must be met in order for an accused juvenile criminal-type offender, awaiting an initial court appearance, to be detained up to 24 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) in an adult jail or lockup:

(i) The State must have an enforceable State law requiring an initial court appearance within 24 hours after being taken into custody (excluding weekends and holidays);

(ii) The geographic area having jurisdiction over the juvenile is outside a metropolitan statistical area pursuant to the Bureau of Census' current designation;

(iii) A determination must be made that there is no existing acceptable alternative placement for the juvenile pursuant to criteria developed by the State and approved by OJJDP;

(iv) The adult jail or lockup must have been certified by the State to provide for the sight and sound separation of juveniles and incarcerated adults;

(v) The State must provide documentation that the conditions in paragraphs(f)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section have been met and received prior approval from OJJDP. OJJDP strongly recommends that jails and lockups that incarcerate juveniles be required to provide youth specific admissions screening and continuous visual supervision of juveniles incarcerated pursuant to this exception; and

(vi) Pursuant to section 223(a)(14) of the JJDP Act, the nonMSA (low population density) exception to the jail and lockup removal requirement as described in paragraphs (f)(4) (i) through (v) of this section shall remain in effect through 1997, and shall allow for secure custody beyond the twenty-four hour period described in paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section when the facility is located where conditions of distance to be traveled or the lack of highway, road, or other ground transportation do not allow for court appearances within twenty-four hours, so that a brief (not to exceed an additional forty-eight hours) delay is excusable; or the facility is located where conditions of safety exist (such as severely adverse, life-threatening weather conditions that do not allow for reasonably safe travel), in which case the time for an appearance may be delayed until twenty-four hours after the time that such conditions allow for reasonably safe travel. States may use these additional statutory allowances only where the precedent requirements set forth in paragraphs (f)(4) (i) through (v) of this section have been complied with. This may necessitate statutory or judicial (court rule or opinion) relief within the State from the twenty-four hour initial court appearance standard required by paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section.

(5) Reporting requirement. The State shall report annually to the Administrator of OJJDP on the results of monitoring for section 223(a)(12) ,(13), and (14) of the JJDP Act. The reporting period should provide 12 months of data, but shall not be less than six months. The report shall be submitted to the Administrator of OJJDP by December 31 of each year.

(i) To demonstrate the extent of compliance with section 223(a)(12)(A) of the JJDP Act, the report must include, at a minimum, the following information for the current reporting period:

(A) Dates covered by the current reporting period;

(B) Total number of public and private secure detention and correctional facilities, the total number reporting, and the number inspected on-site;

(C) The total number of accused status offenders and nonoffenders, including out-of-State runaways and Federal wards, held in any secure detention or correctional facility for longer than twenty-four hours (not including weekends or holidays), excluding those held pursuant to the valid court order provision as set forth in paragraph (f)(3) of this section or pursuant to section 922(x) of title 18, United States Code (which prohibits the possession of a handgun by a juvenile), or a similar State law. A juvenile who violates this statute, or a similar state law, is excepted from the deinstitutionalization of status offenders requirement;

(D) The total number of accused status offenders (including valid court order violators, out of state runaways, and Federal wards, but excluding Title 18 922(x) violators) and nonoffenders securely detained in any adult jail, lockup, or nonapproved collocated facility for any length of time;

(E) The total number of adjudicated status offenders and nonoffenders, including out-of-state runaways and Federal wards, held for any length of time in a secure detention or correctional facility, excluding those held pursuant to the valid court order provision or pursuant to title 18 U.S.C. section 922(x) ;

(F) The total number of status offenders held in any secure detention or correctional facility pursuant to the valid court order provision set forth in paragraph (f)(3) of this section; and

(G) The total number of juvenile offenders held pursuant to title 18 U.S.C. section 922(x).

(ii) To demonstrate the extent to which the provisions of section 223(a)(12)(B) of the JJDP Act are being met, the report must include the total number of accused and adjudicated status offenders and nonoffenders placed in facilities that are:

(A) Not near their home community;

(B) Not the least restrictive appropriate alternative; and

(iii) To demonstrate the extent of compliance with section 223(a)(13) of the JJDP Act, the report must include, at a minimum, the following information for the current reporting period:

(A) Dates covered by the current reporting period;

(B) The total number of facilities used to detain or confine both juvenile offenders and adult criminal offenders during the past 12 months and the number inspected on-site;

(C) The total number of facilities used for secure detention and confinement of both juvenile offenders and adult criminal offenders which did not provide sight and sound separation;

(D) The total number of juvenile offenders and nonoffenders not separated from adult criminal offenders in facilities used for the secure detention and confinement of both juveniles and adults;

(E) The total number of State approved juvenile detention centers located within the same building or on the same grounds as an adult jail or lockup, including a list of such facilities;

(F) The total number of juveniles detained in State approved collocated facilities that were not separated from the management, security or direct care staff of the adult jail or lockup;

(G) The total number of juvenile detention centers located within the same building or on the same grounds as an adult jail or lockup that have not been approved by the State, including a list of such facilities; and

(H) The total number of juveniles detained in collocated facilities not approved by the State that were not sight and sound separated from adult criminal offenders.

