How Credible Messenger Mentoring Incorporates Public Justice and Social Science
This article originally appeared on Shared Justice, an initiative of the Center for Public Justice, on March 29, 2022. This article was a part of Shared Justice’s Transformative Justice series. The series explores one of the most urgent areas for reform within the juvenile justice system: juvenile probation. Focusing on promising practices in diversion and prevention, including Credible Messenger Mentoring, the series highlights opportunities for government and civil society to create a juvenile justice system that is more equitable, effective, and restorative. Edits have been made for clarity.
The current juvenile justice system has made significant strides, incarcerating sixty percent fewer young people in the last couple of decades.1 One of the keys to this decrease has been utilizing juvenile probation, which entails supervision in a young person’s community rather than placement in a residential facility. However, this oft-used juvenile correction is more harmful than helpful in most cases. One study found that for low-risk youth, those placed on probation were over fifty percent more likely to reoffend.2 While there is progress on reduced rates of incarceration, there are still major problems with juvenile probation that need to be addressed with a heart for youth flourishing and a head for what is effective and feasible. As French philosopher Étienne Gilson claims, “[P]iety never dispenses with technique.”3 The lives and well-being of young people are at stake in this discussion of juvenile probation reform. We need to advocate for evidence-based juvenile probation reform that accomplishes its aim to uphold justice and foster youth flourishing.
Currently, juvenile probation as a practice within the juvenile justice system is broken. Juvenile probation is the most common juvenile correction, with sixty-three percent of youth adjudicated delinquent — roughly meaning “found guilty” — placed on juvenile probation.4 Under probation, youth remain in their communities under the supervision of a probation officer and must comply with strict rules and requirements. The goal of juvenile probation is to be a “diversion program” so that fewer young people are incarcerated overall. Diversion programs refer to a category of actions or policies which aim to redirect behavior that may warrant prosecution or further justice-involvement to alternative, informal methods of accountability within a community.
But the incentives for good behavior are out of line with how adolescents develop.5 Probation focuses on deterrence through negative-incentive structures such as curfews, frequent drug tests, required activities and treatments, and a laundry list of rules to follow. If an adolescent slips up during probation, she runs the risk of being placed in a residential facility. Juvenile probation should help youth steer clear of further involvement with the justice system. Instead, probation can be a vicious cycle that is “virtually impossible to escape from,” so many youth end up being further justice-involved.6
“Justice-involved” describes people who have contact with the justice system. This language is particularly important when writing about justice-involved youth, because it is person-centered and promotes humanizing young people who interact with the justice system.7 Justice-involved youth tend to have worse outcomes than youth who never had contact with the juvenile justice system. They also tend to have more adverse childhood experiences, which can be exacerbated by further contact with law enforcement, leading to higher rates of post-traumatic behaviors and behavioral health concerns. Substance-use rates are also higher in justice-involved youth populations than non-justice-involved youth. Justice-involved youth also struggle in the classroom, as data suggests that educational attainment is lower for justice-involved students and they display more educational challenges. Other long-term negative outcomes for justice-involved youth include increased risk of unemployment, homelessness, and mental health issues.8
There are also significant racial disparities in juvenile probation caseloads. Youth of color are overrepresented in juvenile probation. In 2017, fifty-five percent of youth on probation were youth of color, despite making up only forty-six percent of the total youth population. And sixty-eight percent of young people placed in residential facilities for “technical violations” — breaking a probation rule or requirement — were youth of color.9 With these disparities on top of an already inefficient and costly system, we need to reframe how we care for our youth. There has to be a better way.
Utilizing a Public Justice Perspective
As Christians, we believe all humans bear the image of God. Everyone has immutable, inherent dignity. As C.S. Lewis writes in his sermon, “The Weight of Glory,” “there are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal … If he is your Christian neighbour he is holy in almost the same way, for in him also Christ vere latitat — the glorifier and the glorified, Glory Himself, is truly hidden.”10 When we truly grasp the beauty and glory which our Creator gave us and which the Holy Spirit imparts to each of us not through our own merit, we begin the long obedience of justice.
