By Lisa Pilnik, Amber Farn, and Michael Umpierre

Through YAP’s Safely Home Initiative, six jurisdictions implemented YAP in their communities, including Yavapai County, Arizona; Alameda County, California; Fulton County, Georgia; Mecklenburg County, North Carolina; Hamilton County, Ohio, and the state of Illinois. The publication details the strategies, impact, and outcomes resulting from the implementation of the YAP Safely Home Initiative in these six communities. Policymakers, youth justice agency leaders, and others interested in supporting community-based services and alternatives to youth incarceration are encouraged to read this new resource for the field.

Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, Georgetown University, 2023. 41p.

Edited By Frank J. Cohen

FROM THE FOREWORD: “This publication is a report of the proceedings of the Law Enforcement Institute on Youth and Crime held at New York University, July 18-21, 1955, in the Vanderbilt Auditorium, Washington Square South. It was jointly sponsored by Attorney General of the State of New York, Honorable Jacob K. Javits, and Chairman, New York State Youth Commission, Honorable Mark A. McCloskey, in cooperation with the New York University Graduate School of Public Administration and Social Service.

The purpose of this Institute was that of determining how to prevent and reduce juvenile delinquency, a problem that occupies increasingly the attention of national, state, and local officials and citizens today. Figures released by the United States Children's Bureau show that delinquency has risen 28 per cent in the past four years. It is estimated that about 2 per cent of all children in the United States between the ages of ten to seventeen years were dealt with by juvenile courts in delinquency cases. Approximately a million children are picked up by the police in a year; 100,000 are held in jail and sore 40,000 are sent to training schools.

NY. International Universities Press. 1954. 269p.

By Hazel Kemshall

HM Inspectorate of Probation is committed to reviewing, developing and promoting the evidence base for high-quality probation and youth offending services. Academic Insights are aimed at all those with an interest in the evidence base. We commission leading academics to present their views on specific topics, assisting with informed debate and aiding understanding of what helps and what hinders probation and youth offending services. This report was kindly produced by Professor Hazel Kemshall, summarising key learning for practitioners and organisations in relation to risk management. Practitioners are often required to make decisions in challenging situations with incomplete information, and it is thus important to pay attention to the potential influence of subjective biases and individual emotions and values. To minimise error and ensure that decisions are balanced, reasoned and well-evidenced, practitioners need to seek and critically appraise information, and adopt an open, honest and reflective approach….

Manchester: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2021. 16p.

By W. Dyer Halpern

In 2018, New York State enacted its “Raise the Age” (RTA) legislation, which raised the age of criminal responsibility from 16 to 18 years old. Under RTA, 16- and 17-year-olds accused of misdemeanors go to family court, where they can be adjudicated as juvenile delinquents. A 16- or 17-year-old accused of committing felonies is considered an “adolescent offender” (AO). When an AO is arrested for a felony-level crime, his case is initially heard in the “youth part” of the criminal/supreme/superior court system (what we’ll call “adult court” going forward). But most of these cases are quickly “removed”—that is, transferred—to family court or even directly to family court probation. Under RTA, in order for a prosecutor to keep an AO in adult court, he must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that: 1. the defendant caused significant physical injury to a person other than a participant in the offense; or 2. the defendant displayed a firearm, shotgun, rifle, or deadly weapon, as defined in the penal law in furtherance of such offense; or 3. the defendant unlawfully engaged in sexual intercourse, oral sexual conduct, anal sexual conduct, or sexual contact.1 But these factors are harder to satisfy than they might seem…..

New York: The Manhattan Institute, 2023. 23p.

