Washington State

1
Washington States Experience With Research-Based
Juvenile Justice Programs
May 19, 2005 Robert Barnoski,
Ph.D. (Barney) Washington State Institute for
Public Policy www.wsipp.wa.gov
2
Washington State Institute for Public Policy

• Created in 1983 by the state Legislature
• Mission Carry out non-partisan research on
  projects assigned either by the legislature or
  the Institutes Board of Directors
• 8 legislators
• 4 higher education provosts or presidents
• 4 state agency directors

3
What We Will Talk About Today

• This presentation describes Washington State's
  experiences implementing research-based programs
• Some History
• Outcome Evaluations
• Quality Assurance
• Cost Benefit
• Cost Benefit Meta-Analysis

4
Juvenile Justice in Washington State

• Determinant sentencing since 1977 based on
  prior record and current offense
• Two systems county vs. state
• Each county runs juvenile court, detention, and
  probation
• State runs juvenile correctional institutions,
  parole, and distributes state funds to counties
  (Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration JRA)
• Juvenile courts also manage non-offender cases
  dependency, youth-at-risk, truancy, etc.

5
History of Legislation

• 1995 Funding of intensive probation program.
• 1996 Preliminary outcomes are not good.
• 1997 Determine if research-based programs exist
  and can be implemented in Washington State
  juvenile courts.
• Eliminate parole but establish intensive parole
  in JRA.
• 1998 Switch funding from intensive probation to
  research-based programs in juvenile courts.
• Re-establish parole in JRA.
• 2002 Preliminary research-based program outcomes
  are positive and point to competent delivery.
• Parole and intensive parole outcomes are not
  good.
• 2003 Develop adherence and outcome standards for
  research-based programs.
• JRA moves toward research-based and Functional
  Family Parole (FFP).
• Cost-benefit analyses of prevention and
  intervention programs beyond juvenile offenders.

6
Initiation of Research-Based Effort in
Washington State

• 1997 Community Juvenile Accountability Act
  (CJAA)
• Legislature said it would provide funding if
  research-based programs could be identified
• State, juvenile court administrators, and the
  Institute met regularly to identify
  research-based programs
• Six programs were identified, four were
  recommended
• 1998 Legislature funded the programs 3.3
  million/year
• 1999 Programs started
• 2001 Evaluation groups filled
• 2003 Evaluation completed

7
Four Things Were Needed to Implement
Research-Based Programs

1. Find research-based programs scientifically shown
   to work
2. Develop an assessment to identify the most
   appropriate program for each youth
3. Implement quality assurance to ensure services
   are delivered as designed
4. Conduct a valid outcome evaluation

8
First Thing Research-Based Program List

• Functional Family Therapy (FFT)
• Aggression Replacement Training (ART)
• Coordination of Services
• Multi-Systemic Therapy (MST)
• Multidimensional Therapeutic Foster Care
• Adolescent Diversion

9
Functional Family Therapy(2,100 per youth)

• Blueprint Program University of Colorados
  Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence
• Structured family-based intervention to enhance
  protective and reduce risk factors in the family
  
• FFT is a three-phase program
• Motivate family toward change
• Teach family how to change a specific critical
  problem
• Help family generalize their problem-solving
  skills
• Trained therapists have caseloads of 10 to 12
  families
• Involves about 12 visits during a 90-day period

10
Aggression Replacement Training(700 per youth)

• Group training of 10 youth by two instructors
• Classes meet for one hour three times per week
  for 10 weeks
• Aggression cycle
• Skill development
• Moral reasoning
• Training, not therapy, that uses guided
  discussion, modeling, role play, and homework

11
Coordination of Services(400 per youth)

• Educational program for low-risk juvenile
  offenders and their parents. The goals
• Describe the consequences of delinquent behavior
• Stimulate goal setting
• Review the strengths of youth and family
• Explain what resources are available
• Participants given vehicle to open lines of
  communication and make shifts in thinking
• Community groups present participants with
  information concerning services they provide

12
Second Thing Build the Washington Juvenile Court
Assessment

• Pre-screen for level of risk more intensive
  service to higher risk youth and families
  minimal for low risk
• Comprehensive assessment only for higher risk
  youth 10 life domains of risk and protective
  factors
• Motivational interview to engage youth and family
• Re-assess dynamic factors for progress
  individual and groups
• Common language for talking about youth and
  families

