Heavy Burdens: The Weight of Juvenile Fees and Fines in the Keystone State
Mozaffar, Esq. & Aqilah David
Nadia
Meet the Authors
Nadia Mozaffar : Nadia Mozaffar is a Senior Attorney at Juvenile Law Center and a coordinator of the national Debt Free Justice campaign, a national campaign to eliminate fees and fines in the juvenile legal system. Her work focuses on policy advocacy around juvenile fees and fines, and she has significant expertise in leading advocacy campaigns, formulating legislative strategy, drafting legislation, organizing coalitions, and testifying at briefings and hearings. Nadia has co-authored several reports at Juvenile Law Center including Credit Overdue: How States Can Mitigate Academic Credit Transfer Problems for Youth in the Juvenile Justice System, Reimagining Restitution: New Approaches to Support Youth and Communities, and The Price of Justice: The High Cost of “Free” Counsel for Youth in the Juvenile Justice System. Nadia also has significant litigation experience and has participated in lawsuits to protect the rights of youth in the justice system.
Aqilah David: Aqilah David is a Youth Advocate with Juvenile Law Center and a 2025 Stoneleigh Youth Advocacy Fellow. Aqilah first joined the Youth Advocacy Program’s Juveniles for Justice group (now called Advocates for Youth Justice) in 2018 following her own experience of incarceration. Aqilah observed how young people often take on the burden of being in the juvenile legal and family surveillance systems and navigate them without proper support. She recognized that she could use her expertise and voice to change these systems and bring awareness to the hardships young people face within them. Aqilah has worked with Juvenile Law Center to advocate for Pennsylvania’s credit transfer bill, establish Philadelphia’s youth ombudsperson office, and end fines and fees for young people and their families.
Acknowledgements
The authors give special thanks to Sanjana Bijlani, Jessica Feierman, Alisa Hoban, Jay Kimberley, Cathy Moffa, Katy Otto, and Malik Pickett for their insights and assistance, which have been instrumental in shaping this publication. Work on this project was made possible with support from the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies and Ballmer Group. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies and Ballmer Group.
I. Introduction
My name is Aqilah David, and I am from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I was incarcerated at the age of 15 for a misdemeanor and I was ordered to pay the courts money that I could not afford. It was very hard being arrested and being in a youth jail and prison. It made me feel regretful and ashamed, and it was so scary. My incarceration marked the worst time of my life! In addition to my imprisonment, I learned that I would have to pay money for the mistakes that I made.
I first discovered my court costs during a very brief meeting with my child advocate lawyer. He told me about my court and financial obligations and emphasized the requirement to pay specific fees. Initially, I did not fully understand what that meant. I was very confused about why I had to pay so much money and scared for my freedom because I knew in the back of my mind that my family and I could not afford those costs comfortably.
- Aqilah David, 2025 Stoneleigh Youth Advocacy Fellow, Juvenile Law Center
Aqilah is not alone
with her experiences with juvenile system fees and fines in Pennsylvania. Delvin Reddick of Allegheny County got in trouble for stealing when he was only a child and also faced juvenile fees and fines that he could not afford; eventually, he had to delay college to pay his growing court debt.1 Thousands of other young people across the Commonwealth have faced similar challenges.
From 2018 - mid 2024, Pennsylvania juvenile courts assessed children and their families over 12 million dollars in fees and almost 2 million dollars in fines.2 Pennsylvania charges youth fines, fees, and court costs in most cases; about two-thirds of juvenile court cases closed in 2024 included financial obligations.3 In 2023, Pennsylvania courts assessed children an average of $311 in fees and fines per case.4
Fees and fines vary widely across the state depending on the juvenile court.5 Some counties require youth pay significantly higher costs than others, 6 creating a system of “justice by geography,” wherein youth and family experiences with fees and fines differ based on location.
For families already struggling through the complexities and trauma of the juvenile justice system, additional juvenile system costs create significant emotional and financial distress.7 Pennsylvania youth report that juvenile system fees and fines lead to longer probation periods, family debt, and missing school or work due to court visits.8 Juvenile fees and fines also increase youth recidivism,9 destabilizing communities and making them less safe.
While fees and fines have a significant negative impact for youth and families, they create minimal, if any, financial gain for Pennsylvania counties. It takes youth time to pay off their financial obligations,10 and the amounts counties collect are so small they make up a miniscule portion of their budgets.11 Collection costs may further reduce any net revenue from fees and fines and
unpaid fees and fines lead to cases remaining open longer.12 Indeed, the costs counties spend to administer these fees may outweigh the amount collected.13
Given the harms of fees and fines on youth and families, and the costs to counties themselves, 24 states have passed legislation eliminating some or all juvenile system fees and fines.14
Fees and fines undermine the development of youth competency, community safety, and accountability required by Pennsylvania’s system of balanced and restorative justice. 15 Pennsylvania should join the growing movement against juvenile fees and fines to protect youth in the Commonwealth, providing them with needed support rather than taking away their resources.
