View
44
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
DJJDP’s Comprehensive Delinquency Prevention & Intervention Strategy. The Need For a Comprehensive Strategy. Poor matching of prevention programs with risk factors for delinquency Poor targeting of serious, violent and chronic offenders Little use of risk and needs assessments - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Poor matching of prevention programs with risk factors for delinquency
Poor targeting of serious, violent and chronic offenders
Little use of risk and needs assessments Poor matching of offenders with the
level of service Over-use of detention and incarceration
Comprehensive Strategy for Juvenile Delinquency
Problem Behavior > Noncriminal Misbehavior > Delinquency > Serious, Violent, and Chronic Offending
PreventionTarget Population: At-Risk Youth
Preventing youth from becoming
delinquent by focusing prevention
programs on at-risk youth
Graduated SanctionsTarget Population: Delinquent Youth
Improving the juvenile justice
system response to delinquent
offenders through a system of
graduated sanctions and a
continuum of treatment
alternatives
> > > > > >Programs for All Youth
Programs for Youth at Greatest Risk
Immediate Intervention
Intermediate Sanctions
Community Confinement
Training Schools
Aftercare
Prevention and InterventionWindows of Opportunity
Age 3
Family
Source: Howell (2003)
Age 6
School
Age 9
Peer Group
Age 12
IndividualCharacteristics
Age 15
Community
Age 18
ElementarySchoolFailure
ConductProblems
ChildDelinquency
GangMember
Serious andViolent
Delinquency
Prevention Early Intervention Treatment& Sanctions
Risk and Protective Factors
Risk/protective factors in the individual, family, peer group, school, neighborhood
ConductDisorder
EarlyDelinquency
Serious andViolent JuvenileOffending
Prevention Prevention Prevention
Intervention Intervention Intervention
Non-Serious Non-ViolentNon-Chronic
64%
Serious
34%
Chronic
15%
Violent
8%
C,S & V
4%
Source: Snyder (1998) Maricopa Co. Study (N=151,209)
Juvenile Offender Court Careers
Defiance/Disobedience
Stubborn Behavior
Authority Conflict Pathway(Before Age 12)
Authority Avoidance
(truancy, running away, staying out late)
Minor Covert Minor Covert BehaviorBehavior(shoplifting, (shoplifting,
frequent lying)frequent lying)
Covert Covert PathwayPathway
Minor Minor AggressionAggression
(bullying, (bullying, annoying annoying others)others)
Overt Overt PathwayPathway
Physical Fighting
(physical fighting, gang fighting)
Property Damage
(vandalism, firesetting)
Violence
(rape, attack,
strongarm)
Moderate to Serious
Delinquency
(fraud, burglary, serious theft)
Age of Onset
Late
% Boys
Few
Pathways to Boys’ Chronic, Serious, Violent Delinquency
Early Many
Developed by the Jordan Institute for Families
Risk factors, indicators, & data are accessible online: http://www.unc.edu/ncjcp/
Individual Risk FactorsIndividual Risk Factors
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• Constitutional Factors
• Behavior problems in school
• Academic failure
• Early conduct problems
• Gang membership
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• Constitutional Factors
• Behavior problems in school
• Academic failure
• Early conduct problems
• Gang membership
Family Risk FactorsFamily Risk Factors
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• Prenatal factors • Family management problems
• Parent problems
• Family conflict & disruption
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• Prenatal factors • Family management problems
• Parent problems
• Family conflict & disruption
Peer Group Risk FactorsPeer Group Risk Factors
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• Peer rejection
• Peer delinquent behavior
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• Peer rejection
• Peer delinquent behavior
School-level Risk FactorsSchool-level Risk Factors
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• School & classroom size
• Disruptive school environment
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• School & classroom size
• Disruptive school environment
Community Risk FactorsCommunity Risk Factors
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• Impoverished neighborhood
• Community drug & alcohol use • Community crime & violence
• Presence of gangs
• Availability of guns
Birth–6 7–11 12–16
• Impoverished neighborhood
• Community drug & alcohol use • Community crime & violence
• Presence of gangs
• Availability of guns
SampleSample
31%
OffensesOffenses
82%RochesterRochester
SampleSample
14%
OffensesOffenses
79%DenverDenver
SampleSample
15%
Offenses(Robberies Only) Offenses(Robberies Only)
85%SeattleSeattle
Source: Thornberry, 1998
Source: Lynskey et al. (2000); NB: Ever or current members of a delinquent gang
12
34
5
12%17%
28%23%
20%
Increasing Sanctions
Decreasing Sanctions
Diversion
Youth Court
Probation
Intensive PS
CB Resid.
Residential Placement
Intensive PS
Probation
Group Counseling
Mentoring
Day/EveReport.