(iv) To demonstrate the extent of compliance with section 223(a)(14) of the JJDP Act, the report must include, at a minimum, the following information for the current reporting period:

(A) Dates covered by the current reporting period;

(B) The total number of adult jails in the State AND the number inspected on-site;

(D) The total number of adult jails holding juveniles during the past twelve months;

(E) The total number of adult lockups holding juveniles during the past twelve months;

(F) The total number of accused juvenile criminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails, lockups, and unapproved collocated facilities in excess of six hours, including those held pursuant to the “removal exception” as set forth in paragraph (f)(4) of this section;

(G) The total number of accused juvenile criminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails, lockups and unapproved collocated facilities for less than six hours for purposes other than identification, investigations, processing, release to parent(s), transfer to court, or transfer to a juvenile facility following initial custody;

(H) The total number of adjudicated juvenile criminal-type offenders held securely in adult jails or lockups and unapproved collocated facilities in excess of six hours prior to or following a court appearance or for any length of time not related to a court appearance;

(I) The total number of accused and adjudicated status offenders (including valid court order violators) and nonoffenders held securely in adult jails, lockups and unapproved collocated facilities for any length of time;

(J) The total number of adult jails, lockups, and unapproved collocated facilities in areas meeting the “removal exception” as noted in paragraph (f)(4) of this section, including a list of such facilities and the county or jurisdiction in which each is located;

(K) The total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offense who were held in excess of six hours but less than 24 hours in adult jails, lockups and unapproved collocated facilities pursuant to the “removal exception” as set forth in paragraph (f)(4) of this section;

(L) The total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offense who were held in excess of 24 hours, but not more than an additional 48 hours, in adult jails, lockups and unapproved collocated facilities pursuant to the “removal exception” as noted in paragraph (f)(4) of this section, due to conditions of distance or lack of ground transportation; and

(M) The total number of juveniles accused of a criminal-type offense who were held in excess of 24 hours, but not more than an additional 24 hours after the time such conditions as adverse weather allow for reasonably safe travel, in adult jails, lockups and unapproved collocated facilities, in areas meeting the “removal exception” as noted in paragraph (f)(4) of this section.

(6) Compliance. The State must demonstrate the extent to which the requirements of sections 223(a)(12)(A), (13), (14), and (23) of the Act are met. If the State fails to demonstrate full compliance with sections 223(a)(12)(A) and (14), and compliance with sections 223(a)(13) and (23) by the end of the fiscal year for any fiscal year beginning with fiscal year 1994, the State's allotment under section 222 will be reduced by twenty five percent for each such failure, provided that the State will lose its eligibility for any allotment unless: the State agrees to expend all remaining funds (except planning and administration, State advisory group set-aside funds and Indian tribe pass-through funds) for the purpose of achieving compliance with the mandate(s) for which the State is in noncompliance; or the Administrator makes discretionary determination that the State has substantially complied with the mandate(s) for which there is noncompliance and that the State has made through appropriate executive or legislative action, an unequivocal commitment to achieving full compliance within a reasonable time. In order for a determination to be made that a State has substantially complied with the mandate(s), the State must demonstrate that it has: Diligently carried out the plan approved by OJJDP; demonstrated significant progress toward full compliance; submitted a plan based on an assessment of current barriers to DMC; and provided an assurance that added resources will be expended, be it formula grants or other funds, to achieve compliance. Where a State's allocation is reduced, the amount available for planning and administration and the required pass-through allocation, other than State advisory group set-aside, will be reduced because they are based on the reduced allocation.

(i) Full compliance with section 223(a)(12)(A) is achieved when a State has removed 100 percent of status offenders and nonoffenders from secure detention and correctional facilities or can demonstrate full compliance with de minimis exceptions pursuant to the policy criteria contained in the Federal Register of January 9, 1981 (copies are available from the Office of General Counsel, Office of Justice Programs, 633 Indiana Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20531).