II. FEES AND FINES LAW AND POLICY: COUNTY PRACTICES VARY WIDELY
Pennsylvania laws give juvenile courts significant discretion in assessing fees and fines that, in turn, leads to widely different outcomes for youth depending on which county and court they appear in. When a court finds a child delinquent, it may order that the child pay “reasonable amounts of money as fines, costs, fees or restitution” considering the nature of the acts committed and the earning capacity of the child.16 Probation orders may include “appropriate” fines.17 Even the terms and conditions of informal adjustments, through which youth avoid formal court proceedings, may include requirements that the youth pay costs, fees or restitution, including supervision fees.18
As a result, courts, counties, and other localities have developed varying policies around youth legal financial obligations. Some counties may charge for participation in certain diversion programs, probation, or for electronic monitoring, while others waive these costs. For example, in Montgomery County, families must pay $140 in court costs during their initial intake with the probation department.19 A 2021 bulletin from Lehigh County sets forth over 200 dollars of county fees per case including clerk’s fees, postage fees, and fees for the sheriff’s attendance in court.20 Bedford County charges a $57 clerk fee21 and Adams County has a $50 supervision fee per case.22 Section III, which analyzes the data on fees and fines assessed at the county level, demonstrates how these differing policies lead to disparate experiences for youth.
In addition to fees assessed at the judge’s or county discretion, Pennsylvania statutes include several mandatory fees including a $25 crime victim compensation fee23 and a $42.25 judicial computer system filing fee.24 Certain offenses also include mandatory fees or fines such as a $500 fine for the manufacture or sale of a false identification card,25 a $100 fine for driving under the influence,26 and a $25 fee to maintain the Pennsylvania Amber Alert System for youth adjudicated delinquent of designated offenses.27
Pennsylvania also holds parents financially liable when their children get in trouble with the law. Courts may order parents pay for costs related to informal adjustments, summons, warrants, notices, subpoenas, travel expenses of witnesses, or transportation of children.28 Parents may even have to pay for the “cost of care and support” of children placed outside the home with a public agency29 — meaning that parents must pay for their child’s incarceration. For example, in Westmoreland County, parents attend a hearing with a Conference Officer who assesses their earnings to determine the amount of child support they must pay for their child in placement.30 The court automatically deducts the payment from their wages each month.31 In contrast, Philadelphia ended the practice of collecting this fee in 2017.32
III. FEES AND FINES DATA: LOW COLLECTION, LIMITED REVENUE
This report analyzes three sources of data on juvenile system costs, fees, and fines. First, the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (“AOPC”) provided Juvenile Law Center with fiscal information from each Pennsylvania county on the total amounts of costs, fees, and fines assessed, adjusted,33 and received by counties in each year from 2018 to August 2024. Drexel University JD/ PHD students analyzed the AOPC data. Their full report is available at Appendix I. Second, the Pew Charitable Trusts (“Pew”) presented their findings on fees and fines, including responses from judicial and probation officer surveys, during the September 20, 2020, meeting of the Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice Task Force.34 Finally, the Juvenile Court Judge’s Commission (“JCJC”) reports on fees and fines paid by youth whose cases have been closed.35
Analysis of these data sets leads to three important conclusions on how fees, fines, and other juvenile legal obligations operate in Pennsylvania. First, the data shows stark differences in fees and fines assessment practices by county, with some counties assessing significantly more fees and fines than others. Second, youth do not quickly pay off their fees and fines. Finally, fees and fines make up a very small percentage of total county budgets; any revenue collected may be offset or even outweighed by the cost of collections.
A. Justice
by Geography—Significant Differences in Youth
Experience by County
Pennsylvania youth face dramatically different financial consequences depending on their jurisdiction. Fiscal data from AOPC and Pew shows wide variations in the total amounts of fees and fines assessed by Pennsylvania counties. For example, in 2018 Forest County assessed, on average, $53 per youth, the lowest average rate, while Bedford County, on average assessed $673 per youth, the highest average rate.36 More recent data shows similar discrepancies. In 2023, three counties assessed more than $300 per case, on average, in fees: Pike ($367), Bedford ($337) and Mifflin ($302).37 Ten counties38 assessed an average of less than $50 per case.39
The data shows similar variability in the assessment of fines, although overall counties assessed less in fines than in fees. In 2018, Delaware County assessed, on average, $294 in fines per case, the highest of any other county, while seventeen counties did not impose any fines.40 2023 AOPC data shows that Potter County had the highest average fine per case at $94, while 7 counties did not impose any fines.41
B. Unpaid Burdens—Low Payment Rates
By August 2024, Pennsylvania counties had only collected an average of 58% of fees assessed in 202342 meaning that a significant portion of youth had been unable to pay their fees even months after assessment. Twenty-two counties had fee collection rates below 50%, with Lehigh County having the lowest fee collection rate of 14%.43 Thirteen counties did not collect any of the fines they assessed.44 A comparison of average legal financial obligations similarly shows that large portions of fees and fines remain unpaid—in 2023 the average amount assessed was $311, while the average paid was only $166.45
Many courts do not close a child’s case until youth have met their fee and fine obligations.46 Thus, while most youth have paid off fees at case closing,47 it may take several years for cases to close with youth remaining under the financial burden of their unpaid fees and fines throughout that time. In fact, the costs themselves may extend the probation period; only one in five judges responding to a Pew survey said juvenile cases could be closed with unpaid fees and fines, while 25% stated that court jurisdiction does not end until youth pay fines, fees, or costs.48 As further discussed below, this leads counties to incur additional costs and youth to suffer additional harm.
