CALGARY COMMUNITY CONFERENCING

School Component 1999-2000: A Year in Review

  Prepared by:   Avery Calhoun, Ph.D.

                                    September, 2000

Introduction

Calgary Community Conferencing began in early 1998 as an initiative of the City of Calgary, Youth Probation Services. The Calgary Board of Education became a partner in June 1999, with funding for a .5 F.T.E position. Additional financial partners include the Calgary John Howard Society and the Mennonite Central Committee. Non-financial partners include Calgary Police Services and Calgary Family Services. Currently, referrals to Community Conferencing come from two primary sources: the youth justice system and the Calgary Board of Education. Therefore, Conferences can be broadly categorized as either Court or School. The following report[1] provides a description of School Conferences and their various participants. Some demographic information on the young people[2] is also included. This report concentrates on School Conferences, although comparisons with Court Conferences are made where informative.

[1]  The data used for this report and the report itself are the property of Calgary Community Conferencing.

[2]  The phrase ‘young people’ is used to describe the youths responsible for the harmful incident.

1.      

          School and Court Conferences

Between January 1998 and the end of May 2000, Calgary Community Conferencing completed 65 Community Conferences. As portrayed in Table 1, just under one-third (19 or 29.2%) were School and just over two-thirds (46 or 70.8%) were Court Conferences.

Type	Number	Percent	Date of First Conference
School	19	29.2	May 25/99
Court	46	70.8	Jan. 10/98
Total	65	100

[1] Percent totals may not add exactly to 100 throughout the report,. This is due to rounding error

The first School Conference occurred during May 1999, which was prior to the official partnership between Calgary Community Conferencing and the Calgary Board of Education (C.B.E). This first Conference was a pilot for the C.B.E. and involved an assault between junior high students. The first Conference held during the year of C.B.E. funding was on November 3, 1999, and involved physical fighting between students from a different junior high school. There were two additional Conferences in November and one in December, for a total of five School Conferences during 1999. In 2000, four School Conferences were held in January, two in February, one in March, four in April and three in May.

 Considering only the time period since the first School Conference (i.e., between May 25, 1999 and May 31, 2000), 47 Community Conferences were completed. Over this period, School Conferences (19) accounted for 40.4% while Court Conferences (28) accounted for 59.6% of  the total completed.

2.  Schools Participating in Community Conferences

As indicated in Table 2, students from a total of 14 schools participated in Conferences over the reporting period. Close to three-quarters (10 or 71.4%) of these schools were junior high, while 14.3% (2) were elementary and 14.3% (2) were high schools. Of the 19 School Conferences that occurred across the 14 schools, approximately one-tenth (2 or 10.5%) involved elementary, three-quarters (14 or 73.7%) junior high, and one-tenth (3 or 10.5%) high school students. No participating school was involved in more than 3 Conferences.

Table 2.  Conferences by School

School	Number	Percent
Elementary School A	1	5.3
Elementary School B	1	5.3
Junior High School A	1	5.3
Junior High School B	1	5.3
Junior High School C	1	5.3
Junior High School D	2	10.5
Junior High School E	3	15.8
Junior High School F	2	10.5
Junior High School G	1	5.3
Junior High School H	1	5.3
Junior High School I	1	5.3
Junior High School J	1	5.3
High School A	2	10.5
High School B	1	5.3
Total	19	100

[1] Percent totals may not add exactly to 100 throughout the report,. This is due to rounding error

3.  Types of Incidents Conferenced

Table 3a portrays the various incidents about which the 19 School Conferences were held between May 1999 and May 2000. As can be noted, assaults accounted for the highest proportion of incidents, both in terms of number of Conferences (8 or 42.1%) and number of young people (19 or 35.8%). A total number of 53 young people were involved in Conferenced incidents. 

Table 3a.  Conferences and Participants by Incident

Incidents over which School Conferences were held can be sorted into three broad categories: assault related, interpersonal conflict, and property related.  Assault-related incidents accounted for just over half of the total Conferences and involved a little over one third (21) of the young people. Conferences regarding interpersonal conflict in schools, which involved over half (30) of the total young people involved in Conferences, accounted for less than half (45%) of the total Conferences. Finally, only one property related incident, tire slashing, was Conferenced, which involved 2 young people.