(ii) Compliance with section 223(a)(13) has been achieved when a State can demonstrate that:

(A) The last submitted monitoring report, covering a full 12 months of data, demonstrates that no juveniles were incarcerated in circumstances that were in violation of section 223(a)(13); or

(B) (1) The instances of noncompliance reported in the last submitted monthly report do not indicate a pattern or practice but rather constitute isolated instances; and

(2 )(i) Where all instances of noncompliance reported were in violation of or departure from State law, rule, or policy that clearly prohibits the incarceration of all juvenile offenders in circumstances that would be in violation of section 223(a)(13), existing enforcement mechanisms are such that the instances of noncompliance are unlikely to recur in the future; or

(ii) An acceptable plan has been developed to eliminate the noncompliant incidents.

(iii) (A) Full compliance is achieved when a state demonstrates that the last submitted monitoring report, covering 12 months of actual data, demonstrates that no juveniles were held in adult jails or lockups in circumstances that were in violation of section 223(a)(14).

(B) Full compliance with de minimis exceptions is achieved when a State demonstrates that it has met the standard set forth in either of paragraphs (f)(6)(iii)(B) (1) or (2) of this section:

(1) Substantive de minimis standard. To comply with this standard the State must demonstrate that each of the following requirements have been met:

(i) State law, court rule, or other statewide executive or judicial policy clearly prohibits the detention or confinement of all juveniles in circumstances that would be in violation of section 223(a)(14) ;

(ii) All instances of noncompliance reported in the last submitted monitoring reported were in violation of or departures from, the State law, rule, or policy referred to in paragraph (f)(6)(iii)(B)(1 )(i) of this section;

(iii) The instances of noncompliance do not indicate a pattern or practice but rather constitute isolated instances;

(iv) Existing mechanisms for the enforcement of the State law, rule or policy referred to in paragraph (f)(6)(iii)(B)(1 )(i) of this section are such that the instances of noncompliance are unlikely to recur in the future; and

(v) An acceptable plan has been developed to eliminate the noncompliant incidents and to monitor the existing mechanism referred to in paragraph (f)(6)(iii)(B)(1 )(iv) of this section.

(2) Numerical de minimis standard. To comply with this standard the State must demonstrate that each of the following requirements under paragraphs (f)(6)(iii)(B)(2) (i) and (ii) of this section have been met:

(i) The incidents of noncompliance reported in the State's last submitted monitoring report do not exceed an annual rate of 9 per 100,000 juvenile population of the State; and

(ii) An acceptable plan has been developed to eliminate the noncompliant incidents through the enactment or enforcement of State law, rule, or statewide executive or judicial policy, education, the provision of alternatives, or other effective means.

(iii) Exception. When the annual rate for a State exceeds 9 incidents of noncompliance per 100,000 juvenile population, the State will be considered ineligible for a finding of full compliance with de minimis exceptions under the numerical de minimis standard unless the State has recently enacted changes in State law which have gone into effect and which the State demonstrates can reasonably be expected to have a substantial, significant and positive impact on the state's achieving full (100%) compliance or full compliance with de minimis exceptions by the end of the monitoring period immediately following the monitoring period under consideration.

(iv) Progress. Beginning with the monitoring report due by December 31, 1990, any State whose prior full compliance status is based on having met the numerical de minimis standard set forth in paragraph (f)(6)(iii)(B)(2 )(i) of this § 31.303, must annually demonstrate, in its request for a finding of full compliance with de minimis exceptions, continued and meaningful progress toward achieving full (100%) compliance in order to maintain eligibility for a continued finding of full compliance with de minimis exceptions.

(v) Request submission. Determinations of full compliance and full compliance with de minimis exceptions are made annually by OJJDP following submission of the monitoring report due by December 31 of each calendar year. Any State reporting less than full (100%) compliance in any annual monitoring report may request a finding of full compliance with de minimis exceptions under paragraph (f)(6)(iii)(B) (1) or (2) of this section. The request may be submitted in conjunction with the monitoring report, as soon thereafter as all information required for a determination is available, or be included in the annual State plan and application for the State's formula grant award.