C. An Ineffective Revenue Source
One of the most startling revelations from our analysis is that fees and fines provide barely any revenue to Pennsylvania counties. For example, in 2022, fees constituted less than 1% of the county budget in every single county.49 In 17 counties including Allegheny, Berks, Bucks, Butler, Cameron, Centre, Cumberland, Dauphin, Delaware, Forest, Lehigh, Northhampton, Perry, Potter, Susquehanna, Venango, and Washington—legal financial obligations made up less than .01% of each county’s budget.50
Collection costs further negate any fiscal benefit from fees and fines. In Pennsylvania, courts and probation offices play a role in collecting fees and fines. Neither AOPC nor the counties could provide Juvenile Law Center with data associated with collection costs, but analysis of such costs around the country has shown that jurisdictions often spend far more collecting costs than they receive because of the staff time needed for collections and payment. For example, advocates in Oregon found that in 2019, the state spent $866,000 to collect $864,000.51 The Montana Department of Corrections spent $300,831 to collect $238,721 in incarceration fees from families with youth in custody between 2018 and 2021.52 Moreover, county expenditures to keep cases open longer simply because of outstanding fees and fines will lead to heightened court costs as well as increased probation costs.53
IV. THE IMPACT: UNDERMINING PENNSYLVANIA’S JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
During my time as a Stoneleigh Youth Advocacy Fellow at Juvenile Law Center, I spoke with young people who expressed their deep concerns about the burdens of fees and fines. Through these discussions I learned that requiring young people to pay fees and fines has a chain reaction. Young people and their families often must choose between paying for rent, food, or toiletries or paying for a huge amount of court fees.
Young people cannot contribute financially to their communities if they are stuck having to pay expensive court fees. This financial strain puts the community in harm’s way; the young person might reoffend because they do not have the financial means. Some young people cannot get their court charges dismissed or have their GPS parole completed until they complete their assigned court fees.
- Aqilah David, 2025 Stoneleigh Youth Advocacy Fellow, Juvenile Law Center
Numbers tell only a partial story of the impacts fees and fines have on the lives of young people involved in the juvenile system. The data alone cannot adequately demonstrate the roadblocks these financial obligations create for a young person’s future, emotional toll they cause, or the sacrifices they require struggling families to make.
The purpose of the Pennsylvania juvenile justice system is to provide “balanced attention” to community protection, youth accountability, and supports that “enable children to become responsible and productive members of the community.” 54 National research, youth and family stories, and accounts from public defenders and other advocates show that juvenile system fees and fines undermine each of these objectives.
A. Fees and Fines Do Not Support Children Becoming
Responsible and Productive Members of Society
It is common sense that children do not have the money to pay juvenile system fees and fines. Pennsylvania law restricts the number of hours that children, especially those under 16, can work.55 Youth currently face a tough job market, in which competition from college graduates, automation, and economic uncertainty create stiff competition.56 Those who do find employment
frequently struggle to maintain grades and school attendance while working, which can lead them to drop out.57 When youth cannot pay juvenile system fees and fines, the impact is devastating; they can be pulled deeper into the justice system, face burdensome civil judgments, accrue debt, and experience heightened family tensions.
The lack of financial resources can pull youth deeper into the justice system from the outset of the case to its termination. First, if a child cannot afford the costs associated with an informal adjustment or participation in a diversion program, the state may file a formal petition against them in juvenile court.58 Further, as discussed in Section II, judges and probation officers often require that youth remain on probation until they pay all of their fees and fines.59 Youth on probation must generally follow a set of strict conditions including attending school, submitting to drug and alcohol tests, and completing community service hours.60 Failure to meet these conditions means courts can charge youth with technical violations, revoke their probation, or even confine them.61 The longer a young person remains on probation, the more scrutiny they receive from the courts and the higher risk that they will face further consequences. Pennsylvania public defenders have even reported that youth have been put in placement or stayed longer in placement due to unpaid fees and fines.62
The lack of resources can also be economically destabilizing. Courts can convert unpaid legal financial obligations to civil judgements, leading to long-term financial struggles that last well into adulthood.63 Having a civil judgment can put youth at risk of eviction, wage garnishment, a lien on property, and serious credit problems that may interfere with their ability to get loans for education or housing.64
When youth do not have the resources to pay their fees and fines, the burden often falls to their parents or guardians, creating economic instability and family tensions. Research shows that youth fees and fines lead to increased conflicts between parents and children and can cause tension in sibling relationships.65 Families also face significant stress, frustration, and economic strain,66 and parents have even reported having to choose between paying fees and fines or paying for necessities such as groceries.67 Evidence shows that fees and fines increase the “‘financial and social instability of members of the debtor’s family’ in addition to the instability of the individual.”68
Financial consequences are particularly debilitating for the many youth in the juvenile justice system from families already facing poverty. A 2023 economic analysis of Philadelphia’s juvenile justice system found that communities with the highest rates of childhood poverty were the same communities where youth were most impacted by the juvenile justice system.69 Saddling youth and families with legal financial obligations worsens the economic divide.