By Judd B. Kessler. Sarah Tahamont. Alexander Gelber, Adam Isen

AbstractRecent policy discussions have proposed government-guaranteed jobs, including for youth. One key potential benefit of youth employment is a reduction in criminal justice contact. Prior work on summer youth employment programs has documented little-to-no effect of the program on crime during the program but has found decreases in violent and other serious crimes among “at-risk” youth in the year or two after the program.We add to this picture by studying randomized lotteries for access to the New YorkCity Summer Youth Employment Program (SYEP), the largest such program in theUnited States. We link SYEP data to New York State criminal records data to inves-tigate outcomes of 163,447 youth who participated in a SYEP lottery between 2005and 2008. We find evidence that SYEP participation decreases arrests and convictions during the program summer, effects that are driven by the small fraction (3 percent)of SYEP youth who are at-risk, as defined by having been arrested before the start of the program. We conclude that an important benefit of SYEPs is the contemporaneous effect during the program summer and that the effect is concentrated among individu-als with prior contact with the criminal justice system

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Volume41, Issue3. Summer 2022. Pages 710-730

By Florian Kaiser

To explore why system contact often has no crime-preventative effect, the current study examined the effects of juvenile justice contact on Situational Action Theory's (SAT) causes of crime, including personal morals, deviant peer associations, and detection risk perceptions. The analysis is based on a sample of English (Peterborough Adolescent and Young Adult Development Study) and German (Crime in the modern City study) juveniles. Propensity score matching was applied to estimate whether the lenient system contacts influenced the causes of crime in the year after the contact. The treatment effect estimates are mostly insignificant and relatively small. The few significant estimates in the English sample suggest that official contact slightly increased deviant peer associations and decreased feelings of moral guilt. Overall, the findings suggest that system contact may often have no crime-preventative effect as it does not (Germany), or only slightly (England) affect SAT's causes of crime. Previous studies, primarily based on the U.S. data, often reported more substantial effects that mostly operated in a crime-amplifying direction. It is speculated whether the less substantial impact in the current study can be attributed to the overall more lenient, diversion-oriented handling of the examined English and German offenders.

International Criminal Justice ReviewVolume 33, Issue 3 Sep 2023 Pages 225-342

By Chris Trotter and Phillipa Evans

A number of studies have found that when probation officers, and others who supervise young people and adults on community based orders, have good intervention skills their clients are more likely to be engaged in supervision and to have low recidivism rates. The skills include, role clarification, pro-social modelling, problem solving, cognitive and relationship skills. Little research has been done, however, on the development of these skills across whole organisations. This study aimed to examine the extent to which training and coaching of probation officers, across two state youth justice departments in Australia, improved the use of workers’ skills. Audio-tapes of worker/client interviews were provided to research staff before and after training and coaching. Analysis of the audio-tapes found a significant increase in the overall use of worker skills following the training and coaching. However, the increases in the skills applied largely to role clarification, rather than pro-social modelling, problem solving and cognitive skills.

European Journal of Probation. Volume 15, Issue 2Aug 2023Pages97-170

By Lauren Knoth; Paige Wanner; Lijian He

This document reports on an outcome evaluation of the Washington State Aggression Replacement Training (WSART) program, conducted by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP), to evaluate recidivism outcomes for juvenile court youth. WSART is a group-based intervention for moderate- and high-risk youth with criminal charges filed in juvenile courts. The program uses cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) techniques to teach youth three core components: anger control, moral reasoning, and social skills. The authors evaluated the effects of WSART in Washington State courts from 2005 to 2016. They found that, on average, WSART participants were more likely to recidivate than similar youth who did not participate in the WSART program. The authors note that differences in recidivism for WSART versus non-WSART youth were evident in nearly all subpopulations of males, including White youth, Black youth, Hispanic youth, younger youth, high-risk youth, moderate-risk youth, youth assessed using the Back On Track risk (BOT) assessment, and youth assessed with the Positive Achievement Change Tool (PACT) assessment; however, results indicated that WSART participation did reduce recidivism for females. The authors also state that they found that youth who completed the entire WSART curriculum were significantly less likely to recidivate than youth who participated but did not complete the WSART program.

Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2019. 70p.