It begins with our children. Jesus declares during his earthly ministry, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”11 God values children and desires them to flourish. Yet the most vulnerable of our youth are consistently placed in systems and cycles that prevent young people from thriving. A reformed view of a justice system aligns with a heart for redemption, reconciliation, and forgiveness. Social science and developmental psychology agree: studies consistently show that current practices in juvenile justice lead to poor outcomes, perpetuate racial disparities, and decimate communities.12 Faith and science both envision the same, better path forward — it’s almost as if it was designed that way. This shared vision keeps youth in their communities, relies on fruitful and science-backed collaboration between care communities and the justice system, and promotes human flourishing and restoration.
Aristotle connected human flourishing with living the “good life,” but Christians have a much deeper understanding of human flourishing. While shalom is Hebrew for “peace,” it also encapsulates wholeness, completeness, and communion with God. Human flourishing is about living well as image-bearers, enjoying and using the gifts from God to bring about shalom in our various spheres.
The Center for Public Justice uplifts public justice as the guiding principle for government’s work. It recognizes that “much of what contributes to human flourishing is not government’s task,” but at the same time, “much of what contributes to human flourishing is government’s task.”13 The juvenile justice system — and more specifically juvenile probation reform — is a microcosm of public justice at work. Equity and effectiveness in juvenile probation requires the partnership of government — through the traditional justice system of courts, probation officers, and so forth — and communities. Both of these entities must seek the flourishing of youth.
Diversion as a Solution
Juvenile probation as a facet of the juvenile justice system is still a necessary program; it just doesn’t need to be used as frequently as it is when there are other effective diversion programs that support youth development. Formal juvenile probation is necessary when the young person is charged with a serious offense or poses a risk to public safety. Evidence also shows that positive interactions with probation officers are connected to positive outcomes.14 However, for most juvenile delinquency cases, the costs of juvenile probation far outweigh its benefits.
To promote flourishing for youth in their communities, localities should invest in diversion programs. Diversion programs offer an alternative to juvenile probation and residential placement, allowing young people to altogether avoid contact with the justice system while still being held accountable for their actions through community programs and caring accountability.15 Some examples of diversion programs include mental health or substance use counseling in schools or local organizations, after-school programming, and job training or tutoring, among others.16 Studies show that diversion programs reduce recidivism rates in young people, are generally much less expensive, and they eliminate the negative effects that justice involvement has on young people’s long-term outcomes.17 The Annie E. Casey Foundation states that more than 60 percent of juvenile cases nationwide can be safely diverted, stymying the negative effects of formal processing.18 Diversion programs allow young people to remain in their communities and with their families. This aligns with the Center for Public Justice’s formal guideline for family, which states that the “government’s policies should aim to uphold the integrity and social viability of families.”19 In many of the communities that are disproportionately impacted by the juvenile justice system, this guideline for family should be extended to “communities of care.” Communities of care encompass the nuclear family as well as the people — neighbors, extended relatives, teachers, coaches, etc. — who surround and support a child in essential ways.
To achieve public justice as previously stated within juvenile probation reform, both government and communities have a role to play. Currently, juvenile probation is very expensive for local jurisdictions. One study found the juvenile probation workforce includes 15,000 to 20,000 professionals — 15,000–20,000 paychecks coming from taxpayers’ pockets.20 Shifting more low-risk young people away from juvenile probation and residential placement when they come in contact with the justice system would save localities money. Those savings could be diverted to these community-based diversion programs that emphasize accountable restoration and adhere to the evidence-backed notions of positive youth development and social capital investment.
Social Capital and Positive Youth Development
In the last several decades, there has been a growing body of literature among political scientists, economists, sociologists, and other fields of research emphasizing the importance of social capital. Robert Putnam describes social capital as the “connections among individuals — social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them.”21 The intricacies of social interaction and commitments that people implicitly and explicitly make in community together are vital to community flourishing. A holistic approach to juvenile probation reform must utilize the strength, local knowledge, and care that community members have for one another and for the youth in their communities to create better solutions to divert young people from juvenile probation.