Juvenile system fees and fines also exacerbate racial inequities. Serious racial disparities pervade the Pennsylvania juvenile justice system. Black youth are only 14 percent of the statewide youth population but account for 37 percent of the written allegations coming into the system, almost a third of youth held in detention prior to adjudication, and 63 percent of youth detention.70 Because the justice system disproportionately punishes Black youth, their families must pay more money to the system than those of similarly situated white youth.71 Considering the wealth gap between Black and white families in Pennsylvania,72 Black families more acutely feel the consequences of financial sanctions.
To become “responsible and productive citizens,” youth need the support of their families, not hefty bills that strain their financial resources, add stress and anxiety, and push them further into the justice system.
B. Fees and Fines Do Not Hold Youth Accountable
Pennsylvania’s juvenile justice system purports to hold youth accountable by providing opportunities for them to repair the harm caused by their behavior.73 Fees and fines are a poor mechanism for repairing harm.74 As described in Section I, counties levy juvenile justice fees to pay for administrative items like postage stamps and computer fees or require youth to pay for elements of their own punishment such as electronic monitoring or placement fees. These justice system fees function as a funding mechanism for counties (albeit ineffective) and courts and have limited, if any, connection to the youth, the offense, or the harm caused.
Youth also cannot acknowledge and repair harm through fines that they cannot afford. Under the current system, youth who come from wealthy families can easily pay off their fines or have their parents do so without expending any effort or repairing any harm that they caused. Poor youth who cannot afford fines themselves languish in debt and the juvenile justice system, or they pass the financial burden on to their families. None of these options adequately promote a sense of responsibility or accountability.
C. Fees and Fines Do Not Lead to Community Safety
A growing body of research has found that monetary sanctions increase youth recidivism and therefore undermine community safety. 75 A 2017 criminology study of youth in Allegheny County found that financial penalties increased the likelihood of recidivism in youth.76 A follow-up study in 2023 of more than 1,000 cases in Florida found that youth who owed fines and fees had higher recidivism rates than those who did not, even when controlling for age, race, gender, and type of offense—and the more they owed, the larger the increase.77 More than 13.3% of youth surveyed in that study reported they would resort to criminal activity to pay fees or fines.78 Disciplinary measures that result in youth returning to criminal activity makes Pennsylvania communities less safe.
V. THE SOLUTION: ELIMINATING FEES AND FINES
By eliminating financial penalties from the youth justice system, we can create an environment where young people are far less likely to reoffend. This approach empowers young people to move forward in their lives and develop the necessary skills to thrive in their communities. Imposing fees and fines on youth to teach them lessons about their decisions is not an appropriate form of accountability for young people still in their developing and growing years/stages.
Instead, we should focus on providing constructive opportunities for learning and growth. Youth deserve the chance to reflect on their experiences, understand their consequences, and learn from them, all while being held accountable for their actions in a meaningful way. This accountability should not be tied to their financial situation but rather focus on personal responsibility and rehabilitation. Prioritizing their development and support rather than punitive financial measures will ultimately lead to more productive and responsible young adults. This positive effect would ripple throughout the community, enhancing the financial well-being of these young individuals and their families. Eliminating fees and fines would then give young people a chance to return to society, not in debt or in total loss. It would help them remove the financial burden of the juvenile legal system, which contributes to increasing poverty in Pennsylvania.
-
Aqilah David, 2025 Stoneleigh Youth Advocacy Fellow, Juvenile Law Center
Pennsylvania can best support youth in the justice system, their families, and the community by prohibiting courts and counties from charging juvenile system fees and fines. The Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice Taskforce recommended the elimination of most juvenile fees and fines in their June 2021 final report.79 In doing so, the state will join a growing movement of states across the country that have passed legislation eliminating justice system fees and fines.
Twenty-four states have passed legislation eliminating some or all fees and fines.
Eliminating fees and fines is a commonsense reform, not a partisan issue. Almost all state legislatures to pass reforms have done so with significant bipartisan support. Some states have passed these bills unanimously.
Pennsylvania should join the growing movement to eliminate fees and fines, bringing our laws in line with the purpose of our Juvenile Act80 to ensure a balanced and restorative justice system.
VI. CONCLUSION
I dream of a future where young people, who may make mistakes typical of their age, can find the support they need. It would be a very hopeful world if Pennsylvania eliminated fees and fines for these youth enabling them to thrive financially and pursue their dreams without the weight of financial burdens holding them back.
