Share |

Adolescent Consultation Services, Inc.

 189 Cambridge Street
 Cambridge, MA 02141
[P] (617) 494-0135
[F] (617) 494-0136
www.acskids.org
robyn.eastwood@acskids.org
Robyn Eastwood
Facebook Twitter
INCORPORATED: 1973
 Printable Profile (Summary / Full)
EIN 04-3263996

LAST UPDATED: 09/21/2017
Organization DBA ACS
Former Names --
Organization received a competitive grant from the Boston Foundation in the past five years No

Summary

--

Mission StatementMORE »

The mission of Adolescent Consultation Services (ACS) is to support and empower children and families involved with the Juvenile Court. We provide compassionate care through comprehensive mental health evaluations, individual and group therapy, and targeted education and advocacy to the Court and to community service providers. Our specially-trained clinicians educate and strengthen at-risk youth and their families to help them make good choices, cultivate healthy relationships, stay out of lockup, and connect with the resources they need to live full, productive lives.

Mission Statement

The mission of Adolescent Consultation Services (ACS) is to support and empower children and families involved with the Juvenile Court. We provide compassionate care through comprehensive mental health evaluations, individual and group therapy, and targeted education and advocacy to the Court and to community service providers. Our specially-trained clinicians educate and strengthen at-risk youth and their families to help them make good choices, cultivate healthy relationships, stay out of lockup, and connect with the resources they need to live full, productive lives.


FinancialsMORE »

Fiscal Year July 01, 2012 to June 30, 2013
Projected Income $1,397,000.00
Projected Expense $1,397,000.00

ProgramsMORE »

  • Direct Services to Court-involved Kids and their Families

Revenue vs. Expense ($000s)

Expense Breakdown 2014 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2013 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2012 (%)

For more details regarding the organization's financial information, select the financial tab and review available comments.


Overview

Mission Statement

The mission of Adolescent Consultation Services (ACS) is to support and empower children and families involved with the Juvenile Court. We provide compassionate care through comprehensive mental health evaluations, individual and group therapy, and targeted education and advocacy to the Court and to community service providers. Our specially-trained clinicians educate and strengthen at-risk youth and their families to help them make good choices, cultivate healthy relationships, stay out of lockup, and connect with the resources they need to live full, productive lives.


Background Statement

ACS alleviates barriers to care for court-involved youth and families. Established in 1973, ACS evaluates, counsels, and advocates for at-risk youth and their families to connect them with the resources they need overcome difficulties due to trauma, family difficulties and mental health issues. ACS services increase the resiliency of families by educating youth and their families about how to use community resources when problems arise.

ACS serves a discrete population, characterized by substantial mental health needs including Mood Disorder, ADHD, Anxiety Disorder, and Suicidality. All ACS clinicians receive specialized training to teach them how best to identify and address these complex needs and apply them in a Juvenile Court context. This training involves an extensive certification program to become a certified Juvenile Court Clinician; it typically takes at least one year to complete along with regular on-site supervision.
ACS served only the Cambridge Court until 1998 when ACS won the contract to provide Juvenile Court Clinic services throughout Middlesex County. The program developed expertise in serving court-involved teens and families and built strong community linkages. The Department of Mental Health (DMH) has administered the contract since 1999 that covers approximately 60% of ACS’s overall operating budget.
Private sources allow ACS to respond to the diverse needs of the Juvenile Court sites in Cambridge, Lowell, Framingham, and Waltham. In-kind office space at each of the Juvenile Court sites uniquely positions ACS to provide services to troubled youth and families.
ACS clients are a diverse group from more than 54 urban, rural, MetroWest, and Greater Boston communities. Ethnicities include Asian, Black, Caucasian, and Hispanic. All but a few have a family history of living near or below the poverty line. Many of the families are under-employed, with insufficient resources to adequately provide for their children.

 


Impact Statement

ACS is often the “last resort” for troubled kids who have exhausted many other available services. Without ACS’s intervention these vulnerable kids would not have access to vital community resources.  