13
Mapping Problem to Intervention for Moderate to
High Risk Youth
Problem Domain Intervention
Family (Primary) Functional Family Therapy (FFT), Multi-Systemic Therapy (MST), and Mentoring
No Family Multi-Dimensional Treatment Foster Care
Aggression Aggression Replacement Training (ART)
Impulsive Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) or ART
Mental Health DBT or Family Integrated Treatment (FIT)
Sexual Behavior ? - ART, DBT, FIT
Alcohol/Drugs ? - ART, DBT, FIT
Attitudes ART, DBT
Skills ART, DBT
School, Employment, Free Time, Relationships School, Employment, Free Time, Relationships
14
Case ManagementSequence to Self Reliance

• If family has problems
• Family gt
• Engage motivate family
• gt Specific Problems
• gt Generalization
• If no family problems
• Engage motivate youth
• gt Attitudes Skills
• gt Specific Problems
• gt Generalization

15
Role of Probation in Rehabilitation

• Assess youths strengths and weaknesses
• Assign youth to right caseload (low risk
  caseload)
• Assign youth to right program(s)
• Engage and motivate youth and family
• Courts motivational interview and change cycle
  
• JRA Functional Family Probation
• Support and help youth and family generalize what
  is learned during research-based program
• Deflect enabling undesirable behavior
• Monitor changes in risk and protective factors to
  see if approach is making a difference and adjust
• Does not make job easier, but might make it more
  effective

16
Assessment Proliferation

• Must be something to WSJCA, since it is being
  used in at least a dozen states (including New
  York, Illinois, Florida, Utah, N. Dakota) and
  multiple courts some in California
• Service providers particularly seem to like it
• We encourage continual refinement and improvement
  of the assessment capitalizing on what has been
  done
• It is evolving to be a systematic collection of
  relevant social file information

17
Third Thing Quality Assurance Infrastructure

• Steering committee
• Contract with program designers
• Statewide program experts
• Regional consultants
• Initial training
• On-going consultation, feedback, and training
• Assessment of competent program delivery

18
Fourth Thing Evaluation Design

• A rigorous test
• Not enough funding for everyone, so Waiting
  List youth assigned to a control group by court
  staff
• Includes completers and non-completers
• Youths eligibility for program is based on risk
  assessment
• Level of risk for re-offending
• Profile of risk factors
• Tests if probation plus a research-based program
  reduces recidivism more than probation alone

19
FFT Results

18-Month Unadjusted Felony Recidivism Percentage




















20
ART Results
18-Month Recidivism Percentage
21
Coordination of Services Results

19
17
12-Month Recidivism Percentage
1
3
Misdemeanor and Felony
Felony
Adjusted 12-Month Recidivism
22
Findings From Initial Studies

• FFT delivered competently
• Reduces 18-month felony recidivism by 38 percent
• Benefit to cost ratio of 7.69
• ART delivered competently
• Reduces 18-month felony recidivism by 24 percent
• Benefit to cost ratio of 12.60
• Coordination of Services
• Reduces 12-month felony recidivism by 57 percent
• Benefit to cost ratio of 13.58
• MST
• No findings because of problems implementing the
  Institutes evaluation design

23
A Clear Lesson

• The key to reducing recidivism with
  research-based programs is competently delivering
  the service.

24
Additional JRA Programs We Were Asked to Evaluate

• Parole
• Intensive Parole
• Local Parole
• Local Commitment
• Group Homes
• ------------------------------------------
• Basic Training Camp
• Dialectic Behavior Therapy
• Mentoring Program
• Family Integrated Transitions

25
(No Transcript)
26
2003 Legislature Starts to Repeat Process for
Other Intervention and Prevention Programs

• Benefits and Costs of Prevention and Early
  Intervention Programs for Youth
• September 2004
• Steve Aos et al.
• Washington State Institute for Public Policy
• www.wsipp.wa.gov

27
Research Questions Methods

• Question Are there research-based programs or
  policies with a real world ability to

Reduce crime,

• We screened evaluations written in English for

The six outcomes
The quality of a studys research design
Whether the program is real world

• We computed effects (meta-analytically)