- Aqilah David, 2025 Stoneleigh Youth Advocacy Fellow, Juvenile Law Center
Youth and families involved in the justice system need support and resources from their community. Burdening them with fees and fines they cannot pay makes it more difficult for them to take accountability for their actions, make amends, and focus on rehabilitation. Pennsylvania can best support youth, families, and community safety by eliminating these financial burdens.
Endnotes
1. Miranda Jeyaretnam, Fines for Youth Violations Can Linger for Years. A Bill Would End That, Pittsburgh’s Publis Source (Apr. 3, 2024), https://www.publicsource.org/juvenile-justice-pennsylvania-allegheny-county-fines-fees-legislation-bill/.
2. Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Pennsylvania Data from AOPC, (county level fines and fees data from 2018-August 2024 provided to Juvenile Law Center on August 27, 2024, in response to records request) (on file with author).
3. Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges Commission, Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice System, Statewide Outcome Measures (2024) 6, available at https://www.pa.gov/content/dam/copapwp-pagov/en/jcjc/documents/publications/outcome-measures/2024%20outcome%20measures%20report.pdf.
4. Kayla McKeon, Legal Financial Obligations (LFOs) in Pennsylvania’s Juvenile Legal System, 1 (Jun. 10, 2025) available at Appendix A.
5. Id
6. Id.
7. Leslie Paik & Chiara Packard, Impact of Juvenile Justice Fines and Fees on Family Life: Case Study in Dane Country, WI (2019) 10-14, available at https://debtorsprison.jlc.org/documents/jlc-debtors-prison-dane-county.pdf.
8. Juvenile Law Center, Pennsylvania Statutes, Debtor’s Prison for Kids: The High Cost of Fines and Fees in the Juvenile Justice System, https://debtorsprison.jlc.org/#!/state/pennsylvania (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
9. Alex R. Piquero & Wesley G. Jennings, Research Note: Justice System–Imposed Financial Penalties Increase Likelihood of Recidivism in a Sample of Adolescent Offenders, 15 Youth Violence & Juv. Just. 325 (2017)); See also Alex R. Piquero & Wesley G. Jennings, A Statewide Analysis of the Impact of Restitution and Fees on Juvenile Recidivism in Florida Across Race & Ethnicity, 21 Youth Violence & Juv. Just. 279 (2023).
10. McKeon, supra note 4 at 2.
11. Id.
12. Pew Charitable Trusts, Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice Task Force System Assessment, Slide 15 (Meeting 8 Presentation to Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice Task Force, 2020), available at https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/ media/pdfs/20210508/153954-file-10124.pdf.
13. See infra notes 52-53.
14. Our Impact, Debt Free Just., https://debtfreejustice.org/our-impact (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
15. 42 Pa.C.S. § 6301b.
16. 42 Pa.C.S. § 6352(a)(5).
17. 42 Pa.C.S. § 6352(a)(6).
18. 42 Pa.C.S. § 6323.
19. Intake, Montgomery County PA, https://www.montgomerycountypa.gov/3425/Intake (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
20. Lehigh County Juvenile Probation, Costs & Fees in Juvenile Delinquency Cases, December 2, 2021 https:// www.lccpa.org/juvenile/LCCPAJuvenileCostsAndFees.pdf (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
21. Bedford County, Clerk of Courts Fee Schedule, May 24, 2024, https://www.bedfordcountypa.org/document_center/Prothonotary/2024%20Clerk%20of%20Courts%20Fee%20Schedule.pdf (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
22. Administrative Order, In Re: Juvenile Court Fees, No 6 of 2013, (Court of Common Pleas of Adams County, May 29, 2013) available at https://www.adamscountypa.gov/getmedia/5532547d-d228-449f-9f3d-6d3e1b76a01d/Order36of2013(R).pdf.
23. 18 P.S. § 11.1101 (3).
24. 42 P.S. C.S. § 3733.
25. 18 Pa.C.S. § 6310.2(c).
26. 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508.1(b).
27. 35 Pa.C.S. § 7025.4.
28. 62 Pa.C.S. § 704.1(e).
29. Id.
30. Westmoreland County, Parental Obligations of Support for Juveniles in Placement, https://www.westmorelandcountypa.gov/1433/Obligations-of-Support-Juveniles-in-Plac (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
31. Id
32. Eli Hager, Philadelphia Will Stop Billing Parents When Their Children Are Incarcerated, the Marshall Project (Mar. 3, 2017) https://www.themarshallproject.org/2017/03/03/philadelphia-will-stop-billing-parents-when-their-children-are-incarcerated (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
33. Adjustments include any changes to the amount of the fees and fines after the initial assessment by the court. AOPC explained that each county has individual practices on how assessments and adjustments are categorized.
34. Pew Charitable Trust, supra note 12.
35. Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges Commission, supra note 3.
36. Pew Charitable Trust, supra note 12 at Slide 20.
37. Administrative Office of the Courts, supra note 2.
38. The ten counties were Allegheny, Clinton, Columbia, Cumberland, Dauphin, Elk, Erie, Lawrence, Northhampton, and Philadelphia.
