Community Corrections Facilities for Juvenile Offenders in Ohio

Abstract

Although prior research suggests that juvenile correctional programs can be effective at reducing recidivism, research has also found that some programs are more effective than others. This suggests that identifying the characteristics of effective correctional programs is an important issue surrounding interventions with juveniles. The current research not only examines the effectiveness of Ohio's community correctional facilities in reducing recidivism, but it also examines whether measures of treatment integrity are related to recidivism. The findings revealed that programs that scored higher on treatment integrity were more effective at reducing recidivism. Specifically, community corrections facilities that served higher risk youth, targeted dynamic risk factors with cognitive behavioral modalities, and employed trained and qualified staff were found to have stronger effects on recidivism than those that did not.

An examination of program integrity and recidivism of a cognitive-behavioral program for incarcerated youth in The Netherlands

“…With these program integrity proxies meta-analyses have established very global, but positive, relations between program integrity and effectiveness of programs aimed at reducing recidivism (Andrews & Dowden, 2005;Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005;Lipsey, 2009). In addition, a few empirical studies showed that program integrity, defined as the adherence to effective principles of correctional treatment, is related to reductions in recidivism (Lowenkamp, Latessa, & Smith, 2006;Lowenkamp, Makarios, Latessa, Lemke, & Smith, 2010). In the present study we will focus on the program integrity and recidivism of the cognitive behavioral program EQUIP (Gibbs, Potter, & Goldstein, 1995).…”

Perceptions of Recidivism Among Incarcerated Youth: The Relationship Between Exposure to Childhood Trauma, Mental Health Status, and the Protective Effect of Mental Health Services in Juvenile Justice Settings

“…The addition of mental health services marginally mitigated the trauma incidents and mental health symptoms, and led to perceived recidivism reduction. The mental health services youth receive can impact the underlying trauma incidents and mental health symptoms, and may be considered helpful towards altering distorted cognitions (Dowden & Andrews, 1999;Lipsey, 1999;Lowenkamp et al, 2010). With more research identifying the promise of juvenile justice therapeutic services (Lowenkamp et al 2006;Lowenkamp et al, 2010;Wallis & Poulton, 2001), this study may support the use of both screening and mental health service delivery.…”

“…Several randomized studies found trauma-focused cognitive behavioral interventions in juvenile justice facilities improved PTSD and depression symptoms among adjudicated youth (Cohen et al, 2016;Ford, Kerig, Desai, & Feirman, 2016). Cognitive behavioral interventions offered in juvenile correctional facilities have also been connected to decreased recidivism (Dowden & Andrews, 1999;Lipsey, 1999;Lowenkamp, Makarios, Latessa, Lemke, & Smith, 2010).…”

“…Recidivism can be operationalized in many ways, and official record data designating a new arrest or conviction is typically the most common (Lowenkamp, Latessa, & Smith, 2006;Lowenkamp et al, 2010). However, research studies have infrequently considered prospective perceptions of youth's future involvement with the criminal justice system.…”

Taking rehabilitation seriously

“…To capture an agency's readiness for effective treatment delivery, they designed the Correctional Program Assessment Inventory (CPAI). The CPAI has been shown to have predictive validity and thus to be essential in guiding agencies to change so as to deliver effective services (see, for example, Lowenkamp et al, 2010).…”