Research on implementation of a case management plan informed by valid risk assessment in justice services is important in contributing to evidence-based practice but has been neglected in youth justice. We examined the connections between risk assessment, treatment, and recidivism by focusing on the individual criminogenic needs domain level. Controlling for static risk, dynamic criminogenic needs significantly predicted reoffense. Meeting individual needs in treatment was associated with decreased offending. However, there is "slippage" in the system that reduces practitioners' ability to effectively address needs. Even in domains where interventions are available, many youth are not receiving services matched to their needs. Implications and limitations of findings are discussed.

This study qualitatively explored frontline perspectives on the challenges of addressing youths' criminogenic needs within a risk-need-responsivity (RNR)-based case management framework. Twenty-nine probation officers from Toronto, Canada participated in semistructured interviews. Emergent themes included the importance of targeting "high impact" criminogenic needs (needs thatwhen effectively addressed-also have an impact on other need domains in addition to a direct impact on criminogenic risk), the salience of specific responsivity factors in case management, the lack of evidence-based programming available to youth, and respondents' uncertainty regarding their role in addressing criminogenic needs. Results highlight the need for research examining the interrelationship of criminogenic needs, specific responsivity factors, and educational outcomes of youth on probation. Findings also support recent initiatives that provide concrete training to probation officers around implementation of the need and responsivity principles in effective case management of justice-involved youth.

Mental health campaigns often promote biogenetic beliefs to reduce stigma, but their effectiveness may vary across disorders. Our study (N = 127) examined two components of essentialist beliefs—entitative (i.e., characterizing groupness) and natural kinds (i.e., biogenetic)—about two stigmatized mental disorders (schizophrenia, alcoholism) as well as a somatic disorder (Parkinson's disease), and their relation to prejudice. The three disorders significantly differed in natural kind beliefs (Parkinson's highest, then schizophrenia, and alcoholism lowest) and prejudice (alcoholism highest, then schizophrenia, and Parkinson's lowest), but not entitative beliefs. Entitative beliefs, however, was a stronger predictor of prejudice against schizophrenia than natural kind beliefs even after controlling for social dominance orientation and prior contact. Implications for anti‐stigma efforts and strategies are discussed.

No abstract