Pine County probation office wins $244,250 restorative justice grant to expand youth programs

Terry Faucet, Pine County probation director, told the county board that the Office of Restorative Practices awarded Pine County $244,250 to expand youth restorative justice services and create a $29,000 juvenile restitution fund that will begin Aug. 1.

The funding, Faucet said during the board meeting, will support expanded community-based restorative programming and allow the probation office to offer a community track for habitual truants. Faucet described the award as a competitive statewide grant and said Pine County received the full amount it requested.

Why it matters: county probation staff said restorative practices and truancy intervention keep young people out of the juvenile court pipeline and reduce placements in out-of-home care. Faucet said the county’s youth restorative program shows low recidivism after successful completion and that the grant will fund efforts to scale that work over 18 months.

Faucet summarized recent department work and outcomes: the office’s snapshot for the prior year listed 396 new probation entries (not including pretrial, diversion or certain juvenile cases), and probation staff reported declines in new offender entries compared with earlier years while noting workload remains high because pretrial, diversion and restorative cases require intensive supervision and casework. Faucet said out-of-home juvenile placements were concentrated: 36 juveniles accounted for 60 placements and three high-cost placements produced roughly 60% of placement spending.

The probation director described several programs tied to the grant and to department outcomes. He said the county’s restorative justice (C5) program had 31 referrals since 2016 with 111 successful completions and a 10% one-year recidivism rate for participants, and that a youth truancy intervention program (YETI) reported that 86% of participants improved attendance and avoided court referral. Faucet credited county staff and local partners — including a career agent named Devin who designed YETI and county prosecutor Reese (who helped with grant work) — for program development.

Faucet also outlined cost savings tied to alternatives to placement: he said electronic monitoring saved $134,000 in placement costs in the most recent year and more than $2 million since the county began using monitors as a detention alternative. The probation office reported 18 average days per placement for some juvenile stays, and Faucet noted the department seeks to limit placements to those who truly need them.

Board members asked about staffing and funding durability. Faucet said many program positions are grant-funded or partially subsidized by state and federal sources and that recent mandates (including an expanding federal workload for SNAP and other assistance verification) increase staffing pressure. He warned that mandated work without commensurate funding complicates budgeting.

Faucet and board members described next steps: the restorative justice grant begins Aug. 1; the probation office will draw on the county’s grant-writing and administrative resources to implement programming and the restitution fund; and staff will return with budget and operational details as the county’s 2026 budget process proceeds.

Ending: Commissioners praised the department’s results and encouraged staff to provide reports to the board as the grant-funded work begins. Faucet offered to arrange site visits or demonstration sessions of restorative programming for commissioners who want to observe services firsthand.