ACS serves all of our clients with the same goals in mind: to help them finish school, live with their families, receive appropriate services, and stay out of locked settings whenever possible.
 
ACS strives to meet the comprehensive needs of each child and family by developing comprehensive individualized, rehabilitative plans that are impartial and further the best interests of the child and family.  This approach differs from schools, residential placements, and other child and family services that use a set framework.
 
Compared with 20% of children in the general population, 66% of the 603 children ACS served in 2012 have at least one psychiatric disorder. In 2012, the rates of the following symptoms were found among ACS clients: 
• Mood Disorders, including Major Depression, 73%
• Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, 72%
• Anxiety Disorders, including Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), 65%
• Suicidality, 34%
 
ACS clinicians work with parents and service providers involved in a child’s case to follow through with necessary services, such as special education, counseling, or medical care. ACS uses a set of three measures to track client outcomes. In 2012: 
• 80% of the teens were engaged in treatment and/or services.
• 80% were attending school, alternative education, or working.
• 79% of the parents or family members demonstrated active involvement in their child’s treatment.
 
ACS clients needs vary and so do the measures of their success. ACS works to understand each child in the context of home and community, to identify the child's unique needs, and to ensure that the child has access to appropriate services and educational opportunities.

Needs Statement

Starting in 2010, ACS noticed a trend: more referrals of very complicated cases. Clinicians have invested more time on each case.  For example, many ACS clients struggle with overlapping mental health issues. Over half of youth we see (66%) have at least one mental health concern. 

In 2007, DMH issued a request for responses for the new Juvenile Court Clinic contracts. ACS was proud to note that the service expectations for the first time included “liaison and referral services”, which parallel the ACS Education and Advocacy model. However, providing these services has been a challenge because DMH was not able to offer the increased funding required to cover their cost.
Clinically, Competency to Stand Trial evaluations for youth involved on delinquency complaints challenged the resources of ACS. This type of evaluation requires that only psychologists or psychiatrists with particular expertise and credentials can provide them.  
Additionally, increased attention to various diversion initiatives has been at the forefront of Juvenile Justice. The Juvenile Court used ACS to evaluate youth for safety for diversion and to explore alternative placements. ACS has had to expand its group treatment program to meet the need.

 


CEO Statement



Board Chair Statement



Geographic Area Served

In a specific U.S. city, cities, state(s) and/or region.
GREATER BOSTON REGION, MA

ACS serves the Middlesex Juvenile Court. Through the Middlesex County Juvenile Court sites in Cambridge, Lowell, Framingham, and Waltham, we serve 54 urban, MetroWest, and Greater Boston cities and towns. Middlesex County is the most populous in Massachusetts and has the largest population under the age of 18 with over 320,000 youth. With support from private sources, ACS services respond to the diverse needs of these urban, rural, and suburban communities.

Organization Categories

  1. Human Services - Children's and Youth Services
  2. Mental Health & Crisis Intervention - Mental Health Treatment
  3. Youth Development - Youth Development Programs

Independent research has been conducted on this organization's theory of change or on the effectiveness of this organization's program(s)

No

Programs

Direct Services to Court-involved Kids and their Families

ACS tailors its services to match the individual needs of each client and family. This grant would help fund ACS’s direct clinical services described below.  

Evaluation - A thorough understanding of the child and family is crucial to making recommendations for care.

- Same-day evaluation of kids at risk of hurting themselves or others.
- Extended, comprehensive evaluations with specific, realistic recommendations for care. Recommendations are based on information gathered from schools, medical records, family and one-on-one interviews.

Treatment

- Groups: Anger Management, Motherhood, Young Men’s, and Young Women’s.
- Individual & family counseling. 