However, it is important to note that many of these underserved communities that are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system do not have access to the same level of social capital that middle- and upper-class communities have. In his later work, Putnam analogizes social capital to “air bags” that inflate when a child faces adversity.22 Doyle McManus writes in an LA Times column on the “air bag” philosophy of social capital that affluent children have more air bags, resulting in a “widening inequality of opportunity among the nation’s children.”23 An example of an air bag would be a more affluent family being able to pay for therapy or tutoring for their struggling child. In communities where there are fewer air bags to bolster the social capital of young people, diversion programs that partner with community organizations, houses of worship, schools, and law enforcement can help to improve a young person’s social capital and resilience to adversity. When a young person’s social capital is secure, educational attainment,24 future earnings and employment,25 and other outcomes improve.26 A young person is more resilient to changing circumstances and events in life, demonstrating that diversion through utilizing and improving social capital can be a way to prevent delinquency. Social capital investment can happen through diversion programming and will lead to young people flourishing and being a productive member of society.
These diversion programs that support social capital and communities must also align with emerging evidence on Positive Youth Development (PYD). Youth.Gov defines PYD as
an intentional, prosocial approach that engages youth within their communities, schools, organizations, peer groups, and families in a manner that is productive and constructive; recognizes, utilizes, and enhances young people’s strengths; and promotes positive outcomes for young people by providing opportunities, fostering positive relationships, and furnishing the support needed to build on their leadership strengths.
“Positive Youth Development,” Youth.Gov, https://youth.gov/youth-topics/positive-youth-development.
A Harvard study indicates that PYD’s “evidence-based approach is a significant departure from the punitive approaches commonly adopted by juvenile justice systems in the past.”28 PYD “focuses on a youth’s talents, strengths, interests, and future potential,”29 understanding that these factors all rely on a youth’s environment and social support systems. PYD’s goal is to support those characteristics so that a youth is more resilient to adversity. A growing body of literature supports PYD’s effectiveness in reforming juvenile probation. Recent, peer-reviewed data30 suggests that practices which utilize positive youth development result in better long-term outcomes and decreased recidivism.31 PYD is focused on providing positive experiences and support for a youth’s development. Despite a better understanding of what motivates youth behavior, juvenile probation has not adapted. The Annie E. Casey Foundation reports that “youth respond far better to rewards and incentives for positive behavior than to the threat of punishment for misbehavior,” and youth need community support and nurturing for maturity more than sanctions and surveillance.32
A Promising Diversion Program: Credible Messenger Mentoring
To promote human flourishing for justice-involved youth and strengthen their social air bags, incentives need to change. Communities and governments must invest in youth rather than engage in deterrence efforts. There are many promising diversion programs being tested and implemented throughout the U.S., all aimed at decreasing recidivism, reducing cost, and promoting flourishing and better outcomes for youth. Mentoring has emerged as an important and successful strategy in developing and caring for justice-involved youth.33 This practice incorporates several principles discussed in this article: the human dignity of every person according to biblical justice, social capital’s role in flourishing communities, and positive youth development, which conveys the importance of positive relationships for a young person’s development. One study finds that “youth with mentors are more likely to report engaging in positive behavior.”34 An example of a model that incorporates an understanding of human capital and social capital development is Credible Messenger Mentoring.
“Credible” means that the mentor shares similar life experiences and situations with young people who are justice-involved. In an Instagram Live conversation with the Center for Public Justice, Bishop Darren A. Ferguson, a key architect in Credible Messenger Mentoring, described a Credible Messenger as someone who is “authentic” and has “integrity.” According to Bishop Ferguson, this movement is centered around restoration and love, so that people who once harmed communities can heal communities. Mentors relate experientially with a young person, guiding them through decisions and systems to forge a path forward with support towards a better future.
