References by Chapter for Reentry I-Guide

Introduction

Reasonable Evidence:
Altschuler, D. M., and Brash, R. 2004. Adolescent and teenage offenders confronting the challenges and opportunities of reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 2(1): 72–87.

Altschuler, D. M., and Armstrong, T. L. 2001. Reintegrating high-risk juvenile offenders into communities: Experiences and prospects. Corrections Management Quarterly 5(1): 79–95.

Cusick, G. R., Goerge, R. M., and Bell, K. C. 2009. From Corrections to Community: The Juvenile Reentry Experience as Characterized by Multiple Systems Involvement. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall at University of Chicago.

Gies, S. V. 2003. Aftercare. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Chapter 1: Establish Goals

Begin by using information about the specific youth population to inform your program.
- Reasonable Evidence:
  Jain, S., Cohen, A.K., Jagannathan, P., Leung, Y., Bassey, H., and Bedford, S. 2018. Evaluating the implementation of a collaborative juvenile reentry system in Oakland, California. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 00(0):1–20.
  
  Gather specific information on individual needs through interviews and assessment tools.
  - Reasonable Evidence:
    Smith, C. J., Hayler, B., and Craig, K. 2000. The Illinois Department of Corrections’ Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment Program: The Final Report of the Program Evaluation. Springfield, IL: Center for Legal Studies.
    
    Develop both individual- and agency-level goals.
    - Compelling Evidence:
      Aloisi, M., and LeBaron, J. 2001. The Juvenile Justice Commission’s Stabilization and Reintegration Program: An Updated Analysis. New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety, Juvenile Justice Commission.
      
      Greenwood, P. W., Deschenes, E. P., and Adams, J. 1993a. Chronic Juvenile Offenders: Final Results from the Skillman Aftercare Experiment. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
      
      Wiebush, R. G., Wagner, D., McNulty, B., Wang, Y., and Le, T. N. 2005. Implementation and Outcome Evaluation of the Intensive Aftercare Program: Final Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
      
      Include more specific, secondary goals to supplement the primary goal of reducing recidivism.
      - Compelling Evidence:
        Josi, D. A., and Sechrest, D. K. 1999. A pragmatic approach to parole aftercare: Evaluation of a community reintegration program for high-risk youthful offenders. Justice Quarterly 16(1):51–80.
        
        Use SMART goals to set clear program goals.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        James, C., Asscher, J. J., Dekovic, M., Van der Laan, P. H., and Stams, G. J. J. M. 2013. Endeavors in an experimental study on the effectiveness of an aftercare program in the Netherlands: Research note. Criminal Justice Policy Review 24:123–138.
        
        Create an implementation plan that outlines all the necessary steps, personnel, and activities involved in the implementation of a program.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Melton, A. P., Martinez, R., and Melton, D. J. 2014. Experiences with Incorporating Culture into Tribal Green Reentry Programs. Research Triangle, NC: RTI International.
        
        Chapter 2: Community Needs Assessments
        
        Use information gathered on your targeted juvenile population to make decisions about suitable programs to implement.
        
        Minimum Related Evidence:
        Alameda County Associated Community Action Program, Alameda County Health Care Services Agency, and Alameda County Probation Department. 2010. Comprehensive Blueprint for Youth Reentry in Alameda County: Collaborative and Effective Juvenile Reentry. Alameda County, CA. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from the web: https://www.acgov.org/probation/documents/ALACOYouthReentryBlueprint2010.pdf
        
        If possible, conduct focus groups and interviews with stakeholders to capture information that cannot be found in the existing data.
        
        Minimum Related Evidence:
        Alameda County Associated Community Action Program, Alameda County Health Care Services Agency, and Alameda County Probation Department. 2010. Comprehensive Blueprint for Youth Reentry in Alameda County: Collaborative and Effective Juvenile Reentry. Alameda County, CA. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from the web: https://www.acgov.org/probation/documents/ALACOYouthReentryBlueprint2010.pdf
        
        Create an inventory of the programs and treatment services currently available for youths in your community.
        