Follow-up

- Educating clients and their family members about the Court process and available resources to address the recommendations
- Educating the Court and community about the unique needs of clients.
- Advocating for specific resources that best match individual needs and actively linking clients to them these resources.
Budget  $1,397,000.00
Category  Human Services, General/Other Children & Youth Services
Population Served Children and Youth (0 - 19 years) At-Risk Populations Families
Program Short-Term Success 

At a Young Women’s Group session in the fall, Janice Chen, the ACS group leader, was guiding the girls through a conversation about their own self-worth. One of the girls, Alexis, introduced herself with her name, grade, and three or four things she’s good at. The girl next to her, Lauren, simply said her name and her grade, and then stopped, saying she didn’t know what else to say. Alexis immediately turned to Lauren and asked, “What are you good at?”

Lauren looked around, shook her head, and said: “Nothing.” But Alexis quickly said: “Come on, you must be good at something. What do you like to do?” After some discussion about different activities, they decided that Lauren was good at drawing. That exchange was very valuable for Lauren, who has extremely low self-esteem. Janice noted how that experience of peer support and validation transformed her: Lauren lit up and contributed more in that group session than she ever had before.
Program Long-Term Success 

ACS clinicians evaluate children and their families to understand their needs and to bring together the resources necessary to find real solutions to their underlying problems. ACS intervenes at the critical point when positive outcomes are still possible. ACS services increase the resiliency of families by educating youth and their families about how to use community resources when problems arise. 

ACS helps kids stay in school and have a more successful educational career by coordinating with schools to meet the needs of each child. Research shows that students compelled to take an extra year of schooling experienced an average increase of 14 % in wages; graduating from high school means an average of $10,000 more per year when that child becomes an adult. Therefore, as ACS helps young people to stay in school, there is an overall benefit not just for the individual child, but also a long-term benefit for all of the communities in Middlesex County.

Program Success Monitored By 

Since 2002, ACS has used a set of three measures to track client outcomes. The 2011 data demonstrates the success of the full range of ACS services:

- 89% of the teens were engaged in treatment and/or services.

- 92% were attending school, alternative education, or working.

- 83% of the parents or family members demonstrated increased active involvement in their child’s treatment.

Our clients' needs vary and so do the measures of their success. Children most frequently demonstrate success by changes in their behavior—evidence for all to see that they have made a significant turnaround. There is no single, easy remedy for complex problems that have usually developed over an extended period of time. Individually tailored responses, which take into account the urgent and comprehensive needs of the child and family, are what lead to success.

Examples of Program Success 

Sisters Cindy, 16, and Ellie, 14, were referred for ACS evaluations. Cindy was an honors student who generally avoided getting into trouble, with the exception of when she was violently attacking her younger sister. Ellie was running away and cutting herself. The girls’ mother, Susan, was highly traumatized after being raised in a Cambodian refugee camp. Cindy and Ellie’s father left and Susan became involved with an abusive boyfriend. When their father petitioned for custody the Department of Children and Families learned that Ellie was raped by her mother’s boyfriend.

ACS connected Ellie with services to ensure that she stays safe enough to remain at home with her family. Cindy will begin a trauma-informed group at our ACS Court Clinic, comprised of young women who need help finding alternatives to violence when dealing with conflict. We’ll also support Dave and his mother, linking them with parenting classes for families dealing with a history of trauma.


CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

--

Management


CEO/Executive Director Ms. Rebecca Pries
CEO Term Start Sept 1976
CEO Email acs@acskids.org
CEO Experience

Rebecca Pries, Executive Director of ACS, joined the program in 1974 and was appointed Executive Director in 1976. She holds a B.A. from Goshen College, a M.Ed. from Tufts University Graduate School of Education and a C.A.G.S. from Boston University Graduate School of Education. Co-author of the ACS publication, KIDS AND THE LAW, Rebecca Pries lectures for a variety of clinical teaching programs as well as for training seminars. She has made a strong professional and personal commitment to the special needs of high-risk, disadvantaged children, teens and their families.