Where this framework is implemented, it has become a huge success. New York City integrated Credible Messenger Mentoring into its juvenile probation program through its Arches Transformative Mentoring Program, which succeeded in reducing recidivism dramatically.35 Spurred by this success, other jurisdictions have created Credible Messenger Mentoring programs — in Los Angeles, Chicago, South Carolina, and Washington, D.C. Meanwhile, organizations like Community Connections for Youth (CCFY) offer workshops on how community organizations and houses of worship can create their own network of Credible Messengers. Belinda Ramos, Strategic Advisor to the Executive Director at CCFY, emphasized in a recent interview with Shared Justice that one result of introducing Credible Messenger Mentoring as a diversion program is that it builds “the community’s capacity, through grassroots organizations and neighborhood commitments, to support young people and guide them on a better path.”36
As Deputy Commissioner of New York City’s Probation Department, Clinton Lacey worked to bring Credible Messenger Mentoring to the New York City’s Probation Department through Arches. He then brought Credible Messenger Mentoring to Washington, D.C., as Director of Washington, D.C.’s Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services. Now, Lacey serves as CEO and President of the Credible Messenger Mentoring Movement (CM3), working on the non-profit level to “establish a series of local Credible Messenger initiatives around the nation.”37 With the goal of helping youth and their families break the cycle and impact of being justice-involved, CM3 is an organization that recruits and trains people in the community to become credible mentors for youth.
Credible Messengers can be a feature of diversion (keeping youth who don’t pose a serious threat out of the court system and instead steering them towards supportive mentoring organizations) or probation (parole officers and Credible Messenger Mentors working together to holistically address the issue and care for youth). This template for mentoring can be used by the government and by community organizations, and it can offer a space for partnership that has concrete, positive outcomes for justice-involved youth.
What do we believe to be true about our young people? Do they deserve harsh punitive punishment that does not help them? Or do we, as their caring communities, owe it to them to love them and help them flourish? While there are other successful programs aimed at maximizing the benefit towards society and youth outcomes while minimizing harm and cost, the Credible Messenger Mentoring model is a significant development in connecting justice-involved youth with community members who have shared experiences and can empower them. The need to reform juvenile probation and shift to diversion programs like Credible Messengers has gained consensus from justice experts, faith communities, social scientists, and leaders who were once justice-involved themselves. There is an opportunity in this current moment of consensus to advocate for — and participate in — juvenile justice reform that embraces diversion programming that is holistic, relational, and ultimately restorative.
Anna Kate Peterson ’21
Anna Kate majored in Political Science and Economics. She is currently living in Washington D.C.
1 “Youth Prisons: Why Are We Paying to be Less Safe?,” The Crime Report, August 21, 2020, https://thecrimereport.org/2020/08/21/youth-prisons-why-are-we-paying-to-be-less-safe/.
2 Edward J. Latessa, Durian Lovins, and Jennifer Lux, “Evaluation of Ohio’s Reclaim Programs,” Center for Criminal Justice Research, University of Cincinnati, April 30, 2014, 30.
3 Étienne Gilson, Christianity and Philosophy, trans. Ralph MacDonald (New York and London: Sheed & Ward, 1939), 115.
4 “What is Juvenile Justice?,” The Annie E. Casey Foundation, December 12, 2020, https://www.aecf.org/blog/what-is-juvenile-justice.
5 The Annie E. Casey Foundation, “Explainer: Transforming Juvenile Probation,” YouTube video, March 30, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rPth6AEV9Y.
6 “How Juvenile Probation Lands More Youths in Jail,” The Crime Report, October 26, 2020, https://thecrimereport.org/2020/10/26/how-juvenile-probation-lands-more-young-people-in-jail/.
7 “Language of Incarceration,” Leading into New Communities, https://lincnc.org/language-of-incarceration/.
8 Data in this paragraph drawn from Robert Kinscherff et al., Promoting Positive Outcomes for Justice-Involved Youth: Implications for Policy, Systems and Practice (Judge Baker Children’s Center, 2019). Available at https://www.bakercenter.org/policy-briefs.
