Where is sage publications based

A Report to the Wisconsin Governor’s Juvenile Justice Commission and the Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance

Stephen A. Small, Arthur J. Reynolds, Cailin O’Connor, and Siobhan M. Cooney

A joint initiative of the University of Wisconsin–Madison

Schools of Human Ecology and Social Work, and the University of Wisconsin–Extension, Cooperative Extension

June 2005

This project was supported by funds from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs.

What Works, Wisconsin What Science Tells Us about Cost-Effective Programs

for Juvenile Delinquency Prevention

What Works, Wisconsin What Science Tells Us about Cost-Effective Programs

for Juvenile Delinquency Prevention

Stephen Small, Arthur Reynolds, Cailin O’Connor, and Siobhan Cooney

University of Wisconsin–Madison

School of Human Ecology 1300 Linden Drive

Madison, WI 53706 sasmall@wisc.edu or areynolds@waisman.wisc.edu

Acknowledgements We are grateful to the Policy and Legislative Committee members of the Wisconsin Governor’s Juvenile Justice Commission for their initiative in making this project

possible, and to the staff of the Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance for their support and collaboration throughout the project. We also appreciate the editorial assistance of

Mari Hansen of the University of Wisconsin–Madison/Extension.

The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official positions or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice,

the State of Wisconsin, or other funders.

This publication may be cited without permission providing the source is identified as: Small, S.A., Reynolds, A.J., O’Connor, C., & Cooney, S.M. (2005). What Works, Wisconsin: What science tells us about cost-effective programs for juvenile delinquency prevention. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin–Madison.

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................5 I. PROJECT OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................................1

PROJECT HISTORY ..................................................................................................................................1 KEY CONCEPTS .......................................................................................................................................2

Risk-Protection Framework ..............................................................................................................2 Positive Youth Development Approaches .........................................................................................4 Human Capital Perspective ..............................................................................................................4 Evidence-Based Programs and Practices ..........................................................................................4 Registries of Evidence-Based Programs ............................................................................................6 Classification of Prevention Programs..............................................................................................6 Cost-Benefit Analysis .......................................................................................................................7

INFLUENCE OF THE WASHINGTON STATE STUDY ON THE PRESENT REPORT .................8 II. COST-EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS TO PREVENT DELINQUENCY AND CRIME ............................9

PRINCIPLES OF EFFECTIVE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY PREVENTION PROGRAMS .......9 PRINCIPLES OF EFFECTIVE JUVENILE OFFENDER PROGRAMS ..............................................10 SUMMARY OF SELECTED COST-EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS.........................................................11

III. REVIEW OF PROGRAMS AND APPROACHES..................................................................................15 PRIMARY PREVENTION PROGRAMS ..............................................................................................15

Preschool Education........................................................................................................................15 Family Support Programs ..............................................................................................................17 Social-Emotional Learning Programs.............................................................................................21

SECONDARY PREVENTION PROGRAMS........................................................................................23 Family Training Programs .............................................................................................................23 Social Skills Training Programs .....................................................................................................23 Mentoring Programs ......................................................................................................................24 Vocational/Job Training Programs .................................................................................................25 Emerging and Unproven Programs................................................................................................26

JUVENILE OFFENDER PROGRAMS ..................................................................................................27 Juvenile Offender Program Categories and Considerations ...........................................................27 Diversion/Community Accountability Programs .........................................................................28 Therapeutic Interventions...............................................................................................................30 Case Management/Multimodal Interventions................................................................................31 Emerging and Unproven Programs and Approaches ....................................................................32

IV. CONSIDERATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAMS .........................34 SELECTING AN APPROPRIATE EVIDENCE-BASED PREVENTION PROGRAM ....................34 STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTING PROGRAMS ...........................................34 BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTING EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAMS .............................................36 CULTURAL/ETHNIC CONSIDERATIONS........................................................................................37

V. RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................................38 VI. CONCLUSIONS...........................................................................................................................................43 VII. REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................................44

APPENDIX A: EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAM DETAILS

APPENDIX B: EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS

APPENDIX C: LIST OF PROGRAM REGISTRIES

APPENDIX D: GUIDELINES FOR SELECTING EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAMS

