Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:55 pm
Time: 11:55 pm
Results for juvenile rehabilitation
13 results foundAuthor: Poortvliet, Matthew van Title: Trial and Error: Children and Young People in Trouble with the Law, A Guide for Charities and Funders Summary: This report explores the issue of youth offending and highlights some of the innovative and promising ways that charities are helping young people to stay out of trouble. The report, aimed at charities and funders, examines strengths and weaknesses within the youth justice sector in the U.K., outlines the role government plays, and highlights areas where investment could create greatest impact. Details: London: New Philanthropy Capital, 2010. 83p. Source: Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 118218 Keywords: CharitiesJuvenile Delinquency PreventionJuvenile OffendersJuvenile Rehabilitation |
Author: Victoria. Parliament. Drugs and cRime Prevention Committee Title: Inquiry into Strategies to Prevent High Volume Offending and Recidivism by Young People: Final Report Summary: The Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee of Parliament is to inquire into and report upon justice and crime strategies in high volume crimes such as theft and property-related offences, which often involve young people; with the Committee to provide recommendations on: (a) causal factors that may influence patterns of high volume crime, with particular emphasis on repeat offences committed by young people; and (b) strategies that may be effective in addressing the underlying causal factors or recidivist patterns of offending. Statement of Principles underlying the Recommendations The following principles are based on the deliberations of the Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee and the evidence it has received. These principles underlie and support the recommendations that follow.1 1. Young people make an important contribution to the well-being of the community. Only a small minority of young people get involved in criminal or antisocial behaviour at the expense of the wider community. 2. Most young people deal successfully and responsibly with the challenges of adolescence and the transition to adult life without experiencing serious or lasting difficulties. Conversely, a small minority of young people due to a variety of factors are at risk of engaging in criminal or antisocial conduct. These factors must be understood and addressed in an effort to tackle the range and complexity of problems faced by the minority at risk. 3. There is no one cause or single factor contributing to juvenile offending. Criminal and antisocial behaviour by young people, as with adults, is a complex phenomenon that is attributable to a range of intersecting and overlapping factors. 4. Strategies developed to address youth offending and its causes should be grounded in a rights based framework that places the needs of the child as paramount. At the same time these strategies should address the need for young people to respect others within the community. 5. Policy and program interventions to address youth offending must be based on best evidence. An essential part of any policy development is the ability to rely and draw upon comprehensive and up-to-date data. 6. Strategies and program interventions are not of themselves enough. It is essential that any project developed to address youth offending and antisocial behaviour be subject to ongoing monitoring and evaluation. 7. Prevention and early intervention programs and approaches that address the needs of all young people are an essential component of any strategy to prevent or reduce youth offending. 8. Incarceration for young people should only be used as a last resort. For most young people alternative strategies such as diversionary programs have proven to be more successful. 9. Engaging young people in education, training, constructive leisure activities and/or meaningful employment empowers young people and assists in preventing youth offending. 10. There is a need for an 'all of community' approach by which the responsibility for preventing youth offending is shared by all levels of government, the private sector, parents, carers and the community at large. As part of such an approach a coordinated and appropriately funded strategy to reduce youth offending is essential. 11. A range of interventions, methods and approaches is necessary to address youth offending - a 'one size fits all' response is insufficient to tackle the complexities of the problem. Targeted approaches will need to be tailored to different groups of young people at risk in addition to more generalist methods that apply equally to all young people in the community. Details: Melbourne: Government Printer, 2009. 375p. Source: Parliamentary Paper; no. 218, Session 2006-2009. Accessed May 8, 2018 at: https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/dcpc/high_volume_crime/DCPC-Report_HighVolumeCrime_2009-07-22.pdf Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/dcpc/high_volume_crime/DCPC-Report_HighVolumeCrime_2009-07-22.pdf Shelf Number: 116652 Keywords: Community InterventionsDelinquency PreventionJuvenile Offenders (Australia)Juvenile RehabilitationRecidivism (Juvenile Offenders)Repeat Offenders (Juveniles, Australia) |
Author: Williams, Sarah Title: The City of Easton Weed and Seed Initiative: Evaluation 2008 Summary: This report is an evaluation and needs assessment of Easton Weed & Seed carried out between September snd November 2008. It includes background on the program and target neighborhood, a description of the Weed & Seed programs, the results of focus groups conducted with target residents and surveys of community residents. It concludes with overall impressions and recommendations. Details: Bethelmen, PA: Lehigh Valley Research Consortium, 2008. 23p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119151 Keywords: Cognitive Behavioral TherapyCorrectional EducationCrime PreventionDelinquency PreventionDrug Abuse and AddictionJuvenile InmatesJuvenile OffendersJuvenile RehabilitationWeed & Seed Program |