By Christoph Engel

Objectives: Peer effects on the decision to commit a crime have often been documented. But how little does it take to trigger the effect? Method: A fully incentivized, anonymous experiment in the tradition of experimental law and economics provides fully internally valid causal evidence. A companion vignette study with members of the general public extends external validity. Results: (a) the more of their peers violate an arbitrary rule, the more participants do; (b) a minority has a threshold and switches from rule-abiding to violation once a sufficient number of their peers violate the rule; (c) the more the rule is constraining, the more participants are sensitive to the number of others who violate the rule; (d) if participants do not have explicit information about the incidence of rule violations in their community, they rely on their beliefs. Conclusion: In terms of substance, the paper shows that mere social information is the core of peer effects. In terms of methodology, the paper demonstrates the power of incentivized, decontextualized lab experiments for isolating mental building blocks of the decision to commit a crime.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 2023, Vol. 60(4) 455–492

By Tim Bateman, Anne-Marie Day and John Pitts

Although there are some important limitations with the data, the available evidence demonstrates conclusively that children who are in the care of the local authority are consistently over-represented among those who come to the attention of the youth justice system. A similar disproportionality is also evident within the children’s custodial estate. While it appears that the relationship is long-standing, it has only recently become the focus of policy attention which has begun to explore some of the reasons for the patterns discernible in the figures (see, for example, Schofield et al, 2012: Laming, 2016). In particular, an independent review of the relationship between the care system and the criminal justice system, led by Lord Laming, commissioned an extensive exploration of the available literature that provides a useful baseline for future research (Staines, 2016). The current review aims to provide a context for research, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, that aims to identity the particular pathways of looked after children into, through and leaving custody and to establish in what ways, and to what extent, these might differ from those of children who do not have care experience. It does not accordingly aim to replicate the earlier work identified in the previous paragraph; instead the intention is to draw on previous reviews, and relevant additional material, through a lens that focuses on the existing evidence base as it relates specifically to the likelihood of children being incarcerated, to their subsequent custodial experience and to the provision of effective resettlement once they have been released.

Luton: University of Bedfordshire, 2018. 37p.

By Emily D. Buehler

This report describes substantiated incidents of youth sexual victimization perpetrated by youth or by staff in juvenile facilities. The report presents data on the incidents of sexual victimization, such as location and time of day. It also provides characteristics of the victims and perpetrators of the victimization. The report details services provided to the victim and consequences for the perpetrator. In part, it fulfills BJS’s mandates under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108–79).

Highlights. During 2013–18: About 62% of youth-on-youth sexual victimization incidents occurred in an area under video surveillance in state juvenile systems, and 51% of incidents in local and private facilities occurred in an area under video surveillance. There were three times as many victims of abusive sexual contact (1,054) as victims of nonconsensual sexual acts (358). About 63% of victims and 73% of perpetrators of incidents of youth-on-youth sexual victimization were male. There were 657 victims and 511 perpetrators of staff-on-youth sexual victimization in juvenile justice facilities.

Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2023. 33p.

By Carlene Firmin, Hannah King, Molly Manister and Vanessa Bradbury

Contextual Safeguarding (CS) has developed as a safeguarding approach for practitioners to recognise contextual dynamics and children’s exposure to extra-familial harm (EFH). Within CS, practitioners (and the systems in which they work) assess neighbourhood, schools or peer groups to understand the contextual factors that are contributing to the harm and abuse of the young people who are associated with it. Interventions are then developed within the contexts where that harm has occurred, through relationships building, advocacy, training, policy and practical action, alongside support to the affected young people. Initially focused on and piloted within children’s social care, the approach has generated much interest from youth justice services (YJSs) across the country. It is evident that EFH crosses into YJS boundaries and collaborative work through the CS approach that is already underway within some local service areas across England. Safeguarding responsibilities are currently overseen by multi-agency Safeguarding Partnerships made up of three statutory partners – police, health and local authorities. These partners are free to arrange their local provision and to involve other agencies as they see fit. Probation and YJSs are frequently invited to attend and have a duty to cooperate.

Research & Analysis Bulletin 2023/02 . Manchester, UK: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2023. 44p.