39. Administrative Office of the Courts, supra note 2.
40. Pew Charitable Trust, supra note 12 at Slide 21.
41. Administrative Office of the Courts, supra note 2.
42. Id.
43. Id
44. Id.
45. See Mckeon, supra note 4 at 1.
46. Pew Charitable Trust, supra note 12 at Slide 15.
47. Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges Commission, supra note 3 at 6-7; see also Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges Commission, Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice System Financial Obligations (2024) available at https:// www.pa.gov/content/dam/copapwp-pagov/en/jcjc/documents/publications/infographics/2023%20financial%20obligations%20-%20infographic.pdf.
48. Pew Charitable Trust, supra note 12 at Slide 15.
49. Bedford County collected the greatest percentage, with .09%. McKeon supra note 4 at 4.
50. McKeon supra note 4 at 4.
51. Youth Rights & Justice, Research on Juvenile Administrative Fees and Fines, 3 https://olis.oregonlegislature. gov/liz/2021R1/Downloads/PublicTestimonyDocument/16531.
52. Public Records Request Response from Montana Department of Corrections, sent to Policy Advocacy Clinic, University of California, Berkeley Law.
53. For example, in 2018, juvenile probation cost Allegheny County an average cost of $22.81 per day. Allegheny County Department of Human Services, Calculating Unit Costs in Allegheny County: A Resource for Justice System Decision-Making and Policy Analysis, 2021 Update, 5 https://www.alleghenycountyanalytics.us/ wp-content/uploads/2021/09/20-ACDHS-23-CriminalJusticeSystemCosts_v4.pdf.
54. 42 Pa.C.S. § 6301b.
55. Employment of Minor Childs Employment Act, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, https://www.pa.gov/ agencies/dli/resources/compliance-laws-and-regulations/labor-management-relations/child-labor-act (last visited Sept. 30, 2025).
56. Elizabeth Heubeck, Summer Jobs For Teens Are Now Scarce. Some Schools Are Trying To Change That, Education Week (Jul. 3, 2025), https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/summer-jobs-for-teens-are-nowscarce-some-schools-are-trying-to-change-that/2025/07#:~:text=Teens%20face%20competition%20from%20 recent,which%20keeps%20employers%20from%20hiring.
57. Vanessa Patino Lydia et al, Assessing the Impact of Court Costs and Fees on Juveniles and Families 4 (2017), 17
https:// www.seethegirl.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Assessing-Impact-Court-Costs.pdf
58. Pew Charitable Trust, supra note 12 at Slide 11.
59. Id. at 15.
60. Josh Weber, Breaking the Rules: Rethinking Condition Setting and Enforcement in Juvenile Probation: 50-State Findings: Juvenile Probation Condition and Enforcement Policies by the Numbers (2022) 4, available at https://projects.csgjusticecenter.org/breaking-the-rules/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2022/08/Breaking-theRules-50-State-Findings.pdf See also Monroe County Juvenile Probation Office, Rules for Juvenile Probation https://www.monroepacourts.us/getmedia/423b6aad-9162-4de4-9914-4c436e95b0a0/20221101_RulesandRegulationsJuvenileFinal.pdf.
61. Jyoti Nanda, Set Up to Fail: Youth Probation Conditions as a Driver of Incarceration, 26.3 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 677, 685 (2022) available at https://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1953&context=pubs
62. Juvenile Law Center, Pennsylvania Statutes, Debtor’s Prison for Kids: The High Cost of Fines and Fees in the Juvenile Justice System, https://debtorsprison.jlc.org/#!/state/pennsylvania (last visited Sept. 29, 2025).
63. Jessica Feierman et al., Debtors’ Prison for Kids? The High Cost of Fines and Fees in the Juvenile Justice System, Juvenile L. Ctr. 23 (2016), https://debtorsprison.jlc.org/documents/jlc-debtors-prison.pdf.
64. Id
65. Paik supra note 7.
66. Id.
67. Feierman supra note 63 at 12.
68. Eileen Funnell, Debt-Free Delinquency: Clearing the Path for Debt-Imprisoned Juveniles, 52 Seton Hall L. Rev. 1183, 1187 (2022) (citing Beth A. Colgan, The Excessive Fines Clause: Challenging the Modern Debtors’ Prison, 65 UCLA L. Rev. 2, 66 (2018)).
69. Econsult Solutions Inc., Philadelphia’s Shifting Juvenile Justice Paradigm: An Economic Paradigm (2023) 17, available at https://phillyda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Philadelphias-Shifting-Juvenile-Justice-Paradigm_Technical-Report.pdf?utm_source=Main+Media+List&utm_campaign=5a3071b41a-EMAIL_ CAMPAIGN_2020_07_22_01_40_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3be4269e47-5a3071b 1a-81496037&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=44444444-4444-4444-4444-444444444444
70. Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency, Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention Plan (2024) 13, available at https://www.pa.gov/content/dam/copapwp-pagov/en/pccd/documents/juvenile-justice/pays/2023-pays/2023%20juvenile%20justice%20%20delinquency%20prevention%20plan.pdf.