What Works, Wisconsin 5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Significant advancements have been made in the science of juvenile delinquency preven- tion in recent years. There is considerable evidence that some approaches are more effec- tive than others in preventing crime and reducing recidivism among youth. Research has shown that implementing proven, scientifically sound programs and interventions can have a preventive effect, making it less likely that indi- viduals will engage in crime and equipping them to make positive contributions to society. Many of these programs have been shown to result in economic benefits to society far out- weighing their costs. Through the use of evidence-based programs, practices and policies, the state of Wisconsin can more effectively address the problem of juvenile delin- quency while making the best use of increasingly lim- ited financial resources.

This report builds on several recent efforts to analyze the growing evidence in the field of delinquency prevention. Most notably, the Washington State Institute for Public Policy’s cost-benefit analysis of dozens of prevention and intervention programs related to juvenile delinquency provided the impetus for this report. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s Model Programs Guide also informed our work. Drawing on those resources, we highlight a number of proven, effective programs and review the strongest evidence available in several catego- ries of interventions, from universal or primary prevention with children and families through community-based programs for juvenile offend- ers. Special attention is also given to several programs and approaches developed in Wiscon- sin.

KEY CONCEPTS

A number of principles and frameworks guide current thinking about the prevention and treatment of youth problems in general and de- linquency in particular. Most fundamental to current approaches is the risk-protection framework. Certain traits of individuals, fami- lies, and communities have been identified as risk factors for the development of anti-social behavior and negative outcomes; criminologists refer in particular to risk factors for delinquent or criminal activity as “criminogenic factors.” Other traits, called protective factors, make negative outcomes less likely and positive out-

comes more likely. Identify- ing risk and protective factors makes it possible to target relevant attitudes, needs, or behaviors among people at risk for negative outcomes, and provide ser- vices and resources that promote positive outcomes.

A related perspective that has informed many recent prevention and youth programming ini- tiatives identifies “developmental assets,” the building blocks necessary for healthy develop- ment.

The human capital perspective is central to understanding not only the reasoning behind offering programs to at-risk individuals, but also the concept of cost-benefit analysis. Human capital refers to the investment of resources to increase the social, emotional, and educational skills of children, parents, and families. The hu- man capital perspective emphasizes that investments in young people’s education and development can produce economic returns to the general public and personal returns to indi- viduals. All of these “returns” can be included when estimating the effect of a program or in- tervention.

Through the use of evidence- based programs, Wisconsin can

more effectively address the problem of juvenile delinquency

while making the best use of limited financial resources.

What Works, Wisconsin Page ii

Putting the human capital perspective to use, information on the effects of programs and interventions can be converted into monetary values and compared to the investment required to achieve those effects. The economic benefits of prevention programs cover a wide range, in- cluding, but not limited to, reduced delinquency and crime, increased economic well-being of participants (and associated tax revenues), and cost savings within major public service and rehabilitative systems. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) offers a practical method for helping poli- cymakers consider alternative programs when faced with limited resources. CBA is a major departure from traditional measures of program effectiveness, which take into account only the strength of a program’s impact, while ignoring the costs. Using CBA, program options can be ranked according to their effectiveness per dol- lar of expenditure.

CBA necessarily builds on evidence gener- ated from high-quality program evaluations. The programs for which this type of information is available are called evidence-based programs. Evidence-based programs are those that have been shown through scientific research and evaluation to be effective and reliable. They have been subjected to rigorous evaluation us- ing comparison groups, often including long- term follow-up to track various outcomes for program participants and non-participants. A number of federal agencies and research organi- zations maintain registries of evidence-based programs to guide the selection of programs for prevention of problem behaviors. Evidence- based programs are somewhat rare, but growing in number.

REVIEW OF PROGRAMS

In this report, we review the available evi- dence in ten categories of programs, grouped into three broad areas:

PRIMARY PREVENTION • Preschool Education • Family Support Programs • Social-Emotional Learning Programs

SECONDARY PREVENTION • Family Training Programs • Social Skills Training Programs • Mentoring Programs • Vocational/Job Training Programs

JUVENILE OFFENDER PROGRAMS • Diversion or Community

Accountability Programs • Therapeutic Interventions • Case Management/Multimodal

Interventions

Within each category, we highlight one or two evidence-based programs, including cost- benefit information whenever it is available. We also discuss the practices and approaches that appear to increase program effectiveness within each category.