• We then calculated monetary benefits and costs

28
Over 30 well-researched studies, mostly of
programs for 3 4 year olds from low income
families. Key findings
improved education outcomes, increased high
school graduation higher test scores lower
special education lower grade repetition
reduced crime, reduced child abuse
neglect. Evidence of decay in early test score
outcomes, but still statistically significant by
high school graduation.
Selected Findings
Summary of Benefits and Costs (2003 Dollars) Summary of Benefits and Costs (2003 Dollars) Summary of Benefits and Costs (2003 Dollars) Summary of Benefits and Costs (2003 Dollars)
Dollars Per Youth (PV lifecycle) Benefits Costs B - C
Early Childhood Education 17,202 7,301 9,901
A home visitation program, with active nationwide
dissemination. NFP is delivered by nurses and is
for low income, soon-to-be first time mothers.
Evidence of reduced crime for mothers
and children, reduced child abuse
neglect, improved education outcomes.
Website www.nursefamilypartnership.org/
Nurse Family Partnership 26,298 9,118 17,180
Functional Family Therapy 16,455 2,140 14,315
Multi-Systemic Therapy 14,996 5,681 9,316
Life Skills Training 746 29 717
Two programs for juvenile offenders and their
families, conducted by trained therapists. FFT
has been implemented statewide in Washington
States juvenile courts. Evidence of reduced
crime when the model is followed. Websites
www.fftinc.com/ and www.mstservices.com/
Seattle Soc. Dev. Project 14,246 4,590 9,837
Guiding Good Choices 7,605 687 6,918
Multi-D Treat. Foster Care 26,748 2,459
24,290
A three-year program for middle school youth
designed to prevent tobacco, alcohol, and
marijuana use. Delivered by classroom
teachers. Key findings Delayed initiation of
tobacco, alcohol, illicit
drugs. Website www.lifeskillstraining.com/
Intensive Juv. Supervision 0 1,482
-1,482
Big Brothers/Sisters (all costs) 4,058
4,010 48
(taxpayer costs only)
4,058 1,283 2,775
A multi-year grade school and middle school
training program for parents (family management
training) and teachers (classroom management,
interactive teaching) for children with low
socioeconomic status. Evidence of reduced
crime, increased high school graduation,
reduced grade repetition Website
http//depts.washington.edu/sdrg/
A multimedia training program (parenting skills,
peer pressure refusal skills for students)
implemented with families of middle school
children. Evidence of reduced crime,
reduced alcohol initiation Website
www.channing-bete.com/positiveyouth/pages/FTC/FTC-
GGC.html
Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care is an
alternative to group facilities for youth with
chronic severe criminal behavior. Delivered by
trained families, the goal is to return the youth
to the family the primary family also receives
therapy. Evidence of reduced crime
Website www.oslc.org/
HF
We meta-analyzed 19 studies of intensive
supervision programs for juvenile offenders. No
statistically significant effect on recidivism
rates.
Mentoring program. Evidence increased test
scores, delayed alcohol and drug initiation.
Website www.bbbsa.org
29
Managing Competent Program Delivery

• Invest in increasing skills, not accountability
• Pick good people
• Provide required training
• Enhance skills
• Retain only competent providers

30
Initial Provider Training

• Written knowledge test and feedback after initial
  training
• Follow-up skill training and consultations
• Certification at end of probationary period

31
Continually Enhance Provider Skills

• Form regional support teams
• On-site direct observation by an expert,
  including audio- or video-taping to improve
  competence
• Case-by-case consultations
• Give feedback

32
Skill Feedback

• Please place a check in the box ? that best
  describes what happened in this session.
  YES? NO ?
• Was a positive climate established through
  welcoming students?
• Were group norms reviewed, emphasizing positive
  participation?
• Were all ACT concepts covered to this point
  reviewed?
• Were issues from the last anger control training
  session reviewed?
• Did all youth complete the hassle log(s)?

33
Ensure Competent Providers Are Retained

• Establish process for corrective action
• Corrective action taken when needed
• Building morale taking pride that we are good!

34
Annual Legislative Accountability

• Youth eligible, assigned, and completing programs
  (75)
• Changes in targeted risk and protective factors
• Program provider competency ratings
• Meeting expected recidivism rates

35
Lets get going on one of these programs.
Some of You May Be Thinking
-or- We already do a great job, so why would we
be interested in this?
36
If You Are Not Comfortable With the Research
Approach, a Possibility

• Understand what is currently being done
• Understand what is being done in research-based
  programs
• Examine the differences
• Are you already doing it
• Does it seem like an improvement
• What needs to be tested
• Implement quality assurance for current practice
• Have competent researcher do valid outcome
  evaluations

37
Essential Ingredients

• Leadership
• Legislation
• Funding pilot research-based programs
• De-funding ineffective programs

• Juvenile court involvement (administrators,
  supervisors, and staff)
• Local provider involvement
• Skilled independent researchers

• Assessment
• Research-based programs
• Valid outcome evaluations
• Cost-benefit analysis

• Infrastructure for program fidelity
• Funding and de-funding contingent on continued
  outcomes