Detention screening instruments Intake screening instruments Research-based risk risk
assessments Objective assessments of youth
and family strengths and needs A placement matrix for
recommending court dispositions Standardized case plans Routine assessment of case plan
progress
DJJDP has a validated risk assessment instrument
DJJDP has a needs/strengths assessment instrument
The JJ Reform Act provided a Disposition Matrix
The Disposition Matrix and risk assessment instrument are functioning well in guiding offender placements
A disposition matrix organizes sanctions and programs by risk level and offense severity.
It places offenders along a continuum of programs and sanctions
Research shows that a reliable risk assessment instrument predicts different recidivism rates at various risk levels.
Low risk offenders are placed in community programs with minimal supervision
Medium risk offenders are typically placed in more structured community programs with intensive probation supervision
High risk offenders may be placed in Youth Development Centers
Offender Disposition Matrix
Risk Level
Offense Low Medium High
Violent Level 2 or 3 Level 3 Level 3
Serious Level 1 or 2 Level 2 Level 2 or 3
Minor Level 1 Level 1 or 2 Level 2
Level 1 Community
Level 2 Intermediate
Level 3 Commitment to Youth Development Center
Dispositional Levels Risk Level by Disposition
Low Medium High Total
%% % %
Level 1 – Community 65% 31% 3% 100%
Level 2 – Intermediate 27% 47% 26% 100%
Level 3 – Commitment 7% 23% 70% 100%
Protective Supervision 47% 49% 4% 100%
Total 49% 38% 14% 100%
Disposition of Court Referrals by Risk Level
DJJDP & JCPCs have responsibility for evaluating JCPC-funded programs
DJJDP has responsibility for identifying “best practices”
• Most juvenile justice programs reduce recidivism--at least slightly.
• The most practical and cost-effective approach is to improve existing programs.
• This can be done by applying research-based knowledge of the features of effective programs.
Four Main Characteristics Of Effective Programs
1. The Program Type (primary intervention)
2. Supplementary Services
3. Amount of Service
4. Characteristics of Clients
Number of Favorable Characteristics
Distribution of Programs
Percentage of Change in Recidivism
0 7% +12%
1 50% -2 %
2 27% -10%
3 15% -20%
4 2% -24%
What is it?
A practical method for evaluating juvenile justice and delinquency prevention programs against best practices
The SPEP provides a scheme (protocol) for assigning points to programs according to how closely their characteristics match those associated with the best outcomes in research.
How was the SPEP developed?
The SPEP contains the main features of effective evaluated programs.
Point allocations are based on research results that are “standardized” across studies, showing the added increment of delinquency reduction each program feature produces, on average.
It is not a whole blueprint for a program. It measures only the delinquency reduction potential a program type has, on average, based on prior research.
It will not provide a treatment plan for individual clients, only a framework within which treatment can be planned.
Primary Program Types for SPEPs(A separate SPEP for each)
Individual counselingGroup counselingFamily counselingParent training/counselingRestitutionInterpersonal skillsTutoring/remedial educationMentoringEmployment relatedDrug/alcohol therapy/counseling
Other Services that may Supplement Primary Programs
Behavior management
Life skills
Intensive supervision
Cognitive behavioral
Prevention Programs: Service Categories
Effective, and above averageParent training/counselingInterpersonal skills trainingTutoring
Effective, and about averageGroup counselingDrug/alcohol therapy/counselingEmployment-related
Effective, but below averageIndividual counselingMentoringFamily counseling
Court Supervised Delinquency Programs: Service Categories
Effective, and above averageFamily counselingTutoringMentoring
Effective, and about averageParent training/counselingInterpersonal skills trainingDrug/alcohol therapy/counselingEffective, but below averageIndividual counselingGroup counselingEmployment-relatedRestitution
Three Sets of SPEPs for the NC Juvenile Justice Continuum
Delinquency Prevention
Court Delinquency Supervision
Commitment Programming &
Aftercare
Expected Recidivism with Features of Effective Prevention Programs
Comparable Juvs not in Evaluated Program 30%
Average Prevention Program in Database 27%
Effective, Above Average Program (EAP) 25%
EAP+Best Supplemental Service (BSS) 20%
EAP+BSS+Optimal Service Amount (OSA) 17%
EAP+BSS+OSA+Appropriate Clients 13%
Comparable Juveniles not in a Program 40%
Average Supervision Program in Database 34%
Effective, Above Average Program (EAP) 32%
EAP+Best Supplemental Service (BSS) 28%
EAP+BSS+Optimal Service Amount (OSA) 24%
EAP+BSS+OSA+Appropriate Clients 21%
PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT & CONTINUUM BUILDING PROCESS
D ELIN Q U EN C Y PR EVEN T IO N
S k il l E nhancem ent C om m unity D ay Progs . C ounse l ing Progs . Intens ive S upervis ion C onfinem ent C om m itm ent Progs .
C O U R T D ELIN Q U EN C Y SU PER VIS IO N C O MMIT MEN T PR O G R AMING & AFT ER C AR E
AcademicAchievement
Drug Health Education
Group Counseling
BehavioralManagement
IndividualCounseling
InterpersonalSkills
CognitiveBehavior
Recommended