The most cost-effective prevention pro- grams reviewed in this report include preschool education, home visitation programs, and social and emotional learning programs for elemen- tary school children. In all of these programs, the quality and intensity of services are high, staff members are well trained, and the program has a well-articulated vision with a strong con- ceptual base. Although mentoring and job training programs were also found to have good evidence of effectiveness, their economic returns are lower.

Among juvenile offender programs, the strongest empirical evidence of cost- effectiveness is for diversion programs and therapeutic interventions that provide a range of intensive services over relatively long periods of time. Overall, there are fewer evidence-based juvenile offender programs than prevention programs. However, a number of principles of effective intervention have been identified that can increase the likelihood that a given program or approach will be effective.

Throughout the review of programs, we also identify emerging or unproven delinquency prevention programs that appear to follow key principles of effective programs but have not yet

What Works, Wisconsin Page iii

demonstrated reliable program impacts. These include after-school programs and enhanced probation and supervision programs. Addi- tional research on these and other programs is needed.

CONSIDERATIONS IN IMPLEMENTING EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAMS

Knowing that a program has undergone rigorous evaluation and has strong evidence that it works is an essential first step in moving toward more effective, evidence-based practice. However, implementing a program that will have the desired effect involves a great deal more than just using an evidence-based pro- gram. Among other things, it requires that the program selected be appropriate to the audi- ence, that it is adequately funded and staffed, and that the selected program is implemented with fidelity. These less tangible matters are of- ten overlooked by program sponsors, but are as important as the program model itself if the program is to have a positive impact. In addition to these issues, there exist a number of practical considerations related to the realities of program administration, which are often barriers to the use of evidence-based programs. These consid- erations are articulated in the full report.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on our synthesis of the available evi- dence on the effectiveness of juvenile crime prevention programs, we make the following recommendations for consideration by the Wis- consin Governor’s Juvenile Justice Commission:

(1) Strongly support the use of evidence- based prevention and intervention pro- grams and practices.

(2) Educate policy-makers and practitioners about evidence-based programs and prac- tices and their practical and economic benefits.

(3) Use results of cost-benefit analysis to bet- ter prioritize funding of education and social programs.

(4) Adopt an appropriate and validated as- sessment tool in order to direct juvenile offenders to the level of intervention and supervision that is most likely to be effec- tive for them.

(5) Develop mechanisms for disseminating effective program models and good prac- tice guidelines to practitioners and decision-makers.

(6) Provide support for local-level delin- quency prevention initiatives.

(7) Increase investments in research and de- velopment (R & D) and in evaluation of emerging, innovative, and promising pre- vention programs.

(8) Provide a greater balance between preven- tion and intervention programs and strategies.

(9) Create new, state-level, operational poli- cies that encourage cross-agency collaboration and funding for prevention.

(10) Develop new state funding mechanisms that are equitable and consistent with the economic benefits of prevention pro- grams.

These recommendations have the potential to positively alter the future life chances of Wis- consin youth, reduce crime, and contribute to significant cost savings. However, putting into action most of these recommendations will re- quire both vision and courage – the vision to look beyond short-term solutions and the cour- age to challenge the status quo and adopt new ways of operating. We hope that this report will serve as an impetus for change and contribute to the emergence of Wisconsin as a national leader for innovative, scientific, and cost-effective poli- cies and programs on behalf of its youth.

What Works, Wisconsin Page 1

I. PROJECT OVERVIEW

Significant advancements have been made in the science of juvenile delinquency preven- tion in recent years. There is considerable evidence that some approaches are more effec- tive than others in preventing crime and reducing recidivism among youth. Research has shown that high-quality implementation of evi- dence-based programs and principles often results in reduced delinquency and future re- cidivism as well as economic benefits to society that outweigh expenditures. Through the use of evidence-based programs, practices and policies, the state of Wisconsin can more effec- tively address the problem of juvenile delinquency while making the best use of increas- ingly limited financial resources.