Author: MacLeod, Shona Title: An Analysis of Youth Offending Teams' Inspection Reports Summary: This research examined annual performance assessments of services for children and young people undertaken by Ofsted in 57 local authorities from January 2006 to April 2009, together with relevant data relating to the national performance indicators on youth offending issues. The findings cover YOTs' performance with regard to: management and leadership; work in courts; work with children and young people in the community; work with children and young people with custodial sentences; and victims and restorative justice. The research found that there has been an improvement in the quality of management and leadership of YOTs and while some areas of work are very good, others show room for improvement. This report is important reading for all those working in YOTs and for policy makers seeking to understand the performance of YOTs over time. Details: Slough, UK:: National Foundation for Educational Research, 2010.40p. Source: Internet Resource; LGA Research Report Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 119292 Keywords: Juvenile Justice ServicesJuvenile OffendersJuvenile RecidivismJuvenile RehabilitationYouth Offending Teams |
Author: New Mexico Sentencing Commission Title: A Review of Juvenile Justice Programs in New Mexico Summary: The purpose of this literature review is to report on best practices in the area of juvenile justice intervention programs, focused on the four distinct program types that are the subject of this review, namely reception and assessment centers, restorative justice panels, girls circles, and day reporting centers. Details: Albuquerque, NM: New Mexico Sentencing Commission, 2010. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 9, 2010 at: http://nmsc.unm.edu/nmsc_reports/ Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://nmsc.unm.edu/nmsc_reports/ Shelf Number: 119914 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration, JuvenilesIntervention Programs (New Mexico)Juvenile DiversionJuvenile OffendersJuvenile Rehabilitation |
Author: Moll, Jeanette Title: Reforming Juvenile Detention in Texas Summary: Given its costs and ill effects for juveniles and families, juvenile detention should only be ordered when a youth represents a risk to the public safety. Both re-offense rates and the number of youth failing to appear have decreased in jurisdictions reducing their detention populations. Risk assessments, deferred prosecution programs, evening reporting, and specialized dockets all provide avenues for more effective juvenile rehabilitation without relying on detention. Details: Austin, TX: Texas Public Policy Foundation Policy Perspective, 2012. 12p. Source: PP14-2012: Internet Resource: Accessed September 16, 2012 at http://www.texaspolicy.com/center/effective-justice/reports/reforming-juvenile-detention-texas Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.texaspolicy.com/center/effective-justice/reports/reforming-juvenile-detention-texas Shelf Number: 126352 Keywords: Corrections Reform (Texas)Criminal Justice Reform (Texas)Juvenile Detention (Texas)Juvenile OffendersJuvenile Rehabilitation |
Author: Richardson, Thomas Title: Former Juvenile Offenders Re-enrolling Into Mainstream Public Schools Summary: This study examined school re-enrollment procedures employed by two school systems for N=578 former juvenile offenders re-enrolling from secured supervised settings to urban mainstream secondary public schools and alternative schools and programs in New England. Quantitative data regarding student demographics and qualitative data from interviews with 19 support personnel and selected documents were used to evaluate which program elements enhanced or disengaged former offenders from secondary urban schools. The characteristics of former juvenile offenders' lack of school involvement with respect to truancy, school suspension and expulsion, learning, behavior, and emotional disabilities, as well as family, economic, and social disadvantages were examined. Details: Charlotte, NC: Johnson & Wales University, Alan Shawn Feinstein Graduate School, 2012. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: NERA Conference Proceedings 2012. Paper 9 Accessed May 7, 2014,at: http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=nera_2012 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=nera_2012 Shelf Number: 132277 Keywords: EducationJuvenile OffendersJuvenile Rehabilitation |
Author: Wagland, Paul Title: Youths in Custody in NSW: Aspirations and Strategies for the Future Summary: Aim: To investigate the extent to which youths in custody 1) rate specific life goals as important and likely to eventuate; 2) have strategies to achieve their goals; and 3) can anticipate barriers to achieving their goals. Method: A total of 107 detainees drawn from NSW Juvenile Justice centres were interviewed about their life goals. Results: Most youths rated specific life goals, such as having a well-paying job and avoiding trouble with the police, as 'quite important' or 'very important' goals to achieve in the future. When youths were asked how likely it was that these specific goals would be realised, the most common response was 'quite likely' or 'very likely'. The most frequently identified strategies for having a well-paying job included getting the necessary diplomas and starting in a junior position to get experience. The most frequently identified strategies for avoiding trouble with the police were resisting peer pressure and obeying the law. Commonly reported barriers to achieving these goals included associating with antisocial peers, drugs and alcohol usage. Many youths also recognised that getting into trouble with the law would also be a barrier to having a well-paying job. Conclusion: Most youths interviewed in this study placed high importance on specific life goals and were generally optimistic about achieving them. Furthermore, most youths could think of strategies that would help them achieve their goals as well as identify possible barriers to achieving them. These findings have the potential to help service providers and policy makers target their services and policies appropriately. Details: Sydney: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2013. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, no. 173: Accessed July 16, 2014 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l2/cjb173.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l2/cjb173.pdf Shelf Number: 132684 Keywords: Juvenile DetentionJuvenile Offenders (Australia)Juvenile Rehabilitation |