Table 3b is presented to enable a comparison between the types of incidents over which School and Court Conferences were held. Court Conferences were categorized into three types: property related (break and enter, theft over and under $5,000, robbery, auto theft, etc.), assault (or interpersonal conflict) related (assault, assault with a weapon, criminal negligence causing bodily harm, etc.), and other (mischief, trespassing, etc.). Note that, on occasion, a Conference is over more than one type of incident. Also note that the table presents types of incidents Conferenced and does not reflect the number of counts on any incident.

Table 3b.  Court Conferences by Incident Category

Both School and Court Conferences have been held regarding serious assault incidents. The most apparent difference between School and Court Conferences involves property related incidents: while these predominate among Court Conferences, there has only been one School Conference held over property related incident.

4.  Referral Sources for School Conferences

As indicated by Table 4, incidents were referred for School Conferences from a variety of sources. School administrators (principals and assistant principals) were responsible for over two-thirds (13 or 68.4%) of the referrals. School counsellors and suspension desk personnel accounted for most of the balance of the referrals, with the one ‘other’ referral coming from a Calgary Police Youth Education Intervention officer.

Table 4.  School Conference Referral Sources

Referral Source	Number	Percent
Suspension Desk	2	10.5
Assistant Principal	6	31.6
Principal	7	36.8
School counsellor	3	15.8
Other	1	5.3
Total	19	100

5.  Time Between Incident, Referral, and School Conference

Tables 5a, 5b, and 5c display, respectively, the number of days between incident and referral, referral and Conference, and incident and Conference. Also included with each table are the average number of intervening days in each category for both School and Court Conferences.

Table 5a.  Days Between Incident and Referral

As indicated by Table 5a, almost all (89.5) school referrals to Community Conferencing occurred within 30 days of the incident and referrals occurred, on average, 16 days after the incident. Without the two incidents referred after more than 30 days (one was referred 34 days and the other was referred 50 days after the incident), the average time between incident and referral was 13 days.  Time elapsed between incident and referral was much longer for Court (146) than for School (16 days) Conferences.

Table 5b. Days Between Referral and School Conference

As indicated in Table 5b, about one-fifth (8 or 42.1%) of School Conferences occurred before 3 weeks had passed since the referral was received. On average, School Conferences occurred just over three-and-a-half weeks post referral. Compared with Court Conferences, School Conferences occurred more quickly after referral receipt, as the former were Conferenced, on average, nine weeks post referral.

Table 5c.   Days Between Incident and School Conference

With respect to time elapsed between incident and Conference, more than one-half (11 or 57.8%) of all School Conferences during the reporting period were held within 6 weeks of the incident. As indicated in Table 5c, the average number of days between school referred incidents and Conferences was 39. However, this includes the one Conference  referred more than 60 days post incident. Minus this Conference, the average days between incident and Conference was 36. Compared with Court Conferences, time between incident and referral for School Conferences was substantially shorter; weeks between incident and referral for School Conferences averaged about 6 and, for Court Conferences, about 30.

6. School Conference Participants

As indicated in Table 6a, 216 Conference participants were directly involved in School Conferences over the reporting period. When observers (i.e., those who attended the Conference but sat outside of the circle) are included, the number of participating individuals involved increases to 259.

Table 6a.  Number of Participants in School Conferences

On average, 11 individuals participated in each School Conference. One of the School Conferences was considerably larger than all others, with 30 directly affected individuals. This Conference was with respect to group related conflict and involved 12 young people. Most (16 of 19 Conferences or 84.2%) Conferences averaged between 5 and 14 directly involved participants.

 To date, more participants have been directly involved in Court (379) than in School Conferences (216).  However, the average number of participants in each School Conference was greater than in each Court Conference, with the latter averaging about 8 individuals.

Table 6b. Types of Participants in School Conferences

As indicated in Table 6b, young people accepting responsibility for the Conferenced incidents accounted for one-fifth of all School Conference participants. Victims numbered about half the number of young people. Supporters of victims and young people numbered 106, representing almost half (49.1%) of all directly involved non-staff School Conference participants.

As can be noted in Table 6b,  a victim was not identified in each Conference. Four School Conferences were held in which the young-person/victim distinction was not appropriate. Two of these incidents involved physical fighting, the third involved verbal fighting and the fourth was the group related conflict mentioned previously.