Co-CEO --
Co-CEO Term Start --
Co-CEO Email --
Co-CEO Experience --

Former CEOs and Terms

Name Start End
-- -- --

Senior Staff

Name Title Experience/Biography
Daniel Sanford Clinical Director --

Awards

Award Awarding Organization Year
Citizenship Award Middlesex District Attorney 2009

Affiliations

Affiliation Year
-- --
Member of state association of nonprofits? Yes
Name of state association --

External Assessments and Accreditations

External Assessment or Accreditation Year
-- --

Collaborations

Massachusetts Alliance of Juvenile Court Clinics (MAJCC)
In 2005, ACS brought together the agencies that run the Juvenile Court Clinics statewide, and united them into an advocacy group called the Massachusetts Alliance of Juvenile Court Clinics (MAJCC). MAJCC makes a convincing and compelling case for the needs of court-involved youth and educates hundreds of legislators and stakeholders. ACS continues to administer and lead this group's advocacy, outreach, and communications. The MAJCC website, built and maintained by ACS, is www.kidsandthelaw.org/majcc.php.
 
Cultivating Youth Voices (CYV)
ACS, along with 4 other youth-serving non-profit organizations, formed a Learning Network called Cultivating Youth Voices (CYV) in 2008. ACS serves as the lead agency for this project, which aims to empower youth to speak out about their experiences in the juvenile justice system. With this group, ACS held the first-ever Kids and Judges Day in Massachusetts.
 
 

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

--

Foundation Comments

--

Staff Information

Number of Full Time Staff 10
Number of Part Time Staff 6
Number of Volunteers 6
Number of Contract Staff 0
Staff Retention Rate % --

Staff Demographics

Ethnicity African American/Black: 2
Asian American/Pacific Islander: 1
Caucasian: 13
Hispanic/Latino: 0
Native American/American Indian: 0
Other: 0
Other (if specified): --
Gender Female: 13
Male: 3
Not Specified 0

Plans & Policies

Organization has Fundraising Plan? Yes
Organization has Strategic Plan? Yes
Years Strategic Plan Considers 5
Management Succession Plan Under Development
Business Continuity of Operations Plan --
Organization Policies And Procedures Yes
Nondiscrimination Policy Under Development
Whistle Blower Policy Yes
Document Destruction Policy Yes
Directors and Officers Insurance Policy --
State Charitable Solicitations Permit Yes
State Registration Yes

Risk Management Provisions

--

Reporting and Evaluations

Management Reports to Board? Yes
CEO Formal Evaluation and Frequency Yes Tri-Annually
Senior Management Formal Evaluation and Frequency No N/A
Non Management Formal Evaluation and Frequency Yes Semi-Annually

Governance


Board Chair Ms. Frances H. Miller
Board Chair Company Affiliation Boston University
Board Chair Term July 2012 -
Board Co-Chair William H. Paine
Board Co-Chair Company Affiliation Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr
Board Co-Chair Term -

Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
James A. Champy Massachusetts Institute of Technology Voting
Roxann C. Cooke Eastern Bank Voting
Nancy L. Donahue No Affiliation Voting
Silvia M. Gosnell Cambridge Health Alliance/Harvard Medical School Voting
Terrie Graham Raytheon Global Headquarters Voting
Daniel H. Jacobs psychiatrist Voting
Jacquie L. Kay WPI, Inc. Voting
Frances H. Miller Boston University Voting
William H. Paine Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr Voting
Lia G. Poorvu No Affiliation Voting
Laura M. Prager Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School Voting
Rebecca E. Pries Adolescent Consultation Services NonVoting
Mary M. Shahian Daintree Advisors Voting
Jane R. Siegel Retired Voting
Barbara Stedman No Affiliation Voting

Constituent Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Youth Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Advisory Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Board Demographics

Ethnicity African American/Black: 2
Asian American/Pacific Islander: 1
Caucasian: 12
Hispanic/Latino: 1
Native American/American Indian: 0
Other: 0
Other (if specified): --
Gender Female: 12
Male: 4
Not Specified 0