Author: Lucenko, Barbara Title: Effects of Functional Family Parole on Re-Arrest and Employment for Youth in Washington State Summary: The Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration implemented a new model of juvenile parole services in 2003, Functional Family Therapy. This new model of parole, Functional Family Parole (FFP), is intended to make families the unit of intervention-not just the youth-and uses family therapy-based approaches to enhance case management outcomes. The new parole model was implemented with several other evidence-based changes in the JRA residential program, collectively called the Integrated Treatment Model. Recent budget reductions led to the elimination of parole for all JRA offenders except high-risk, auto theft offenders, and sex offenders, creating a "natural experiment" allowing us to test of the impacts of Functional Family Parole upon youth in the period following their release. We found that "FFP Youth" were less likely to be arrested and had fewer total arrests during the 9 months following release than those released during the period without the enhanced parole services. "FFP Youth" were also more likely to be employed and earned more on average during the year following release than "No FFP Youth." Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, 2011. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2014 at: http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ms/rda/research/2/24.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ms/rda/research/2/24.pdf Shelf Number: 133067 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesFamily InterventionsJuvenile Offenders (Washington State)Juvenile ParoleJuvenile RehabilitationTreatment Programs |
Author: Great Britain. HM Inspectorate of Probation Title: Desistance and Young People Summary: Desistance is the process of abstaining from crime amongst those who previously had engaged in a sustained pattern of offending. Desistance theories have had a growing influence on probation policy and practice with adult offenders. By contrast, there is more limited research and evidence about youth desistance and no unified, accepted definition. To add to the evidence base, we have assessed the effectiveness of practice in Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) across the main themes which desistance research has identified as being important in supporting children and young people's routes away from offending. In recent years, YOTs statutory workloads have reduced significantly, as has their funding and often their continuity of staff. Alongside the paucity of research, those changes may well have affected the extent to which some YOTs are able to apply themselves to youth desistance, and do so skillfully. In this inspection we found that a small number of case managers clearly had an excellent grounding and understanding of desistance theory. They were able to reference relevant research and identify some of the key ideas and implications for practice. The majority of staff, however, were not schooled in desistance theory and were unclear about how key concepts and approaches could be applied. In this report we confirm that as with adults, personalised approaches work best - those that take into account gender and ethnicity, for example. In this inspection we found that effective methods for children and young people are age-appropriate, and based on a good understanding of the individual's needs, history and circumstances, for example Looked After status. Details: London: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2016. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 6, 2016 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/05/Desistance_and_young_people.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/05/Desistance_and_young_people.pdf Shelf Number: 139282 Keywords: DesistanceJuvenile OffendersJuvenile RehabilitationRecidivism |
Author: Hayek, Connie Title: Environmental Scan of Developmentally Appropriate Criminal Justice Responses to Justice-Involved Young Adults Summary: This environmental scan sought to identify those programs addressing the developmental needs of young adults involved in the criminal justice system. Included in the scan is legislation with provisions sensitive to the developmental level and maturation of justice-involved young adults. The scan incorporated a variety of methods to locate programs and legislation. The approaches included a review of research and documents prepared by advocacy organizations; extensive internet searches; interviews of various stakeholders; outreach to professional organizations; searches on social media sites; and distribution (via professional listservs) of an invitation from the Assistant Attorney General to submit information on successful programs. All established programs included in the scan identified some level of success, although often this was established anecdotally. Achievement of success generally focused on the reduction of recidivism rates. A common theme in all programs is the inclusion of case management or coordination, combined with intensive services. Individualized services included education or vocational training, mental and/or substance abuse treatment, and assistance with housing and employment. Many programs offer reduced sentencing or probation, expungement of records, or a reduction in charges as an incentive for participation. Programs ranged from those still in the developmental stages to several that have provided services and supports to justice-involved young adults for several years. Among the more innovative approaches is a network of programs in the state of Massachusetts, the most widely