Cuyahoga County subcommittee hears focus‑group findings: youth report trauma, distrust and lack of supports

At a meeting of the Cuyahoga County Juvenile Courts Subcommittee on programmatic thrust, presenters from the Greater Cleveland Youth Justice Collective told members that youth who participated in nine focus groups described deep grief, a sense of being targeted and limited access to safe recreational and mental‑health supports.

The presenters — Gabriela Celeste of the Schubert Center for Child Studies at Case Western Reserve University, Jocelyn Rosnick, policy director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, and Pat Slater, a policy strategist at the ACLU of Ohio — summarized findings from 61 participants and said the project was funded by a George Gund Foundation grant.

The group framed the work as a response to what they called "misguided media hype" about youth crime and urged policymakers to consider context. "Kids make up about 4% of all arrests in the city of Cleveland," Celeste said, adding that youth accounted for roughly 3% of violent‑offense arrests in the data the presenters cited. Presenters said those Cleveland Division of Police figures were used only to provide context for Greater Cleveland.

Why it matters: presenters said the focus groups highlight why county investment targeted to ZIP codes identified in the juvenile court's heat map could reduce risk and improve outcomes. Members of the subcommittee said they planned to fold the findings into the committee's final report and recommended using the heat map to prioritize neighborhood resources, transportation solutions and youth programming.

Key findings and details

- Participant pool and limits: Presenters said the team convened nine focus groups with 61 participants. Organizers prioritized youth currently detained in Cuyahoga County facilities, recently released youth, youth from high‑priority ZIP codes (per the juvenile court heat map), impacted young adults (18–25) and caregivers. Presenters noted the data were self‑reported and largely confidential; they said they did not collect comprehensive race categories but observed a majority of participants were Black youth, with a majority male composition.

- Trauma, loss and mental health: Presenters said more than 60% of participants reported losing at least one person to violence; the groups repeatedly linked grief and generational trauma to mental‑health needs and to a normalization of trauma that makes help‑seeking harder.

- Guns and perceived safety: Presenters read focus‑group comments indicating a dual role for firearms: some youth described guns as contributors to violence and, simultaneously, as perceived means of protection. Slater read a participant quote: "Honestly, nothing makes me feel safer. I can feel safer with my family, but it ain't going to make me feel safer other than getting a gun." Presenters emphasized this reflected fear and constraint rather than preference.

- Infrastructure and access gaps: Participants frequently cited a lack of nearby programs, safe recreational spaces, mentors and reliable transportation. Presenters and committee members discussed whether more local programs, better transit or partnerships with recreation centers could reduce barriers.

- Media and social media: Presenters said youth described social media and community "remembrance" pages as retraumatizing and pushed for youth‑led campaigns to present a fuller picture of neighborhoods.

Committee response and next steps

Committee members thanked the presenters and asked for the slide‑level ZIP‑code breakdowns and the fuller report; Judge Ronald Adrian said the subcommittee planned to include the findings in its recommendations to County Council. County Council member Judge Joe Nani offered staff support from an aide (Laura Black) when she returns from leave to help compile the committee's materials. Members discussed an executive‑summary‑first report structure and dividing appendix work across meetings so recommendations can be completed in time for the committee's May deadline.

Procedural actions

The committee approved the minutes from the Feb. 26 meeting by voice vote earlier in the session. The meeting concluded after a motion to adjourn was made, seconded and approved by voice vote.

A note on sourcing and limits

Presenters emphasized that the focus‑group information was self‑reported and confidential; they said they had limited demographic categories and that their observations about race came from researchers' observations and targeted ZIP‑code recruitment. Where presenters cited Cleveland Division of Police arrest data, they used it for local context only.

What happens next

Presenters offered to provide the subcommittee with the ZIP‑code breakdown and the full report; the subcommittee agreed to solicit staff help to organize materials and to divide drafting tasks with the goal of presenting recommendations to County Council in the coming months.