In response to a request from the Wisconsin Governor’s Juvenile Justice Commission and the Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance, this report synthesizes the current research on scientific approaches to delinquency prevention and community-based intervention. In addition, this report provides an overview of the latest concepts, terms and models related to juvenile delinquency prevention and interven- tion. It concludes with recommendations regarding future directions for the state of Wis- consin that can lead to more effective and economically viable approaches for reducing juvenile crime, enhancing youth development and contributing to responsible citizenship.

Three questions guide this report:

• What does science tell us about effective approaches to preventing and treating delinquency?

• What are the economic returns of the most effective programs?

• What steps should the state take to de- velop a more effective and cost-

beneficial strategy for preventing juve- nile delinquency and future crime?

PROJECT HISTORY

Over the past five years, our knowledge about cost-effective programs, practices and principles in the field of juvenile justice and de- linquency prevention has grown at a phenomenal rate. The pace is so rapid that even in the process of developing the direction and scope of this report, new information became

available that led to modifica- tions in what we and the Wisconsin Governor’s Juvenile Justice Commission intended to accomplish through the present report.

Initially, we had planned to provide an update and ex-

tension of the Washington State Institute for Public Policy’s 2001 report on The Comparative Costs and Benefits of Programs to Reduce Crime [1]. However, within weeks of our beginning this project, Washington State released a new ver- sion of their report that essentially did just that (see Benefits and Costs of Prevention and Early In- tervention Programs for Youth [2]). The availability of this new report meant that much of the work on estimating costs and benefits for delinquency and recidivism prevention pro- grams had already been accomplished, freeing us up to address other important issues.

The current report builds on existing re- sources, including the Washington State report as well as the Office of Juvenile Justice and De- linquency Prevention’s (OJJDP’s) web-based Model Programs Guide [3]. Consequently, the cur- rent report includes a discussion of most of the key findings from these previously released documents but also goes well beyond them. We provide here a fairly broad and inclusive sum- mary of what is known about the prevention of delinquency and recidivism in community-

Our knowledge about cost- effective programs, practices and principles in the field of delinquency prevention has grown at a phenomenal rate.

What Works, Wisconsin Page 2

based programs. Drawing on available cost- benefit analyses, we also discuss what is known about the potential cost savings of various ap- proaches to prevention and community-based juvenile offender programs. In addition, build- ing on the OJJDP Model Programs Guide and the numerous other guides and registries that have been developed in recent years, we pro- vide an overview of what is known about proven, effective approaches to the reduction of delinquency, including a synthesis of the princi- ples that underlie successful programs. Finally, we provide a review of some of the strategies that have been found to be critical to the success- ful selection and implementation of prevention and early intervention programs.

KEY CONCEPTS

There are a number of principles and frameworks that guide current thinking about the prevention and treatment of youth problems in general and delinquency in particular. In this section, we provide an overview of some of the most relevant frameworks, concepts and princi- ples as a way to orient the reader to the current scientific thinking in this area and provide a foundation for our later discussion of what works in delinquency prevention.

Risk-Protection Framework

Most scholars and professionals in the field of prevention are guided by some variation of the risk-protection framework. This approach assumes that the best way to prevent delin- quency or other problematic outcomes is to reduce or eliminate risk factors and to increase or enhance protective factors [4]. Risk factors

typically are defined as individual or environ- mental markers that are related to an increased likelihood that a negative outcome will occur [5, 6]. Conversely, protective factors usually are defined as individual or environmental safe- guards that enhance a person’s ability to overcome stressful life events, risks or hazards and promote adaptation and competence [7, 8]. Criminologists use the term “criminogenic fac- tors,” which describes risk factors that (a) have been empirically linked to delinquent or crimi- nal behavior, and (b) are dynamic, or amenable to change through intervention in an individ- ual’s life [9].

Most prevention researchers and practitio- ners view prevention within an ecological framework [e.g., 5, 10, 11] which assumes that risk and protective factors can exist both within individuals and across the various settings in which they live such as the family, peer group, school, and community. Closely related is the idea that most problems are multiply deter- mined [11]. That is, there may be diverse paths to the development of a particular problem like delinquency, and efforts to address a single cause are likely to fail, because most problems have multiple causes. Similarly, the same risk factor can be related to a variety of different out- comes [8]. For example, many criminogenic factors, which put youth at risk for delinquency, also put them at risk for early parenthood or school failure. Thus, efforts to prevent youth problems must account for and target multiple settings and risk factors [11, 12]. Figure 1 pre- sents a list of common risk factors and protective factors for juvenile delinquency organized by ecological level.