Table 6c portrays the roles of the ‘others’ involved in School Conferences. While the role of three directly involved Conference participants was not specified, 29 could be sorted into 10 categories. Among these 29 indirect participants, school Principals or Assistant Principals were the most frequently attending ‘others’ in Conferences, accounting for almost half (44.8%) of the total. School-related personnel (guidance counsellors, administrators, C.B.E. specialist, and teachers) accounted for one-quarter (7 or 24.1%) of ‘other’ participants in School Conferences. Justice system personnel (probation officer, police officers and an alternative measures representative) accounted for 13.8% (4) of ‘other’ participants.

7.  School Conferences: Direct Service

Tables 7a and 7b give an approximation of the direct services Community Conferencing staff give to the individuals involved in School Conferences. All Community Conferences entail intensive pre-Conference preparation, with multiple phone and personal contacts with the involved young people, victims, and supporters.

Table 7a. Preparation for School Conferences

On average, more contact (phone calls and meetings) was made with young persons and their supporters than with victims and their supporters. In total, Community Conferencing staff made 300 phone calls and 165 visits to individuals directly involved in School Conferences over the reporting period.

A very rough approximation of total preparatory direct service hours for School Conferences can be calculated by estimating each phone call at 15 minutes and each meeting at 90 minutes. This results in estimates of 300 total phone calls representing approximately 75 direct service hours and 165 total meetings, equivalent to approximately 247 direct service hours. Using these totals, an estimate of preparatory direct service hours per Conference can be calculated: Conferences average approximately 4 hours in phone calls and 13 hours in meetings.

Table 7b presents information regarding the duration of School Conferences. These Conferences lasted a minimum of two hours and a maximum of 4 hours. On average, Conferences were just over three hours long. In total, Community Conferencing staff spent 60.5 hours in Conferences for all the School Conferences held over the reporting period.

Table 7b. Duration of School Conferences

For comparative purposes, Court Conferences lasted, on average, 3.6 hours, somewhat longer than School Conferences. The shortest Court Conference lasted two-and-a-half and the longest was six-and-a-half hours. The longest Court Conference involved one young person with nine break and enter charges who was Conferenced with three victims.

The Community Conference process typically includes the development, by the young person in collaboration with his or her supporters, of a contract specifying one or more activities to be completed in order to redress the harm caused to the victim(s). In School Conferences that involved mutual harm, all young people were asked to develop separate restoration agreements. Table 8a presents a breakdown of the components of the restoration agreements developed in the School Conferences during the reporting period.

The young people who negotiated restoration agreements specified a total of 141 items they would complete in an effort to redress the harm caused. On average, restoration agreement included about three items. The most frequently occurring item included in restoration agreements involved an activity bringing together the young person(s) and the victim(s). Service hours generally involved the completion of some task by the young person for the victim(s). Adding these with activities with the victim(s) and family, young person – victim activities accounted for 34.0% (48) of the items on all of the agreements.

Table 8b details the restoration agreement items included in the final four columns of Table 8a. As evidenced by this table, there is enormous variety across restoration agreements.

Four tables are presented regarding school consequences for young people who participated in Conferences. Tables 9a and 9b portray, respectively, whether or not young people received school consequences for the incident for which they were responsible and the types of consequences they received by young people over the reporting period. Table 9c indicates, for the various types of incidents Conferenced, the number associated with school consequences. Finally, Table 9d presents the types of school consequence associated with each incident.

Table 9a. Were School Consequences Imposed?

	Number	Percent
No	23	43.4
Yes	25	47.2
Missing	5	9.4
Total	53	100

As indicated in Table 9a, consequences were imposed by schools on approximately one-half of the students who participated in a School Conference.

The most common consequence (as indicated in Table 9b) was 5 day suspensions, accounting for almost one-third of all consequences. Summing across types, 23 students received suspensions. Thus, suspensions represented almost two-thirds (62.2%) of all consequences imposed on students who participated in School Conferences. Of the total 53 students who participated in Conferences, over two-fifths (43.4%) received a school suspension for some period of time.

Table 9b. Types of School Consequences

Table 9c indicates the number of school consequences associated with the type of incident Conferenced. Taking the assault-related incidents together, two-thirds of responsible young people (14 or 66.7%) had an associated school consequence. As can be noted from the table, over one-half (12 or 52.2%) of the 23 Conferenced incidents that did not involve a school consequence were within the group related conflict category. All of these incidents were within one Conference involving 12 young people.