71. For example, an analysis of average probation conditions and fees assessed on Black and white youth in Alameda County showed that family with a Black youth serving average probation conditions is liable for more than twice the juvenile administrative fees ($3,438) as a family with a white youth serving average probation conditions ($1,637). Univ. of Cal. Berkeley Sch. Of L. Pol’y Advoc. Clinic. High Pain, No Gain: How Juvenile Administrative Fees Harm Low-Income Families in Alameda County, California 9 (2016).
72. Cassie Miller, A Closer Look at the Racial and Ethnic Wealth Gap in Pa., Pennsylvania Capital-Star (Feb. 21, 2022), https://penncapital-star.com/labor/a-closer-look-at-the-racial-and-ethnic-wealth-gap-in-pa-the-numbers-racket
73. Pennsylvania’s Juvenile Justice System, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, https://www.pa.gov/agencies/ jcjc/pennsylvania-juvenile-justice-system#accordion-43b5d6ea70-item-b141525810 (last visited Sept. 30, 2025).
74. This report focuses on fees and fines in the juvenile justice system. Restitution is more directly linked to victim compensation and harm repair and requires different reforms not contemplated here.
75. See U. S. Dep’t of Justice. Dear Colleague Letter to Courts Regarding Fees and Fines for Youth and Adults 3 (Apr. 20, 2023) https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1580546/dl. See also Tyler Giles, The Government Revenue, Recidivism, and Financial Health Effects of Criminal Fines and Fees, (Sep. 9, 2023), https://finesandfeesjusticecenter.org/articles/the-government-revenue-recidivism-and-financial-health-effects-of-criminal-fines-and-fees/.
76. Piquero & Jennings (2017) supra note 9.
77. Piquero & Jennings (2023) supra note 9.
78. Id.
79. Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice Task Force, Report and Recommendations 38 (June 2021) https://www. pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20210622/152647-pajuvenilejusticetaskforcereportandrecommendations_final.pdf.
80. 42 Pa.C.S. § 6301b.
Legal Financial Obligations (LFOs) in Pennsylvania’s Juvenile Legal System
Prepared by: Kayla McKeon, JD/PhD
Program in Law and Psychology, Drexel University Report Date: June 10, 2025
Legal financial obligations (LFOs) in Pennsylvania’s juvenile legal system include court costs, fines, fees, and restitution. LFOs place strain on young people and their families, and non-payment can result in consequences like extended probation or incarceration.
This report summarizes data from the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) and information compiled by the Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission (JCJC).
Large proportions of LFOs remain unpaid, even after adjustments.
Average LFO
* LFOs assessed refers to the initial amount of court -determined LFOs, while LFOs adjusted reflects any changes made to that amount after the initial assessment.
*These figures were calculated by dividing the total amounts of restitution and costs, fines, and fees that were assessed, adjusted, and paid in Pennsylvania in 2023 by the product of the total number of juvenile delinquency petitions filed in Pennsylvania in 2023 and the proportion of youth either assessed restitution (0.18) or assessed costs, fines, and fees (0.63) in Pennsylvania in 2023.
• Total amounts of LFOs assessed, adjusted, and paid and total number of delinquency petitions filed in Pennsylvania in 2023 were drawn from the AOPC’s administrative data (See Appendices D-M)
• The proportions of youth assessed restitution or costs, fines, and fees were drawn from the PA Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission’s Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice System Financial Obligations Infographic (August 2024).
Juvenile LFOs account for very small proportions of total county budgets.
The greatest percentage of a 2022 Pennsylvania county budget accounted for by juvenile costs, fines, and fees paid was in Bedford County and these LFOs represented only 0.09% of the county’s budget .
The juvenile costs, fines, and fees paid in 17 Pennsylvania counties ( 25% of counties) represented less than 0.01% of each county’s budget in 2022.
These counties included: Allegheny, Berks, Bucks, Butler, Cameron, Centre, Cumberland, Dauphin, Delaware, Forest, Lehigh, Northampton, Perry, Potter, Susquehanna, Venango, and Washington.
See appendices for:
• The percent of each county’s budget accounted for by costs, fines, and fees paid (Appendix A) and assessed (Appendix B) in 2022.
• Information about costs and fees assessed (Appendix G) and paid (Appendix I) in each county in 2024. Information about fines assessed (Appendix J) and paid (Appendix L) in each county in 2024.
Juvenile LFOs assessed and paid in Pennsylvania varies tremendously across counties.
Juvenile LFOs Assessed From January Through August 2024 by Pennsylvania County
The total LFO amounts assessed within a single county from January through August 2024 ranged from:
• Zero in Cameron to a high of $76,599 in Lehigh for costs and fees.
• Zero in 13 counties (Beaver, Cameron, Clearfield, Clinton, Fulton, Juniata, Lebanon, Montour, Perry, Philadelphia, Sullivan, Warren, and York) to a high of $51,130 in Allegheny for fines.