By John Pitts

  This report, compiled between September 2006 and March 2007, brings together data from two surveys, 54 interviews with ‘key informants’: professionals, local residents and young people involved with, or affected by, youth gangs. Key informants are marked like this (KI.01) in the text to indicate the source of the information. However, the report also draws on the many insights I have gained from informal conversations at Waltham Forest YOT over the period. The interview and survey data is augmented by a literature review. Some of the material presented here is straightforward reportage, but some of it is more speculative, based on inferences or hunches drawn from what respondents have said or what I have read. So when, in the text, I write ‘it appears’ or ‘it is said’, I am drawing on hearsay and hunches or making an inference that seems plausible to me but is not necessarily a castiron fact. As such, these kinds of assertions or conclusions should be read with caution. In the interests of anonymity this report does not name the key informants; yet without them this study would have been impossible.

Cullompton UK:  Willan Publishing, 2008. 178p.  

By Eleno Castro and Randy Kotti

Despite the growing body of qualitative evidence suggesting collusion between gangs and political parties in various parts of the world, little has been done to study quantitatively the extent to which criminal organization may affect political elections in such context. Using police data and voting results in El Salvador, we find that homicides in gang-controlled neighborhoods tend to decrease by 24 percent of the mean during electoral seasons. We also estimate that gang control is associated with a 2.75 percentage point increase in electoral participation. These effects are especially significant in the neighborhoods where political parties have a strong voting base. Consistent with the interviews we conducted, this suggests that parties negotiate with gangs to mobilize electoral participation in the areas where they are more likely to receive electoral support and thus increase their chances of winning. To conduct our analysis, we geolocated the homicides reported daily in the registry of the National Civil Police from 2005 to 2019 crossed with electoral results reported at the voting-center level across El Salvador. We exploit the sudden and exogenous decrease in criminality resulting from the 2012 truce between the government and the two main gangs in El Salvador to identify gang-controlled neighborhoods. We also use penitentiary data from the General Directorate of Prisons for robustness measures. 

Pre-publication, 2022. 51p.

By Nikita Melnikov, Carlos Schmidt-Padilla, and Maria Micaela Sviatschi   

We study how territorial control by criminal organizations affects economic development. We exploit a natural experiment in El Salvador, where the emergence of these criminal organizations was the consequence of an exogenous shift in American immigration policy that led to the deportation of gang leaders from the United States to El Salvador. Upon arrival, the gangs gained control over many urban areas and re-created a system of borders to protect their territory from outsiders. Using a spatial regression discontinuity design, we find that individuals in gang-controlled neighborhoods have less material well-being, income, and education than individuals living only 50 meters away but outside of gang territory. None of these discontinuities existed before the arrival of the gangs. A key mechanism behind the results is that gangs restrict individuals’ mobility, affecting their labor market options by preventing them from commuting to other parts of the city. The results are not determined by high rates of selective migration, differential exposure to extortion and violence, or differences in public goods provision.     

  NBER Working Paper No. 27832  

Cambridge, MA:; National Bureau of Economic Research, 2022. 123p.

By Christian Dustmann, Mikkel Mertz and Anna Okatenko 

The effects of neighbourhood characteristics on the development of children and adolescents is a key area of research in the social sciences literature. Early papers such as Brooks-Gunn et al. (1993) document strong associations between children’s outcomes and the characteristics of the neighbourhoods they live in. More recent work finds evidence that the neighbourhood children grow up in a↵ects their earnings, college attendance, marriage, fertility (Chetty et al., 2016; Chetty and Hendren, 2018a,b; Chyn, 2018; Deutscher, 2020), and school performance (˚Aslund et al., 2011; Galster et al., 2016). One particular concern is the e↵ect of neighbourhood characteristics on adolescents’ criminal, delinquent, and health-compromising activities (for a review, see Leventhal and Brooks-Gunn (2000)), in particular the potential negative impacts of gangs, drugs and violence on children and young teenagers (Jencks and Mayer, 1990; Popkin et al., 2002). A small literature investigates the impact of exposure to crime on the criminal behaviour of young men and women, but little is known about which type of criminal activity in the neighbourhood may lead to spillovers, how this compares with the impact other neighbourhood characteristics have on later outcomes, how exposure to crime affects other dimensions of risky behaviour in particular for girls, and what the longer-term economic consequences of exposure to crime for males and females are….

Bonn: IZA  Institute of Labor Economics .2023. 76p.