What Works, Wisconsin Page 3

FIGURE 1. Common Risk and Protective Factors for Juvenile Delinquency

RISK FACTORS PROTECTIVE FACTORS INDIVIDUAL LEVEL

• Early initiation of problem behavior • Early and persistent antisocial behavior • Low IQ • Hyperactivity • Rebelliousness • Favorable attitudes toward deviant behavior • Involvement in other problematic or dangerous be-

havior

• High IQ • Intolerant attitudes toward deviant behavior • Positive social orientation • Ability to feel guilt • Trustworthiness

FAMILY LEVEL

• Family history of criminal or delinquent behavior • Family conflict or violence • Favorable parental attitudes and involvement in

problem behavior • History of maltreatment • Parental psychopathology • Teenage parenthood • Poverty

• Good relationships with parents • Good family communication • Parents/caregivers who possess strong parent-

ing skills

PEER LEVEL

• Friends who engage in delinquent behavior • Peer rejection

• Non-delinquent friends (or prosocially oriented friends)

SCHOOL LEVEL

• Academic failure or poor performance beginning in late elementary school

• Lack of commitment or bonding to school • Low academic aspirations

• Positive commitment to school • Academic achievement • Strong school motivation • Positive attitude toward school

COMMUNITY LEVEL

• Availability of drugs and weapons • Low neighborhood attachment and community dis-

organization • Media portrayals of violence • Extreme economic deprivation • Concentration of delinquent peer groups

• Non-disadvantaged neighborhood • Low neighborhood crime • Community norms and laws that condemn

drug use, crime and deviant behavior • High neighborhood stability and cohesion

SOURCE: Adapted from Preventing & Reducing Juvenile Delinquency (2003), p. 105. By J.C. Howell. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publi- cations [13] and Child Delinquents: Development Intervention and Service Needs (2003), R. Loeber and D. Farrington, (Eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications [14].

What Works, Wisconsin Page 4

Positive Youth Development Approaches

An increasingly popular approach to prob- lem prevention emphasizes the positive aspects of youth development and well-being. This ap- proach is especially common with traditional youth serving agencies that provide after school and non-formal educational programs, and with initiatives concerned with facilitating youth in- volvement in the community. In contrast to traditional prevention programs, positive youth development assumes that simply preventing problems is not enough to prepare youth for adulthood, and that the best way to prevent problems from occurring throughout the life- span is to promote the developmental potential of young people [8, 15].

While there exist a number of positive youth development models, in Wisconsin the most widely used approach is the Search Institute’s Developmental Assets framework [16]. This model is built around 40 developmental assets, defined as the building blocks that are crucial for promoting healthy youth development and well-being [17]. According to the Search Institute, assets center on the relationships, social envi- ronments, patterns of interactions, and norms that are central to promoting youth development. Correla- tional data from the Search Institute show that the more developmental assets a young person possesses, the fewer problems they exhibit (in- cluding delinquency) and the greater the likelihood that they will experience positive de- velopmental outcomes like school success and social responsibility [18].

Human Capital Perspective

Preventive interventions are increasingly conceptualized from a human capital perspec- tive, recognizing that social programs for children and youth are “investments” that pro- mote well-being among participants and for society at large. Human capital is a general iden-

tifier for investments of human and financial resources to increase the social, emotional, and educational skills of children, parents, and fami- lies. If they are substantial enough, these resources can improve learning and behavior in the short-term as well as economic and social well-being in the long-term. Generally, the ear- lier in the life course that an intervention occurs, the greater its capacity for creating enduring effects, with long-term consequences for indi- viduals, their families, and the communities in which they live [19, 20]. The human capital per- spective emphasizes that investments in young people’s education and development can have economic returns to the general public as well as personal returns to individuals, and that all of these “returns” can be included when estimating the effect of a program or intervention.