Safe Harbors

1. Safe Harbors Francie Mathis, MN Department of Human Services Lauren Ryan, MN Department of Health

2. Overview • Define Trafficking/Exploitation/Prostitution • What are Safe Harbor laws? • MN Safe Harbor • History • Service Delivery Model • Funding • Implementation • Outstanding Issues

3. Definitions • Sex Trafficking • Federal – Recruiting, transporting, enticing […]a person by force, fraud or coercion in a commercial sex act. (Under 18*) • Minnesota– Recruiting, transferring, obtaining […] a person by any means to aid in the prostitution of the individual

5. Prostitution • 609.321 Subd. 9.Prostitution. • "Prostitution" means hiring, offering to hire, or agreeing to hire another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact, or being hired, offering to be hired, or agreeing to be hired by another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact.

7. Sexually Exploited Youth • Subd. 31. Sexually exploited youth" means an individual who: • (1) is alleged to have engaged in conduct which would, if committed by an adult, violate any federal, state, or local law relating to being hired, offering to be hired, or agreeing to be hired by another individual to engage in sexual penetration or sexual conduct […] • Includes Survival sex and trafficking

8. Sex trafficking and prostitution are a part of the same continuum of criminal activity: The sexual exploitation of human beings.

9. Forms Of Sexual Exploitation SEXUAL EXPLOITATION SEX TRAFFICKING Prostitution Stripping Survival Sex Pornography

10. What are Safe Harbor Laws?

11. Safe Harbor laws treat minors engaged in prostitution as victims who need services and generally are immune from prosecution. Cannot be guilty of an act that involves their own sexual exploitation

12. Court decision • Landmark Decision: Texas Supreme Court Rules In Matter of B.W. (2010) Children in Prostitution are Victims, Not Criminals • Facts • Thirteen-year-old B.W. flagged down the car of an undercover officer and offered to engage in oral sex for twenty dollars. She was arrested for prostitution. • The trial court (Family Court) found her guilty of Class B misdemeanor of prostitution; she admitted that she had "knowingly agreed to engage in sex . . . for a fee," and received a sentence of 18-months’ probation. • The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, and the case was appealed, the Texas Supreme Court agreed to review her case. • The Supreme Court of Texas reversed the Court of Appeals by a 6-3 decision.

13. Court decision • “Transforming a child victim of adult sexual exploitation into a juvenile offender was not the legislature’s intent when it enacted the laws on prostitution and delinquent conduct of a child... It is far more likely that the legislature intended to punish those who sexually exploit children rather than subject child[ren]… to prosecution.” • “In passing these statutes, the Legislature has expressed both the extreme importance of protecting children from sexual exploitation, and the awareness that children are more vulnerable to exploitation by others."

14. States with various versions: • New York first 2008 • Illinois • Massachusetts • New jersey • Ohio • Vermont • Washington • Connecticut • Michigan • Tennessee • Florida and … Minnesota

15. Safe Harbors • Safe Harbor and other regionalized responses • Some multidisciplinary approach ground in community based collaborative approach between service providers, shelters, LE, CPS/CW, health care and juvenile justice • Others states have responses based out of child welfare systems • Some states, no Safe Harbor juvenile justice/corrections response

16. Anti-trafficking/Safe Harbor History in MN • 2005 Anti-trafficking legislation passed, Vick Task force created • 2006 statewide task force created and facilitated by Department of Public Safety • 2008 Advocates for Human Rights conducted and published needs assessment in MN on sex trafficking

17. Anti-trafficking/Safe Harbor History in MN • 2010 ECPAT approached Advocates for Human Rights on Safe Harbor in MN • 2010 MN Girl’s Campaign Women’s Foundation • 2011 Safe Harbor passed and Task Force moved to Department of Health

18. Safe Harbor 2011 • 2011 Safe Harbor passed! • Parts effective that year • ‘Sexually exploited youth’ defined and added to child protection statute (CHiPS) 260C.007 (trafficking/exploitation) • Increased fines for Johns

19. Safe Harbor 2011 • Decriminalization passed but delayed effective date until 2014 • Included diversionary program for 16 and 17 year olds • Several County Attorneys pledged to no longer charge youth with engaging in prostitution

20. Safe Harbor 2011 • Directed Department of Public Safety to organize a Safe Harbor committee to develop a statewide response. Created multidisciplinary committee headed by state agencies.