(C) Waiver. Failure to achieve full compliance as defined in this section shall terminate any State's eligibility for FY 1993 and prior year formula grant funds unless the Administrator of OJJDP waives termination of the State's eligibility. ln order to be eligible for this waiver of termination, a State must request a waiver and demonstrate that it meets the standards set forth in paragraphs (f)(6)(iii)(C) (1)-(7) of this section:

(1) Agrees to expend all of its formula grant award except planning and administration, advisory group set-aside, and Indian tribe pass-through funds, to achieve compliance with section 223(a)(14); and

(2) Removed all status and nonoffender juveniles from adult jails and lockups. Compliance with this standard requires that the last submitted monitoring report demonstrate that no status offender (including those accused of or adjudicated for violating a valid court order) or nonoffender juveniles were securely detained in adult jails or lock-ups for any length of time; or that all status offenders and nonoffenders securely detained in adult jails and lock-ups for any length of time were held in violation of an enforceable State law and did not constitute a pattern or practice within the State; and

(3) Made meaningful progress in removing juvenile criminal-type offenders from adult jails and lockups. Compliance with this standard requires the State to document a significant reduction in the number of jurisdictions securely detaining juvenile criminal-type offenders in violation of section 223 (a)(14) of the JJDP Act; or a significant reduction in the number of facilities securely detaining such juveniles; or a significant reduction in the average length of time each juvenile criminal-type offender is securely detained in an adult jail or lock-up; or State legislation has recently been enacted and taken effect and which the State demonstrates will significantly impact the secure detention of juvenile criminal-type offenders in adult jails and lock-ups; and

(4) Diligently carried out the State's jail and lockup removal plan approved by OJJDP. Compliance with this standard requires that actions have been undertaken to achieve the State's jail and lock-up removal goals and objectives within approved time lines, and that the State Advisory Group, required by section 223 (a)(3) of the JJDP Act, has maintained an appropriate involvement in developing and/or implementing the State's plan; and

(5) Submitted an acceptable plan, based on an assessment of current jail and lockup removal barriers within the State, to eliminate noncompliant incidents; and

(6) Achieved compliance with section 223(a)(15) of the JJDP Act; and

(7) Demonstrates an unequivocal commitment, through appropriate executive or legislative action, to achieving full compliance.

(D) Waiver maximum. A State may receive a waiver of termination of eligibility from the Administrator under paragraph (f)(6)(iii)(C) of this section for a combined maximum of four Formula Grant Awards through Fiscal Year 1993. No additional waivers will be granted.

(7) Monitoring report exemption. States which have been determined by the OJJDP Administrator to have achieved full compliance with sections 223(a)(12)(A), (a)(14), and compliance with section 223(a)(13) of the JJDP and wish to be exempted from the annual monitoring report requirements must submit a written request to the OJJDP Administrator which demonstrates that:

(i) The State provides for an adequate system of monitoring jails, law enforcement lockup, detention facilities, to enable an annual determination of State compliance with sections 223(a)(12)(A), (13), and (14) of the JJDP Act;

(ii) State legislation has been enacted which conforms to the requirements of Sections 223(a)(12)(A), (13), and (14) of the JJDP Act; and

(iii) The enforcement of the legislation is statutorily or administratively prescribed, specifically providing that:

(A) Authority for enforcement of the statute is assigned;

(B) Time frames for monitoring compliance with the statute are specified; and

(g) Juvenile crime analysis. Pursuant to section 223(a)(8), the State must conduct an analysis of juvenile crime problems, including juvenile gangs that commit crimes, and juvenile justice and delinquency prevention needs within the State, including those geographical areas in which an Indian tribe performs law enforcement functions. The analysis and needs assessment must include educational needs, gender specific services, delinquency prevention and treatment services in rural areas, and mental health services available to juveniles in the juvenile justice system. The analysis should discuss barriers to accessing services and provide a plan to provide such services where needed.

(1) Analysis. The analysis must be provided in the multiyear application. A suggested format for the analysis is provided in the Formula Grant Application Kit.

(2) Product. The product of the analysis is a series of brief written problem statements set forth in the application that define and describe the priority problems.

(3) Programs. Applications are to include descriptions of programs to be supported with JJDP Act formula grant funds. A suggested format for these programs is included in the application kit.

(4) Performance indicators. A list of performance indicators must be developed and set forth for each program. These indicators show what data will be collected at the program level to measure whether objectives and performance goals have been achieved and should relate to the measures used in the problem statement and statement of program objectives.

(h) Annual performance report. Pursuant to section 223(a) and section 223(a)(22) the State plan shall provide for submission of an annual performance report. The State shall report on its progress in the implementation of the approved programs, described in the three-year plan. The performance indicators will serve as the objective criteria for a meaningful assessment of progress toward achievement of measurable goals. The annual performance repo

Tips

CFR

31.303—Substantive requirements.