Table 9c. School Consequences by Incident Type

Table 9d. School Consequence Type by Incident Type

The four boys involved in verbal fighting were also involved in physical fighting. The 1 day suspension was the school consequence for both verbal and physical fighting.

Table 9d presents a cross-tabulation of school consequences by incident types. As indicated, 37 school consequences were given to the 25 students who received at least one consequence each. The most variance in terms of school consequence was within the assault category. In terms of absolute numbers, the two junior high students responsible for tire slashing (three counts each) received the highest number of consequences as they each received a 5 day suspension, were required to compensate the victims, and write letters of apology. Two junior high students involved in spraying a noxious substance received two school consequences each: a five day suspension and a formal reinstatement. A student from a junior high school responsible for an assault also received two school consequences: a five day suspension and a period of home schooling. The other students who received school consequences received one consequence each.

Calgary Community Conferencing received four C.B.E. referrals that did not proceed to Conference. All of these non-Conferenced referrals were from junior high schools. The four referrals involved seven young people, including four males and three females. Two referrals were regarding a single young person while the other two involved two and three young people. Two of the incidents were verbal fighting, one was property damage, and the fourth involved theft. Two of the referrals did not proceed because CCC staff believed the situation inappropriate for Conferencing; the other two did not proceed as a result of victim choice.

It should be noted that although these four referrals did not proceed to Conference, there was considerable work completed with the involved young people, victims, and supporters. Across these four referrals, a total of 38 telephone calls and 12 meetings were made to young people and/or their supporters. Seventeen telephone calls and three meetings were held with victims and/or their supporters regarding these referrals. Using the same method as was used to estimate the time spent in preparatory work for referrals that did proceed to Conference (Section 7), CCC staff spent 13.75 hours on telephone calls and 22.5 hours on meetings with these non-Conferenced referrals. On average, staff spent about nine hours of direct service work for each referral that was not Conferenced

The young people who participated in Community Conferences over the May 1999 to June 2000 reporting period are described below in terms of gender, age, heritage, and home city quadrant.

As indicated in Table 10a, slightly over two-thirds (37 or 69.8%) of young people involved in School Conferences were male. Female young people comprised substantially more School than Court Conference participants. The gender breakdown for young people participating in Court Conferences was 46 (88.2%) male and 5 female (11.8%).

Table 11b provides information regarding young people’s age. The youngest School Conference student responsible for a harmful incident over the reporting period was 11, while the oldest was 17. Average age among these young people was 14.3. It should be noted that ten of the 12 high school students involved in the Conference on group related conflict were 17. Without this Conference, the average age of School Conference students responsible for the harmful incident was 13.6.

Table 11b. Young Person Age

Age	Number	Percent
11	1	1.8
12	5	9.4
13	15	28.3
14	12	22.6
15	4	7.5
16	6	11.3
17	10	18.9
Total	53	100

On average, young people involved in School Conferences tend to be younger than those involved in Court Conferences. The average age for young people who participated in Court Conferences was 15.8. The youngest Court Conference participant was 12 and the oldest was 18 years.

Table 11c presents information regarding the heritage of the young people involved in school conferencing. The majority (36 or 67.9%) of participants were of Western European heritage, with those of Middle Eastern heritage comprising the next largest group (10 or 18.9%).

Table 11c. Young Person Heritage

Heritage	Number	Percent
West European	36	67.9
Aboriginal/Metis	2	3.8
Asian	2	3.8
African Canadian	2	3.8
Middle Eastern	10	18.9
Unknown	1	1.9
Total	53	100.0

Young people involved in Court Conferences have also been predominantly of Western European heritage (74.5%). The second largest group among the Court participants was Aboriginal/Metis, with young people of this background accounting for 7.8% of the total.

Table 11d portrays the home city quadrants of the young people involved in School Conferences. As is apparent, most School Conferences over the reporting period have involved young people from the Southeast Calgary (31 or 58.5%). The eastern half of the city was home to 85% of the young people in School Conferences. In contrast, only 15% of the young people came from Calgary’s western quadrants.

Table 11d. Young Person Home City Quadrant

Quadrant	Number	Percent
Southwest	4	7.5
Southeast	31	58.5
Northeast	14	26.4
Northwest	4	7.5
Total	52	100.0

Young people who participated in Court Conferences tended to be more dispersed in terms of their home city quadrant. Approximately 15% of young people in these Conferences came from each of the southern quadrants. A third were from the Northwest and just over one-quarter were from the Northeast.