Centenial Celebration

Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.

Date: April 29, 2024 Mon

Time: 10:28 pm

Results for child welfare system

3 results found

Author: Ryan, Joseph P.

Title: Exploring the Characteristics and Outcomes of 241.1 Youth Crossing Over from Dependency to Delinquency in Los Angeles County

Summary: The term crossover youth generally refers to youth who are victims of abuse or neglect and who committed an offense that brought them into the delinquency system. These youth are also commonly referred to as dual-jurisdiction youth or dually involved youth. A youth typically becomes a crossover youth in one of three ways. One way is when a youth enters the child welfare system because of sustained allegations of abuse or neglect and then commits an offense that causes him or her to enter the delinquency system while under the care and custody of child protective services. A second way is when a youth with a prior, but not current, contact in child welfare commits an offense and enters the delinquency system. A third possible way is when a youth with no prior child welfare system contact enters the delinquency system and the probation department refers the case to the child welfare system for further investigation of abuse or neglect. For the purposes of this research brief, the term crossover youth refers to youth who are in the care and custody of the child welfare system and are subsequently charged with an offense. In particular, the current study examines the characteristics of crossover youth processed in Los Angeles County’s juvenile court between April 1 and December 31, 2004. The information presented on these youth is consistent with similar studies and should be informative for any jurisdiction considering and evaluating procedures for supervising the cases of crossover youth.

Details: Sacramento: Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Coruts, Center for Families, Children & the Courts, 2008. 13p.

Source: Internet Resource: ResearchUpdate: Accessed october 25, 2011 at: http://courts.ca.gov/documents/AB129-ExploringReseachUpdate.pdf

Year: 2008

Country: United States

URL: http://courts.ca.gov/documents/AB129-ExploringReseachUpdate.pdf

Shelf Number: 123122

Keywords:
Child Abuse and Neglect
Child Welfare System
Crossover Youth
Juvenile Offenders (California)

Author: Herz, Denise

Title: Addressing the Needs of Multi-System Youth: Strengthening the Connection between Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice

Summary: It has been known for quite some time that children involved in the child welfare system are at risk of “crossing over” to the juvenile justice system and, inversely, that many juvenile justice–involved youth later become involved in the child welfare system. These youth are commonly referred to as crossover youth. The accumulation of research on this population has given us greater understanding of their characteristics, of the pathway they took to become crossover youth, and of the practices professionals can employ to improve their outcomes. Despite these advances in our knowledge, jurisdictions around the United States, and arguably around the world, continue to face challenges in adequately meeting the needs of this difficult-to-serve population. As a result, several reform efforts have been developed to guide jurisdictions in their efforts to improve the way they serve crossover youth. The purpose of this paper is to provide communities with a consolidated framework for serving crossover youth that incorporates the most up-to-date research, lessons from ongoing reform efforts, and an innovative collaborative management structure. To accomplish this task, the paper begins with a summary of the research on crossover youth, including their characteristics and system experiences. The paper then explores the systemic factors that contribute to ineffective service delivery for this population, followed by a review of two major crossover youth reform initiatives in the United States—the Systems Integration Initiative (SII) and the Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM). The final section presents the next frontier of this work by providing a comprehensive array of the best practices needed to improve outcomes for this population and describing Results-Based Accountability™ (RBA), an innovative management structure that can be used to align the work of a variety of stakeholders around a common, community-wide effort for crossover youth. This introduction serves to briefly orient the reader to what we know about crossover youth, the challenges in serving this population, the current reform efforts underway, and the Results-Based Accountability™ framework. These topics are elaborated upon further in subsequent sections. The stage is then set for the presentation of a new frontier of this work—a more cohesive and robust framework regarding how systems can undertake reforms to improve the lives of crossover youth.

