Buncombe data show sharp drop in juvenile complaints but racial disparities persist

Crystal Lynn Lewis, racial and ethnic disparities coordinator for juvenile justice, presented FY25 racial and ethnic disparities (RED) data to the Buncombe County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council planning committee, saying, “The good news is for FY25, Buncombe County only had 277 complaints filed.”

The presentation, given at a hybrid JCPC planning meeting, showed both a marked year-over-year decline in complaints and a continuing imbalance between the racial composition of Buncombe youth and youth entering the juvenile system. Lewis told the committee that Buncombe County’s youth population (ages 6–17) is about 33,606 and is 73% white, 9% Black and 16% Hispanic. In FY25, county complaints were 49% Black, 14% Hispanic and 29% white, she said, and only 132 individual juveniles accounted for the 277 complaints.

Why this matters: the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) and its RED compliance requirement direct states to track disparities at specified decision points and to use data to plan reductions. Lewis said the federal Juvenile Justice Reform Act reauthorization narrowed reporting to volumes and percentages and required states to include plans describing how they will reduce disparities.

Key findings Lewis highlighted: Buncombe’s complaints declined from 650 in FY24 to 277 in FY25; 59 youth were placed in detention in FY25; two youth were placed in Youth Development Centers (YDCs) and one transfer to adult court was recorded; 34% of complaints (95 complaints) originated in schools but involved only 70 youth; males comprised 71% of youth involved and females 29% (38 girls, 94 boys). Lewis also said only 8% of complaints were classified as violent and 64% were minor offenses.

Lewis emphasized numeric context to avoid inflated impressions from ratios alone: “When you actually see the numbers, and Buncombe County is a good example of why it's important to show the numbers, is because you see that it's a relatively small number,” she said. She credited school justice partnerships, court services and community programs for contributing to the decline, adding the reduction gives the county a “workable number” to target with programs.

Discussion at the meeting covered how JCPCs and partners should use RED data. Attendees urged sharing the data with law enforcement, judges and community groups to align resources to needs (for example, transportation or substance‑use treatment) and to prioritize evidence‑based programs that match the populations most represented in the data. Lewis noted UNC Chapel Hill graduate students and other research collaborations the department uses to locate promising practices and recommended mentoring programs for Black boys as one example of effective interventions.

Several participants asked for more granular breakdowns — by school, by referral source (law enforcement vs. victim/citizen report) and by offense type — and Lewis said such requests can be routed through the state research office (Dr. Crozier was named as the research contact). She warned that counts under five are not disclosed to protect juvenile confidentiality.

The committee also discussed peer‑group dynamics, diversion programs and how community partners and families can be engaged in prevention. In closing remarks, Angie Garner, chair of the JCPC planning committee, said the committee will “delve deeper into this data” to inform FY planning, adding, “we are very, very, very excited to see this data.”

No formal motions or votes were recorded on RED policy or funding during the meeting; the presentation was for information and planning.

The presentation and follow‑up steps staff described — sharing vetted slides with local partners, submitting data requests to the state research office, and using RED data to guide JCPC allocations — will shape the committee’s priority‑setting for the coming year.