9 Transforming Juvenile Probation: A Vision for Getting it Right (The Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2018), 5. Available at https://www.aecf.org/resources/transforming-juvenile-probation.
10 C.S. Lewis, “The Weight of Glory,” in The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses, revised and expanded ed., ed. Walter Hooper (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1980), 19. Emphasis original to source.
11 Matt. 19:14
12 Laurence Steinberg, “Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice,” Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 5, (2019): 459-485.
13 “Who We Are,” Center for Public Justice, https://cpjustice.org/who-we-are/. Emphasis added.
14 Timothy Daty, “New Report Provides Framework for Research-Informed Juvenile Probation,” EBPSOCIETY, February 14, 2019, https://www.ebpsociety.org/blog/education/351-research-informed-juvenile-probation.
15 “What is Diversion in Juvenile Justice?,” The Annie E. Casey Foundation, October 22, 2020, https://www.aecf.org/blog/what-is-juvenile-diversion.
16 “Diversion Programs,” Youth.Gov, https://youth.gov/youth-topics/juvenile-justice/diversion-programs.
17 Holly A. Wilson and Robert D. Hoge, “The Effect of Youth Diversion Programs on Recidivism: A Meta-Analytic Review,” Criminal Justice and Behavior 40, no. 5 (October 2012): 497-518.
18 Transforming Juvenile Probation, Annie E. Casey Foundation, 25.
19 “Family,” Center for Public Justice, https://cpjustice.org/family/.
20 Transforming Juvenile Probation, Annie E. Casey Foundation, 6.
21 Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000), 19.
22 Robert D. Putnam, Our Kids (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2016), 198.
23 Doyle McManus, “Column: How ‘social air bags’ for rich kids exacerbate unequal opportunity,” Los Angeles Times, March 17, 2015, https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-oe-mcmanus-our-kids-putnam-20150318-column.html.
24 Silvia Rogošić and Branislava Baranović, “Social Captial and Educational Achievements: Coleman vs. Bourdieu,” Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal 6, no. 2 (2016): 81-100.
25 Marissa Abbott and Aaron Reilly, The Role of Social Capital in Supporting Economic Mobility (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2019), 1-6.
26 Malin Eriksson, “Social Capital and Health — Implications for Health Promotion,” Global Health Action 4, no. 5611 (2011): 1-11.
28 Kinscherff et al., Promoting Positive Outcomes, 13.
29 Kinscherff et al., Promoting Positive Outcomes, 13.
30 Get Smart About Rewards and Sanctions: The Facts About Contingency Management (National Institute of Corrections, 2013). Available at https://nicic.gov/get-smart-about-rewards-and-sanctions-facts-about-contingency-management.
31 “Positive Youth Development,” The Annie E. Casey Foundation, https://www.aecf.org/topics/positive-youth-development.
32 Transforming Juvenile Probation, Annie E. Casey Foundation, 10.
33 “Benefits of Mentoring for Young People,” Youth.Gov, https://youth.gov/youth-topics/mentoring/benefits-mentoring-young-people.
34 Mary Bruce and John Bridgeland, The Mentoring Effect: Young People’s Perspectives on the Outcomes and Availability of Mentoring (Civic Enterprises, 2014), 2. Available at https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED558065.
35 Caleb Crary, “Credible Messenger Mentoring: A Movement Poised to Transform Juvenile Justice,” Shared Justice, March 29, 2022, https://archive.sharedjustice.org/opportunity-for-transformation/2022/1/19/credible-messenger-mentoring-a-movement-poised-to-transform-juvenile-justice-xhzzj.
36 Belinda Ramos and Katie Thompson, “Building Community Capacity to Support Justice-Involved Youth: An Interview with Belinda Ramos,” Center for Public Justice, March 29, 2022, https://cpjustice.org/building-community-capacity-to-support-justice-involved-youth-an-interview-with-belinda-ramos/.
37 “CM3’s Origins,” CM3, https://cm3.splashthat.com/.