known being Roca and UTEC. These programs include repeatedly reaching out to young offenders in efforts to engage them in services rather than requiring voluntary participation at the onset of services. Another innovation is a recently added " pay for success" structure in which the agency providing services is compensated based on achievement of predefined outcomes. UTEC developed several social enterprises (e.g., a mattress recycling service, food services, woodworking) to create employment opportunities for participants. A new program in New York is using mobile technology to track and maintain contact with young adults awaiting trial. A program in Maine operates a separate incarceration facility for young adults with an emphasis on treatment and skill development rather than the typical punitive approach used in adult prisons. Legislative changes in the approach to how young adults are handled within the justice system have centered around three main themes. This includes raising the age of juvenile court jurisdiction, consideration of mitigating circumstances in sentencing, and the expungement of criminal records of young adults. Connecticut has garnered much attention for the governor's proposal to raise the age at which a person can be tried as an adult to 21 years. Several states have proposed legislation that would allow judges to take into account the age at which a crime is committed as a mitigating factor in sentencing, allowing for lesser sentences based on the maturation level of young adults. Several states have considered laws to expunge the criminal records of young adults, reducing the long- term consequences of actions of young adults who may lack the judgment and critical thinking skills of older adults. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 2016. 87p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 2, 2016 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/249902.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/249902.pdf Shelf Number: 139944 Keywords: Juvenile Justice ProgramsJuvenile Justice SystemJuvenile RehabilitationYouth Adults OffendersYouthful Offenders |
Author: McCann, Ellen P. Title: The District's Youth Rehabilitation Act: An Analysis Summary: On December 22, 2016, Mayor Bowser requested that the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC) conduct analysis on the District's Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA). The specific questions to be examined include: how is the YRA applied; what is the recidivism rate of those who received it; and, what programming is available to those sentenced under YRA? In addition to the Mayor's research request, on the same day, Councilmember Allen requested that the CJCC address: how many times YRA was applied to felonies, and later resulted in a set aside; how many later committed another felony, particularly with a weapon or a crime of violence; and how are programs identified for these persons, and the details of their supervision. Responses to Councilmember Allen's requests were submitted February 1, 2017, and informed the analysis conducted herein. The research conducted in response to the Mayor's request examines all eligible offenses, cases, and offenders that were convicted in the DC Superior Court in 2010, 2011, and 2012. This timeframe was selected to offer at least two years after the completion of a term in order to gauge reoffending. Overview of the YRA According to the Youth Rehabilitation Amendment Act of 1985, persons convicted of, and sentenced for, an offense under the age of 221 are eligible for a set aside, or sealing, of conviction at the successful completion of their term, in addition to potentially different sentencing options. Those with a charge of murder, including murder that is part of an act of terrorism, are not eligible. When determining a sentence for a YRA-eligible offender, judges have the option to impose a sentence under the YRA based on the information already available, or, prior to imposing a sentence may order a "youth study" performed in order to aid in a determination about whether a YRA sentence is appropriate. It is intended to determine if the person is likely to be rehabilitated, and to give the offender the opportunity to have the conviction set aside at the conclusion of his term. Authority to formally set aside a conviction belongs to the sentencing judge; in the case of a person who is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Parole Commission, the Commissioner may set aside the conviction sentenced under the YRA. YRA Analysis From 2010-2012, the DC Superior Court handled the disposition of 70,454 cases. Cases eligible for YRA sentencing represented 7% of the disposed cases during this period. How is the YRA applied? There were 5,166 cases that were eligible, and 3,960 persons who were eligible for a YRA sentence during the three-year period studied. In that time, 53% (2,726 of 5,166) of eligible cases were sentenced under YRA, and 60% (2,384 of 3,960) of eligible persons were sentenced under YRA. The offenders sentenced under YRA are convicted of similar offenses to those seen in the superset of all persons eligible for YRA in 2010-2012. Offenses that carried a mandatory minimum sentence were found for just 6.7% of all eligible offenders, and were less likely to be sentenced under YRA, particularly when there were multiple charges that carried a mandatory sentence. Of those eligible persons who had completed their sentence by April 1, 2017, nearly half (976 of 2,135) successfully had their conviction set aside. Younger persons with less of a criminal history (fewer past arrests and convictions and juvenile commitments) were more likely to be sentenced under YRA. Younger offenders with less of a criminal history who were female, as well as those with weapon offenses, were more likely to have their conviction set aside. In this analysis, weapon offenses include only those offenses of possessing a weapon or ammunition illegally. Also of note, persons convicted of felonies were conversely less likely to be set aside. What is the recidivism rate? Based upon the analysis, persons whose