Criminal Justice Programms Graduated Sanctions & Video Reviews Reading reflection (two or three sentences for each) What is meant by “graduated sanctions”

Criminal Justice Programms Graduated Sanctions & Video Reviews Reading reflection (two or three sentences for each)

What is meant by “graduated sanctions”? (reading-4)
In your opinion, who is most to blame for Walter’s conviction, second most responsible? Explain. (JM Chapt. 3)

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Criminal Justice Programms Graduated Sanctions & Video Reviews Reading reflection (two or three sentences for each) What is meant by “graduated sanctions”
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Video reflection (two to three sentences each)

Based on the information in the Video-4, how are girls experiences different than boys with regard to how they get involved in crime, and what happens afterward.

https://amara.org/en/videos/6BG0GArtebyh/info/girl…

https://amara.org/en/videos/vOxAVZOnyPeu/info/girl…

https://amara.org/en/videos/81E0cLS1uH4f/info/girl…

https://amara.org/en/videos/JKTRifLQMbyw/info/girl…

https://amara.org/en/videos/N1KHspEbo792/info/girl…

https://amara.org/en/videos/idjz6yFX5qfA/info/girl… Improving the
Effectiveness of
Juvenile Justice
Programs
A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
Mark W. Lipsey • James C. Howell • Marion R. Kelly
Gabrielle Chapman • Darin Carver
Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
1
2
Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
Improving the
Effectiveness of
Juvenile Justice
Programs
A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
December 2010
Mark W. Lipsey, Peabody Research Institute, Vanderbilt University
James C. Howell, Criminologist, Pinehurst, North Carolina
Marion R. Kelly, Consultant, Richmond, Virginia
Gabrielle Chapman, Peabody Research Institute, Vanderbilt University
Darin Carver, Juvenile Justice Programming Consultant, META L.L.C.
Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
i
ii
Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
Contents
Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
II. The Cyclic History of Criminal Justice Treatment
and Punishment Philosophies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
A. From Rehabilitation to Punishment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
B. Popularity of Deterrence Philosophies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
C. Return to Rehabilitation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
D. Recent Policy Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
III. Prevention and Intervention Programs for Juvenile Delinquency. . . . . . . 11
A. The Key Role of Behavior Change Programs for Juvenile Offenders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
B. The Spectrum of Programs and the Challenge of Taking Effective Programs to Scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
C. Doubts about Whether Many Programs Used in Practice Are Actually Effective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
IV. Evidence-Based Practice: More Than One Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
A. Direct Evaluation of the Effects of the Program as Implemented. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
B. Model Programs with Evidence Certified by a Credible Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
C. Best Practice Guidelines Based on a Meta-analysis of Research Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
V. Meta-analysis of Research on the Effects of Intervention
Programs for Juvenile Offenders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
A. Analysis of the Findings of 548 Evaluation Studies of Delinquency Interventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
B. Program Characteristics Associated with the Greatest Effects on Recidivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
1. Risk Level of the Juveniles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2. Therapeutic versus Control Treatment Philosophies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3. Generic Program Types and Embedded Model Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4. Amount and Quality of Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
C. Effective Juvenile Justice Programs: Implications for Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
iii
VI. The SPEP: Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
A. The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol for Assessing Juvenile Justice Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
B. The Experience of State Juvenile Justice Systems with the SPEP Tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
1. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2. Arizona. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
C. Lessons Learned from the North Carolina and Arizona SPEP Projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
D. The Challenge of Evidence-Based Practice for Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
VII. Integrating Evidence-Based Practice into Juvenile
Justice Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
A. A System Reform Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
1. Prevention Tier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 .
2. Intervention and Graduated Sanctions Tier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
B. The Essential Tools: Risk Assessment, Needs Assessment, Case Management Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
C. Examples of a Comprehensive Continuum of Prevention and Graduated Sanctions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
1. San Diego’s Comprehensive Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2. Orange County’s Comprehensive Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3. Missouri’s Comprehensive Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
VIII. Practical and Policy Considerations in Implementing
Juvenile Justice Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
A. Needed Improvements in Juvenile Justice Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
B. The Challenges of Change and Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
IX. Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
A. To Juvenile Justice System Administrators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
B. To Legislators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
C. To Juvenile Justice State Advisory Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
D. To Judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
E. To Treatment Providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
X. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
iv
Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
Preface
As a society we want our children to be healthy, safe,
happy, fulfilled, and connected to others in a loving,
positive manner—and as parents we do whatever we can
to ensure those outcomes for our children. Those who
work in the social services share the same goals for the
children, youth, and families they serve.
Unfortunately, though individual workers do their best in
this regard, they are too often significantly challenged by
the systems within which they do their work to achieve
the outcomes we want for our children. Appropriate and
effective services may not be available, it may not be
possible to match a youth’s needs to the services that
are available, and there may not be a way to determine
if the services that are available are effective. These