By Josh Rovner

The Sentencing Project, in its national survey of life and virtual life sentences in the United States found 1,465 people serving JLWOP sentences at the start of 2020. This number reflects a 38% drop in the population of people serving JLWOP since our 2016 count and a 44% drop since the peak count of JLWOP figures in 2012.1 This count continues to decline as more states eliminate JLWOP. In five decisions – Roper v. Simmons (2005), Graham v. Florida (2010), Miller v. Alabama (2012), Montgomery v. Louisiana (2016), and Jones v. Mississippi (2021) – the Supreme Court of the United States establishes and upholds the fact that “children are constitutionally different from adults in their levels of culpability”2 when it comes to sentencing. Differences in maturity and accountability informs the protections of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment that limits sentencing a child to die in prison. Research on adolescent brain development confirms the commonsense understanding that children are different from adults in ways that are critical to identifying age-appropriate criminal sentences. This understanding – Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy called it what “any parent knows”3 – was central to the recent Supreme Court decisions excluding people under 18 from the harshest sentencing practices. Starting in 2005, Roper struck down the death penalty for people under 18…...  

Washington DC: The Sentencing Project, 2023.  6p.

By   Ilya Klauzner, Suzanne Poynton, Don Weatherburn and Hamish Thorburn

Youth on Track is an early intervention scheme that was introduced in 2013 to help reduce the risk of young people re-offending. The scheme assigns young people to caseworkers for up to 12 months. Caseworkers administer interventions to the young person, including cognitive-behavioural and family interventions. They can also refer young people to external services to address criminogenic needs and engage with schools to increase attendance. Youth on Track is only available in seven sites in NSW and for young people who have never had a supervised order.
Between August 2017 and June 2020, a randomised controlled trial (RCT) was implemented to evaluate the Youth on Track program. A brief intervention called Fast Track was created as the control arm to ensure some level of treatment for all young people participating in the RCT. Fast Track was capped at six weeks of case management. Caseworkers did not deliver any structured interventions to the young person, but could refer them to external services.
We examined whether there were any differences in recidivism, education, employment, community activity, and housing outcomes between Youth on Track and Fast Track participants.

Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. (Crime and Justice Bulletin No. 249).  

By Veronica Frisancho,  Alejandro Herrera and Eduardo Nakasone

This paper analyzes the relationship between the presence of LGBTQI students in the class-room and the prevalence of violence in the school setting. We rely on a representative sample of secondary schools in Uruguay and exploit variation in the share of LGBTQI students across classrooms to study how their presence affects the individual experience of violence. Our results show little support for the contact hypothesis: a larger share of LGBTQI students in the classroom has no impact on the individual experience of violence. On the contrary, a greater share of female LGBTQI students in the classroom is associated with greater psychological and physical violence among girls, irrespective of their gender identity or sexual orientation.

Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank, 2022. 31p.

By Richard Mendel

Though the number of youth confined nationwide has declined significantly over the past two decades, our country still incarcerates far too many young people.

It does so despite overwhelming evidence showing that incarceration is an ineffective strategy for steering youth away from delinquent behavior and that high rates of youth incarceration do not improve public safety. Incarceration harms young people’s physical and mental health, impedes their educational and career success, and often exposes them to abuse. And the use of confinement is plagued by severe racial and ethnic disparities.

This publication summarizes the evidence documenting the serious problems associated with the youth justice system’s continuing heavy reliance on incarceration and makes recommendations for reducing the use of confinement. It begins by describing recent incarceration trends in the youth justice system. This assessment finds that the sizable drop in juvenile facility populations since 2000 is due largely to a substantial decline in youth arrests nationwide, not to any shift toward other approaches by juvenile courts or corrections agencies once youth enter the justice system. Most youth who are incarcerated in juvenile facilities are not charged with serious violent offenses, yet the United States continues to confine youth at many times the rates of other nations. And it continues to inflict the harms of incarceration disproportionately on Black youth and other youth of color – despite well-established alternatives that produce better outcomes for youth and community safety.

Washington, DC: Sentencing Project, 2022. 34p.