• Zero in 6 counties (Bedford, Cameron, Centre, Fulton, Perry, and Potter) to a high of $99,444 in Philadelphia for restitution . See appendices for information about:
• Restitution assessed (Appendix D) and paid (Appendix F) in each county county from January through August 2024.
• Costs and fees assessed (Appendix G) and paid (Appendix I) in each county county from January through August 2024.
• Fines assessed (Appendix J) and paid (Appendix L) in each county county from January through August 2024.
Juvenile LFOs Paid From January Through August 2024 by Pennsylvania County
The total costs, fines, and fees amounts paid within a single county from January through August 2024 ranged from zero in Cameron (aligning with no assessed LFOs) to a high of $18,301 in Montgomery.
The percentage paid of the total costs, fines and fees assessed within a single county from January through August 2024 ranged from less than 0.001% in Clinton to a high of 75% in Juniata.
• Clinton County did not assess fines, but did assess $21,875 in costs and fees from January through August 2024 and received only $10.50 in payments (<0.05%).
See appendices for information about:
• Percentage paid of the costs, fines, and fees assessed within each county from January through August 2024 (Appendix C)
• Costs and fees assessed (Appendix G) and paid (Appendix I) in each county from January through August 2024
• Fines assessed (Appendix J) and paid (Appendix L) in each county from January through August 2024
Takeaways
• Regardless of the type financial obligation, a large proportion of juvenile LFOs remain unpaid, even after adjustments to the amounts ordered.
• LFOs account for very small proportions of Pennsylvania counties’ budgets less than 1% of each and every individual county’s budget in 2022.
• There is great financial variability in LFOs assessed and paid across counties both in the raw dollar amounts assessed and paid and in the percentages paid of the LFOs assessed.
• LFOs are not a major component of any Pennsylvania county’s budget, but the amount youth are ordered to pay and the extent to which they pay vary widely across counties.
Table of Contents
Appendix A: Percentage of PA County’s 2022 Budgets Accounted for By Costs, Fines, and Fees Paid……………………………………………….4
Appendix B: Percentage of PA County’s 2022 Budgets Accounted for By Costs, Fines, and Fees Assessed…………………………………………5
Appendix C: Percentages of Assessed Costs, Fines, and Fees Paid in Each County in 2024…………………………………………………………………….6
Appendix D: Amount of Restitution Assessed Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024....................................................…..7
Appendix E: Amount of Restitution After Adjustment Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024………………………………………....9
Appendix F: Amount of Restitution Paid Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024………………………………….……..11
Appendix G: Amount of Costs and Fees Assessed Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024………………………………………..13
Appendix H: Amount of Costs and Fees After Adjustment Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024………………………………………..15
Appendix I: Amount of Costs and Fees Paid Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024……………………………………….17
Appendix J: Amount of Fines Assessed Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024……………………………………….19
Appendix K: Amount of Fines After Adjustment Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024………………………………….……21
Appendix L: Amount of Fines Paid Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024…………………………………….…23
Appendix M: Number of Juvenile Delinquency Petitions Filed Per Pennsylvania County Per Year……………………………………………….…………..25
Note: The available data reported in this appendix cover the timeframe from January 2018 through August 2024 and does not include data from the full 2024 calendar year; therefore, reported values may not match annual data reported in other sections of this report or data reported elsewhere that represent different timeframes.
Appendix A: Percentage of PA County’s 2022 Budgets Accounted for
Costs, Fines, and Fees Paid
The table above contains information about the percentage of each county’s 2022 budget that was accounted for by the costs, fines, and fees paid in that county in 2022.
Appendix B: Percentage of PA County’s 2022 Budgets Accounted for
Costs, Fines, and Fees Assessed
The table above contains information about the percentage of each county’s 2022 budget that was accounted for by the costs, fines, and fees assessed in that county in 2022.
Appendix C: Percentages of Assessed Costs, Fines, and Fees Paid in Each County From January Through August 2024
The table above contains information about the percentage of costs, fines, and fees assessed in each county from January through August 2024 that were paid from January through August 2024.
Appendix
D: Amount of Restitution Assessed Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024
Appendix
D: Amount of Restitution Assessed Per Pennsylvania County Per Year from 2018-2024
Appendix E: Amount of Restitution After Adjustment
Appendix E: Amount of Restitution After Adjustment
Appendix
Amount of Costs and Fees Assessed
Appendix H: Amount of Costs and Fees After Adjustment
Appendix J: Amount of Fines Assessed
Appendix K: Amount of Fines After Adjustment
Appendix K: Amount of Fines After Adjustment
Appendix L: Amount of Fines Paid
Appendix M: Number of Juvenile Delinquency Petitions
Appendix M: Number of Juvenile Delinquency Petitions
1800 John F. Kennedy Blvd. Suite 1900B Philadelphia, PA 19103
215-625-0551 / 215-625-2808 fax
WWW.JLC.ORG
Juvenile Law Center @JuvLaw1975
@juvenilelawcenter.bsky.social