21. Safe Harbor 2011-2013 • Safe Harbor committee met 12 times over a year and created the No Wrong Door model which….. “ensures that victims of juvenile sexual exploitation are identified, receive effective victim-centered and trauma-informed services and are housed safely”.

22. Underlying Values and Philosophy of No Wrong Door • Training should be provided to identify sexual exploitation • Sexually exploited youth are victims of a crime • Victims should not feel afraid, isolated or trapped. • Model is grounded in trauma-informed care. • Services should be responsive to the needs of individual youth (gender-responsive, culturally competent, age appropriate, supportive for LGBTQ youth) • Services should be offered statewide with services designed to reflect the specific regional needs. • Youth have the right to privacy and self determination. • Services are based in positive youth development. • Prevention is critical

23. No Wrong Door • 1. Creation of statewide director • 2. Creation of 6 plus navigators • 3. Ensuring appropriate and safe housing • 4. Ensuring effective outreach • 5. Support law enforcement • 6. Provide appropriate and accessible services • 7. Support efforts to prevent exploitation • 8. Comprehensive, statewide training on exploitation – how to identify and where to refer for services • 9. Conduct evaluation.

24. Day One

25. Safe Harbor is meant to build off existing resources and services, which must be fully funded. (Advocates, Fulfilling MN’s Promise)

26. Safe Harbor 2013 • Reported back to legislation the No Wrong Door report and requested 12.8 million for implementation. • Said nice try…but appropriated funding to three state agencies • 2013 - $2.8 million • 2014 - $1.5 million • Legislators were convinced to remove the diversionary program for straight decriminalization for youth under 18.

28. MN Department of Health • Director – hired October 2013. Statewide oversight and coordination of Safe Harbor and No Wrong Door implementation • Regional Navigators. Navigators central contact for youth themselves, law enforcement, service providers or concerned citizenship to refer for services.

29. Role of Regional Navigators

30. Regional Navigators • Breaking Free (Metro-East) • The Link (Metro-West) • Southwest Crisis Center (Southwest) • Heartland Girls’ Ranch (Central) • PAVSA (Northeast) • Olmsted Victim Services (Southeast) • Support Within Reach (Northwest) • White Earth DOVE Program (Northwest)

31. MN Department of Health • Comprehensive supportive services • Trauma-informed and emphasis on culturally specific services • Ranging from advocacy to health care to prevention • RFP released July and due September 2, 2014.

32. MN Department of Health • Evaluation • Wilder to evaluate Safe Harbor / No Wrong Door • Report to legislator, Fall 2015

33. Housing • Specialized emergency shelter, transitional living, youth supportive housing, and foster care placements. • Appropriate security, involvement of survivors, trauma-informed services, formal collaborations with law enforcement and juvenile justice. • 4 grantees: • Life House, Duluth (Shelter) • Breaking Free, St. Paul (Housing: Transitional Living) • The Link, West Metro (Shelter) • Heartland Girls Ranch, Benson (Housing: Supportive Housing)

34. Safe Harbor / No Wrong Door • Statewide Training – Ramsey County Attorney’s Office April 2014 • Training for law enforcement and prosecutors • Eight Regional Conferences, 2015 • Statewide Model Protocol- statewide efforts to develop a model multidisciplinary protocol for identifying and intervening with trafficked youth • MNCASA, SVJI • Fall 2015

35. What’s working well? • Multidisciplinary approach • State agencies and community organizations • Protocols, training • Regionalized response • Prevention efforts • Delayed implementation

36. Outstanding Issues • Building the plane as we fly it! • Providing services to youth • Housing/ Shelter • Mandated reporting • Systems/agencies unsure/unknown where they fit in or their roles

37. Group Discussion • Are you seeing this in your community? • Can you think of instances of misidentification? • Myths/cultures/barriers in your community? • Three things you can do in your job or community?

38. For more information • Website and handouts for more information: • http://www.health.state.mn.us/injury/topic/safeharbor/index.html • DHS website • www.mnhttf.org

39. THANK YOU! • Contact: • Francie Mathis • Francie.mathis@state.mn.us • Lauren Ryan • Lauren.ryan@state.mn.us