| How to Obtain
Documents |
| |
|
|
NCJ Number:
|
NCJ 189240
|
|
Title:
|
Alameda County Placement Risk Assessment Validation, Final Report
|
|
Author(s):
|
Sharon Jones ; Chris Baird
|
|
Corporate Author:
|
National Council on Crime and Delinquency
United States
|
|
Date Published:
|
06/2001 |
|
Page Count:
|
45 |
|
Sponsoring Agency:
|
|
|
Grant Number:
|
1998-JB-VX-0109 |
|
Sale Source:
|
National Council on Crime and Delinquency
1970 Broadway, Suite 500
Oakland, CA 94612
United States
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States |
|
Document:
|
PDF PDF |
|
Agency Summary:
|
Agency Summary |
|
Dataset:
|
http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03254 |
|
Type:
|
Studies/research reports |
|
Language:
|
English |
|
Country:
|
United States |
|
Annotation:
|
This is the final report for a National Institute of Justice
(NIJ) grant project intended to validate a risk assessment
instrument for juvenile probation placement cases in Alameda
County, CA. |
|
Abstract:
|
This project was a follow-up to a process that began in 1996 when
the Alameda County Probation Department contracted with the
National Council on Crime and Delinquency to construct a 5-year
plan to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of their
Juvenile Services Division. The project adapted a risk assessment
instrument based on an existing instrument that had been used and
validated on juvenile probationers in California. Construction
and validation samples were used to develop the scale. The
instrument addressed the relative risk of recidivism of the
youth, but did not take into account the severity of the current
offense, which was rarely found to be highly correlated with
recidivism. The instrument focused on age at first finding, prior
criminal behavior, institutional commitments or placement of 30
consecutive days or more, drug/chemical use, alcohol use,
parental skills, school disciplinary problems, and peer
relationships. For the validation study, Alameda County adopted
the cut-off scores that were then used in other California
counties. Previous studies had found that these scores were
accurate in distinguishing between groups of offenders that had
significantly different rates of recidivism. In essence, youths
classified as medium-risk were twice as likely to reoffend as
youths classified as low risk. Similarly, high-risk youth were
twice as likely to reoffend as medium-risk youth. The validation
study found that 525 of the 1,334 youth in Alameda County who
were placed on field supervision in 1996 fell into the lowest
risk category and could therefore have possibly been handled with
less restrictive sanctions than being placed on formal
supervision. In addition, 202 youths scored high enough on the
scale to warrant more restrictive sanctions, such as out-of-home
placement or intensive probation supervision. The report
concludes that the placement risk assessment instrument developed
was valid and equitable for the targeted juvenile justice
population; therefore, the instrument can be useful for staff who
are making informed placement decisions. 12 tables, appended risk
assessment guidelines, and a 9-item bibliography |
|
Main Term(s):
|
Juvenile probation |
|
Index Term(s):
|
Testing and measurement ; Probation outcome prediction ; Risk management ; Juvenile probation services ; Juvenile corrections decisionmaking ; NIJ final report ; NIJ grant-related documents ; California |
|
Note:
|
For the executive summary, see NCJ-189241. |
| |
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=189240
|
* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents
not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.
|
|
Help | Contact Us | Home