challenges are not the result of a lack of knowledge. We
now have the knowledge to do this work more effectively;
indeed, the research that we have in hand today far
exceeds our knowledge base as little as 5 to 10 years ago.
Research sponsored by the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, the National Institute of Justice,
and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (all within the U.S.
Department of Justice), the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, and a number of foundations has
helped to grow our knowledge. We now have research
on best practices for juvenile justice–involved youth
and the policies that support the practices. We find
this reflected in the increased use of evidence-based
practices and programs, in the growth of the science
of risk and protective factors and criminogenic factors
and characteristics, and in the development and use of
validated risk and needs assessment instruments. We
have learned about the importance of advancing our work
on an ecological platform, serving youth closer to home,
and better connecting youth to family, school, community,
and pro-social peers while utilizing a strength-based
approach. The true challenge is not, therefore, a lack of
knowledge of what works, but rather is in translating the
robust body of knowledge into practice.
This is what the framework presented in this paper
is designed to do. By bringing together the work of
Dr. James “Buddy” Howell and his colleagues on the
Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic
Juvenile Offenders (Comprehensive Strategy) and the
creation by Dr. Mark Lipsey of the Standardized Program
Evaluation Protocol (SPEP), based on his groundbreaking
meta-analyses of juvenile justice research, the framework
presented in this paper is poised to meet one of the
greatest challenges we have in juvenile justice practice
today: how to bring together in a coherent manner the
advances in knowledge noted above.
To demonstrate the need for a new approach, contemplate
this scenario and whether it sounds familiar. A juvenile
justice director is delighted to identify a number of “gold
standard” programs that could be used to benefit his or
her clients, whether found in the Blueprints for Violence
Prevention developed by Dr. Delbert Elliott, or in OJJDP’s
Model Programs Guide, or in the Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration’s National Registry
of Evidence-based Programs and Practices. The new
programs are implemented with as much fidelity as
possible in light of budget constraints and workforce
limitations, while at the same time local programs that
do not have rigorous evidence of success are diminished.
Outcomes may improve for the clients who experience
these gold standard programs, although their replication
may be uneven with mixed levels of effectiveness. And
their reach may be limited due to the expense associated
with their implementation and resistance from providers
who are reluctant to replace their current programs with
new ones. Moreover, the programs are implemented in
silos, disconnected from a systemwide quality assurance
approach and a continuum of effective services to meet the
needs of youth. Despite these challenges, the use of gold
standard programs is viewed by many as a magic bullet,
and in some instances, states are mandated to fund only
these programs—resulting in reductions in funding for
Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
1
local programs that may have measures of effectiveness,
but that do not have rigorous evaluation studies.
The authors of this paper suggest that we can do better
at translating knowledge into practice without wavering
in our commitment to evidence that supports our policies
and practices. I can best bring to life this need to do better
through a story I was once told about a lecturer who was
addressing an audience about how we decide to assume
risk in our lives. He posed three hypothetical questions to
a volunteer in the audience. First, he asked the volunteer
to imagine that there was a steel construction I-beam, 15
feet long, 6 inches high, and 6 inches wide, lying in front
of the podium and offered the volunteer $50 to assume
the risk of walking across it. The volunteer indicated that
she would assume the risk.
The second hypothetical presented a situation in which the
I-beam had been lengthened to 30 feet and was located
across a gorge that dropped 250 feet to a bed of rocks.
Offered $100 to assume the risk of walking across the
I-beam, the volunteer declined.
Presenting the third hypothetical, the lecturer kept the
circumstances the same as in the second scenario, except
for one significant difference. In this situation, the lecturer
had one of the volunteer’s children on one side of the
gorge and was holding the child by the hand, over the
edge of the gorge. The volunteer was on the other side of
the gorge, and unless she crossed the I-beam, the lecturer
would drop her child. The lecturer offered the volunteer
$200 to walk across the I-beam. The volunteer hesitated
for a long moment before responding, “Which one of my
kids have you got?”
I am sure that any amusement you might find in this story
may reflect the fact that you are a parent who has had
“one of those days” with your kids—or that you were one
of those kids! I share this story, however, not merely as
an amusement, but to amplify a point. You are unlikely
to ever meet an individual who says that he or she does
not care about kids. All of us truly want what is best
for children on some level. But the way that concern is
expressed may vary a great deal. The woman in my story
was being asked a very clear question: exactly what steps
are you willing to take to help a child? What kind of priority
2
do children have for you when the going gets tough, when
there are choices to be made? And her answer revealed
what may be an even harder question—which children
are you willing to help?
The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of parents
would do whatever it would take to get across that
I-beam—in fact, virtually every adult would do whatever
it would take to save that child. But as a society, perhaps
through our benign neglect, we don’t do whatever it takes,
and kids to one extent or another are falling into the gorge.
Our challenge is to take those extraordinary efforts that
individual workers are willing to make and embed them
into systems that operate efficiently, effectively, and fairly
in meeting the needs of youth who come in contact with
them—systems that make it possible for workers to grab
our children by the hand and not let them fall.
The framework presented in this paper will help juvenile
justice systems around the country reform their systems
in this way. The overarching frame for the approach is
to construct juvenile justice systems that are aligned
along a continuum of care, from prevention to early
intervention and then to more significant system
involvement as needed. Incorporated into that continuum
are the fundamental elements of valid risk and needs
assessments, the matching of the level of risk and need
to the appropriate service, and then ensuring that the
services provided are effective at improving outcomes
for the children and youth placed in them. By embedding
Lipsey’s SPEP in the Comprehensive Strategy framework,
the approach presented in this paper allows us to
maximize the use of the research we have while not
getting s…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Homework Market Pro
Calculate your paper price
Pages (550 words)
Approximate price: -