Board Information

Board Term Lengths --
Board Term Limits --
Board Meeting Attendance % --
Written Board Selection Criteria No
Written Conflict Of Interest Policy Yes
Percentage of Monetary Contributions 100%
Percentage of In-Kind Contributions --
Constituency Includes Client Representation Yes

Standing Committees

    --

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

--

Foundation Comments

--

Financials


Revenue vs. Expense ($000s)

Expense Breakdown 2014 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2013 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2012 (%)

Fiscal Year July 01, 2012 to June 30, 2013
Projected Income $1,397,000.00
Projected Expense $1,397,000.00
Form 990s

2014 Form 990

2013 Form 990

2012 Form 990

2011 Form 990

2010 Form 990

2009 Form 990

Audit Documents

2014 Audit

2013 Audit

2012 Audit

2011 Audit

2010 Audit

2009 Audit

IRS Letter of Exemption

IRS Letter of Determination

Prior Three Years Total Revenue and Expense Totals

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Total Revenue $1,608,526 $1,521,589 $1,415,731
Total Expenses $1,426,740 $1,459,533 $1,327,693

Prior Three Years Revenue Sources

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Foundation and
Corporation Contributions
$327,588 $277,191 $309,783
Government Contributions $881,554 $843,427 $795,556
    Federal -- -- --
    State $881,554 $843,427 $795,556
    Local -- -- --
    Unspecified -- -- --
Individual Contributions $118,306 $183,026 $139,857
Indirect Public Support -- -- --
Earned Revenue -- -- --
Investment Income, Net of Losses $170,350 $108,581 $11,059
Membership Dues -- -- --
Special Events -- -- --
Revenue In-Kind $94,000 $95,480 $94,500
Other $16,728 $13,884 $64,976

Prior Three Years Expense Allocations

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Program Expense $1,163,904 $1,206,334 $1,070,019
Administration Expense $173,648 $181,139 $177,506
Fundraising Expense $89,188 $72,060 $80,168
Payments to Affiliates -- -- --
Total Revenue/Total Expenses 1.13 1.04 1.07
Program Expense/Total Expenses 82% 83% 81%
Fundraising Expense/Contributed Revenue 7% 6% 6%

Prior Three Years Assets and Liabilities

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Total Assets $1,950,004 $1,770,345 $1,705,903
Current Assets $762,679 $726,241 $655,372
Long-Term Liabilities $0 $0 $0
Current Liabilities $30,454 $32,581 $30,195
Total Net Assets $1,919,550 $1,737,764 $1,675,708

Prior Three Years Top Three Funding Sources

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
1st (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --
2nd (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --
3rd (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --

Financial Planning

Endowment Value --
Spending Policy N/A
Percentage(If selected) --
Credit Line No
Reserve Fund Yes
How many months does reserve cover? 6.00

Capital Campaign

Are you currently in a Capital Campaign? No
Capital Campaign Purpose --
Campaign Goal --
Capital Campaign Dates -
Capital Campaign Raised-to-Date Amount --
Capital Campaign Anticipated in Next 5 Years? --

Short Term Solvency

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Current Ratio: Current Assets/Current Liabilities 25.04 22.29 21.70

Long Term Solvency

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Long-term Liabilities/Total Assets 0% 0% 0%

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

--

Foundation Comments

Financial summary data in the charts and graphs above is per the organization's audited financials.  

Documents


Other Documents

No Other Documents currently available.

Impact

The Impact tab is a section on the Giving Common added in October 2013; as such the majority of nonprofits have not yet had the chance to complete this voluntary section. The purpose of the Impact section is to ask five deceptively simple questions that require reflection and promote communication about what really matters – results. The goal is to encourage strategic thinking about how a nonprofit will achieve its goals. The following Impact questions are being completed by nonprofits slowly, thoughtfully and at the right time for their respective organizations to ensure the most accurate information possible.


1. What is your organization aiming to accomplish?

--

2. What are your strategies for making this happen?

--

3. What are your organization’s capabilities for doing this?

--

4. How will your organization know if you are making progress?

--

5. What have and haven’t you accomplished so far?

--