        Minimum Related Evidence:
        Alameda County Associated Community Action Program, Alameda County Health Care Services Agency, and Alameda County Probation Department. 2010. Comprehensive Blueprint for Youth Reentry in Alameda County: Collaborative and Effective Juvenile Reentry. Alameda County, CA. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from the web: https://www.acgov.org/probation/documents/ALACOYouthReentryBlueprint2010.pdf
        
        Use the findings from your community needs assessment and inventory of programs and treatment services to make decisions about reentry programming.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Cusick, G. R., Goerge, R.M., and Bell, K. C. 2009. From Corrections to Community: The Juvenile Reentry Experiences as Characterized by Multiple Systems Involvement. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, Chapin Hall.
        
        Texas Juvenile Justice Department. 2012. Comprehensive Report: Youth Reentry and Reintegration. Austin, TX: Texas Juvenile Justice Department. https://www.tjjd.texas.gov/publications/reports/2012ReentryReintegrationReport.pdf
        
        Altschuler, D. M., Hussemann, J., Zweig, J., Banuelos, I., Ross, C., and Liberman, A. 2016. The Sustainability of Juvenile Programs Beyond Second Chance Act Funding. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved February 12, 2018, from the web: https://www.urban.org/research/publication/sustainability-juvenile-programs-beyond-second-chance-act-funding-case-two-grantees
        
        Chapter 3: Do Supportive Research
        
        Identify key program components that best serve your population and the specific reentry obstacles that may be present in your community.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Trupin, E. J., Kerns, S. E. U., Walker, S.C., DeRobertis, M.T., and Stewart, D. G. 2011. Family integrated transitions: A promising program for juvenile offenders with co-occurring disorders. Journal of Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse 20:421–436.
        
        Learn what elements or components of reentry programming are important to increase youths’ odds of success.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        James, C., Stams, G. J. J.M., Asscher, J. J., De Roo, A.K., and van der Laan, P. H. 2013. Aftercare programs for reducing recidivism among juvenile and young adult offenders: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review 33: 263–274.
        
        Recognize the importance of matching services and programming to the individualized risks and needs of youths.
        
        Minimum Related Evidence:
        Development Services Group, Inc. 2015. Risk and Needs Assessment for Youths. Literature Review. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved February 12, 2018, from the web: https://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg/litreviews/RiskandNeeds.pdf
        
        Holsinger, A. M., Lowenkamp, C. T., and Latessa, E. J. 2006. Predicting institutional misconduct using the youth level of service/case management inventory. American Journal of Criminal Justice 30(2):267–284.
        
        Latessa, E., Lovins, B., and Ostrowski, K. 2009. The Ohio Youth Assessment System Final Report. Cincinnati, OH: Center for Criminal Justice Research.
        
        Lodewijks, H. Doreleijers, T.A. H., de Ruiter, C., and Borum, R. 2008. Predictive validity of the structured assessment of violence risk in youth (SAVRY) during residential treatment. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 31:263–271.
        
        Understand the role of school in juvenile reentry.
        
        Minimum Related Evidence:
        Altschuler, D., and Bilchik, S. 2014. Critical Elements of Juvenile Reentry in Research and Practice. Bethesda, MD: The Council of State Governments Justice Center. Retrieved February 14, 2018, from the web: https://csgjusticecenter.org/youth/posts/critical-elements-of-juvenile-reentry-in-research-and-practice/
        
        U.S. Departments of Education and Justice. 2014. Guiding Principles for Providing High-Quality Education in Juvenile Justice Secure Care Settings. Washington, DC: U.S. Departments of Education and Justice. Retrieved February 14, 2018, from the web: https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/correctional-education/guiding-principles.pdf
        
        Discuss reentry efforts with other jurisdictions.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Alameda County Associated Community Action Program, Alameda County Health Care Services Agency, and Alameda County Probation Department. 2010. Comprehensive Blueprint for Youth Reentry in Alameda County: Collaborative and Effective Juvenile Reentry. Alameda County, CA. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from the web: https://www.acgov.org/probation/documents/ALACOYouthReentryBlueprint2010.pdf
        