convictions were set aside were less likely to be re-arrested and/ or reconvicted than persons who were sentenced under the YRA but whose convictions were not successfully set aside. This held true when controlling for demographics, criminal history factors, and the offense that resulted in the YRA sentence. This highlights the need for more information, as the impact of interventions used during an offender's sentence is not accounted for, and may be instructive to further improve outcomes. When comparing similarly situated persons who were and were not sentenced under the YRA, there was no difference in reoffending from the point they were sentenced. The two groups had similar chances of being re-arrested or reconvicted over the next two years, demonstrating that the sentence itself does not act as a point at which behavior changes, but instead that the sentence merely sets the stage for a person to have the conviction set aside at the end of his or her term. What programming is available? The examination of programming revealed two main points. First, there are no programs targeted to the YRA population. Second, there are programs that a YRA offender might access, such as Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency's (CSOSA) Young Adult Program, Federal Bureau of Prison's (FBOP) standard programming, and the Department of Correction's (DOC) standard programming, but a YRA sentence is not a qualifying criteria for any of the existing programs. Findings and Considerations There is broad consensus that the propensity for youthful offenders to commit crimes desists once they reach their mid-20s. Across the United States, young adult offenders who are able to show an amenability to rehabilitation have been able to receive concessions such as conviction sealing and expungement if they do not reoffend. This is the case both nationwide and locally in the District of Columbia. Neurological development indicates that young people develop reasoning and maturity starting from adolescence, and are well-developed by eighteen years of age. A person can distinguish right from wrong by their mid-teens; however, persons cannot gauge risk, understand consequences fully, or delay gratification until well into their 20s, a phenomenon referred to as the "maturity gap." The age-crime curve supports biological conclusions in this sense, as persons who are criminally active tend to slow down or stop offending by their mid-20s. Young adult offender programs utilized across the United States vary widely, including Young Adult Courts, probation and parole programs, district attorney-led programs, community-based partnerships, hybrid partnerships, and prison-based programs. At the same time, in many jurisdictions there is legislation that directs either courts, government agencies, or both to address young adult offenders in ways distinct from those approaches taken with older adult offenders. Unfortunately, while there is a national consensus on the need to hone practices specific to the young adult offender population, research identifies best practices thus far for only two distinct groups: juveniles and adults. While programs that are known to be effective with other age groups may also be effective with young adult offenders, the evidence base simply has not caught up. After a full review of the findings, as well as the testimony from Councilmember Allen's Roundtable on Sentencing in the District of Columbia: Agency Roles and Responsibilities (February 9, 2017), and the relevant national literature, some opportunities emerged. The findings here show that it is possible to improve the utilization of YRA, be more effective in outcomes for young adult offenders and enhance public safety. This can be done through legislation, as well as through appropriate programming, both of which can help better inform decision-making and help better prepare the offender to successfully attain the set aside of his or her conviction at the end of term. Details: Washington, DC: Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, 2017. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed march 12, 2018 at: http://www.jrsa.org/pubs/sac-digest/vol-27/dc-yra-analysis.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.jrsa.org/pubs/sac-digest/vol-27/dc-yra-analysis.pdf Shelf Number: 149442 Keywords: Juvenile Justice SystemsJuvenile OffendersJuvenile RehabilitationRecidivismTreatment ProgramsYoung Adult Offenders |
Author: Knoth, L. Title: Washington State Adult and Juvenile Recidivism Trends: FY 1995 - FY 2014 Summary: Previous reports published by WSIPP have shown a gradual decline in recidivism for adults released from prison through the 1990s and early 2000s. This report updates our review of recidivism trends for adults released from prison and expands the scope of our report to include youth populations and additional adult populations. This report provides a high-level overview of general changes in Washington State recidivism trends from FY 1995-FY 2014. The report analyzes recidivism for four samples of criminal justice-involved populations: adults convicted of a criminal offense, adults released from incarceration in prison, youth convicted of a criminal offense, and youth released from a commitment in a Juvenile Rehabilitation (JR) facility. Consistent with our prior reports, our analyses found gradual declines in overall recidivism for all four populations from FY 1995-FY 2014. However, examination of recidivism trends by type of recidivism, type of initial offense, and demographic characteristics indicates that the magnitude of the decline in recidivism varied among different sub-populations. Details: Olympia, Washington: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2019. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 4, 2019 at: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1703/Wsipp_Washington-State-Adult-and-Juvenile-Recidivism-Trends-FY-1995-FY-2014_Report.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://www.wsipp.wa.gov/Publications Shelf Number: 156166 Keywords: IncarcerationJuvenile RehabilitationOffender RehabilitationPrisonRecidivism |