Our Unique Features

Custom Papers Means Custom Papers

This is what custom writing means to us: Your essay starts from scratch. Plagiarism is unacceptable. We demand the originality of our academic essay writers and they only deliver authentic and original papers. 100% guaranteed! If your final version is not as expected, we will revise it immediately.

Qualified and Experienced Essay Writers

Our team consists of carefully selected writers with in-depth expertise. Each writer in our team is selected based on their writing skills and experience. Each team member is able to provide plagiarism-free, authentic and high-quality content within a short turnaround time.

Free Unlimited Revisions

If you think we missed something, send your order for a free revision. You have 10 days to submit the order for review after you have received the final document. You can do this yourself after logging into your personal account or by contacting our support.

Prompt Delivery and 100% Assuarance

We understand you. Spending your hard earned money on a writing service is a big deal. It is a big investment and it is difficult to make the decision. That is why we support our claims with guarantees. We want you to be reassured as soon as you place your order. Here are our guarantees: Your deadlines are important to us. When ordering, please note that delivery will take place no later than the expiry date.

100% Originality & Confidentiality

Every paper we write for every order is 100% original. To support this, we would be happy to provide you with a plagiarism analysis report on request.We use several writing tools checks to ensure that all documents you receive are free from plagiarism. Our editors carefully review all quotations in the text. We also promise maximum confidentiality in all of our services.

24/7 Customer Support

We help students, business professionals and job seekers around the world in multiple time zones. We also understand that students often keep crazy schedules. No problem. We are there for you around the clock. If you need help at any time, please contact us. An agent is always available for you.

Try it now!

Calculate the price of your order

Total price:
$0.00

How it works?

Follow these simple steps to get your paper done

Place your order

Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.

Proceed with the payment

Choose the payment system that suits you most.

Receive the final file

Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.

Our Services

Our services are second to none. Every time you place an order, you get a personal and original paper of the highest quality.

Essays

Essay Writing Service

While a college paper is the most common order we receive, we want you to understand that we have college writers for virtually everything, including: High school and college essays Papers, book reviews, case studies, lab reports, tests All graduate level projects, including theses and dissertations Admissions and scholarship essays Resumes and CV’s Web content, copywriting, blogs, articles Business writing – reports, marketing material, white papers Research and data collection/analysis of any type.

Admissions

Any Kind of Essay Writing!

Whether you are a high school student struggling with writing five-paragraph essays, an undergraduate management student stressing over a research paper, or a graduate student in the middle of a thesis or dissertation, homeworkmarketpro.com has a writer for you. We can also provide admissions or scholarship essays, a resume or CV, as well as web content or articles. Writing an essay for college admission takes a certain kind of writer. They have to be knowledgeable about your subject and be able to grasp the purpose of the essay.

Reviews

Quality Check and Editing Support

Every paper is subject to a strict editorial and revision process. This is to ensure that your document is complete and accurate and that all of your instructions have been followed carefully including creating reference lists in the formats APA, Harvard, MLA, Chicago / Turabian.

Reviews

Prices and Discounts

We are happy to say that we offer some of the most competitive prices in this industry. Since many of our customers are students, job seekers and small entrepreneurs, we know that money is a problem. Therefore, you will find better prices with us compared to writing services of this calibre.