Details: Washington, DC: Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, Georgetown Public Policy Institute, Georgetown University, 2012. 84p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 9, 2012 at http://cjjr.georgetown.edu/pdfs/msy/AddressingtheNeedsofMultiSystemYouth.pdf

Year: 2012

Country: United States

URL: http://cjjr.georgetown.edu/pdfs/msy/AddressingtheNeedsofMultiSystemYouth.pdf

Shelf Number: 124393

Keywords:
Child Welfare
Child Welfare System
Crossover Youth
Juvenile Justice Systems

Author: Young, Douglas

Title: Traversing Two Systems: An Assessment of Crossover Youth in Maryland

Summary: Awareness about the vulnerabilities of children who are involved in both the juvenile justice and child welfare systems has grown exponentially over the past decade. The emergent challenge with helping crossover youth - those involved at some point in their lives in the dependency and delinquency systems - is not due to a lack of available guidance about what should be done for them. Rather, the challenges for addressing crossover youth include properly identifying them and their needs, and implementing evidence-based practices tailored to those needs. The present study was designed to begin to build a knowledge base to address these challenges in Maryland. Employing a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, the research focused on the five most populous jurisdictions in the state, Baltimore City, and Anne Arundel, Montgomery, Prince George's, and Baltimore Counties. Based on interviews with 26 officials in state and local agencies and survey responses from a representative sample of 164 stakeholders working with crossover youth, our review of state and local practices suggests a picture with preliminary signs of progress against a backdrop of general inattention to this population. Several state-led initiatives are promising in that they incorporate practices encouraged in the crossover youth practice literature, although none focus specifically on this group. Interview and survey results revealed some local efforts involving information sharing, collaborative case reviews, and joint attendance at court hearings on dual-system cases. About 60 percent of survey respondents reported using routines for identifying dual-system youth, providing cross-system notifications on proceedings, and holding family and multi-disciplinary team meetings for these cases. However, there was little use of formal, structured efforts, such as collaborative funding agreements, joint attendance at all hearings, or consolidated case planning or supervision. Survey results showed stakeholders were well aware of crossover youths' risks and needs and the challenges of working with these youth. Organizational expertise on crossover youth, and attention and resources paid to this population were given low ratings. Consistent with prior studies, quantitative analyses comparing samples of crossover youth (N=526) and delinquency-only youth (N=601) showed crossover youth were engaged in the juvenile justice system in deeper and more chronic ways, with their first arrest at an earlier age and having more arrests and referrals. Detention, placement, and commitment outcomes for crossover youth were particularly frequent, outsizing observed differences with delinquency-only youth on charges, filings, and adjudication hearings and suggesting that crossover youth face more harsh responses in the juvenile justice system. Compared with the delinquency-only group, crossover youth had less favorable results on risk, need, and protective measures on school attendance and performance, peer and adult relationships, and attitudes reflecting empathy, remorse, and self-control. The groups' most stark differences were on objective indicators of mental health needs. Analyses of Baltimore City crossover youth (N=200) and a dependency-only sample (N=200) showed the crossover group to have somewhat different and more persistent family problems, more placements, and longer length of placement. These findings, together with the interview and survey results suggest a consensus need for more focused efforts on crossover youth in Maryland. Several practices already in use - the one judge/one family court model, case identification, family and multi-disciplinary meetings, information sharing, collaborative case reviews, joint hearing attendance - should be expanded, routinized, and sustained. Results from the risk and needs analyses underscore the importance of responding to the mental health treatment needs of crossover youth in the state. These Maryland findings reinforce and extend those reported in prior research, providing detailed information on needs and protective factors and risk factors related to maltreatment. More generally, the results should heighten the urgency of increasing attention to this population.

Details: College Park, MD: Institute for Governmental Service and Research, University of Maryland, College Park, 2014. 154p.

Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 9, 2015 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248679.pdf

Year: 2014

Country: United States

URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248679.pdf

Shelf Number: 135539

Keywords:
At-Risk Youth
Child Protection
Child Welfare System
Juvenile Offenders
Juvenile Offenders (U.S.)