        Chapter 4: Stakeholder Buy-In
        
        Identify program champions who can help get support for the program.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Barton, W. H., Jarjoura, G. R., and Rosay, A. B. 2008. Evaluation of the Boys and Girls Club of America Targeted Re-entry Initiative: Final Report. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
        
        Encourage program champions to help in the development of programmatic goals and implementation.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Goodstein, L., and Sontheimer, H. 1997. The implementation of an intensive aftercare program for serious juvenile offenders: A case study. Criminal Justice and Behavior 24(3):332–359.
        
        Use an implementation team to enhance the implementation process.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Wiebush, R. G., Wagner, D., McNulty, B., Wang, Y., and Le, T. N. 2005. Implementation and Outcome Evaluation of the Intensive Aftercare Program: Final Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
        
        Collaborate with leadership to get their support of the reentry program.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Smith, C. J., Hayler, B., and Craig, K. S. 2000. The Illinois Department of Corrections’ Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment Program: The Final Report of the Program Evaluation. Springfield: IL: Center for Legal Studies, University of Illinois at Springfield.
        
        Ensure buy-in from frontline staff who would be impacted by the implementation of a reentry program.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Smith, C. J., Hayler, B., and Craig, K. S. 2000. The Illinois Department of Corrections’ Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment Program: The Final Report of the Program Evaluation. Springfield: IL: Center for Legal Studies, University of Illinois at Springfield.
        
        Build a bridge across public and private organizations to increase long-term collaboration.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Calleja, N. A., Dadah, A. M., Fisher, J., and Fernandez, M. 2016. Reducing juvenile recidivism through specialized reentry services: A Second Chance Act project. OJJDP Journal of Juvenile Justice 5(2):1–11.
        
        Integrate opportunities for youth and family engagement into reentry program.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Trupin, E.J., Kerns, S. E. U., Walker, S. C., DeRobertis, M.T., and Stewart, D. G. 2011. Family integrated transitions: A promising program for juvenile offenders with co-occurring disorders. Journal of Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse 20:421–436.
        
        Get buy-in from all members of the community directly affected by the implementation of certain types of reentry programs, such as gang interventions.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Altschuler, D. M., Hussemann, J., Zweig, J., Banuelos, I., Ross, C., and Liberman, A. 2016. Sustainability of Juvenile Programs Beyond Second Chance Act Funding. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
        
        Chapter 5: Specific Jurisdictional Issues
        
        Take into account how the setting and services of a program match the needs and issues of the communities that youth return to.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Lurigio, A., Bensinger, G., Thompson, S. R., Elling, K., Poucis, D., Selvaggio, J., and Spooner, M. 2000. A Process and Outcome Evaluation of Project BUILD: Years 5 and 6. Unpublished manuscript. Chicago, IL: Loyola University.
        
        Explore what housing options are available for youth once they reenter the community.
        
        Minimum Related Evidence:
        Stansfield, R. 2016. Juvenile desistance and community disadvantage: The role of appropriate accommodations and engagements. Justice Quarterly 33(4):708–728.
        Tam, C.C, Freisthler, B., Curry, S.R., and Abrams, L.S. 2016. Where are the beds? Housing locations for transition age youth exiting public systems. Families in Society 97(2):111–119.
        
        Consider adding culturally competent components that are uniquely responsive to the communities targeted by the program.
        
        Minimum Related Evidence:
        Sickmund, M., Sladky, T.J., Kang, W., and Puzzanchera, C. 2017. Easy access to the census of juveniles in residential placement. Retrieved August 15, 2018, from the web: https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezacjrp/
        
        Armstrong, T., and Jackson, L. 2003. Overrepresentation of minorities in youth correctional confinement in the United States: A promising aftercare approach for ameliorating this problem. In Queloz, N., Brossand, R., Repand, F., Butikofer, B., Meyer-Birsch, B., and Pittet, D. (Eds.), Migrations in Ethnic Minorities: Impacts on Youth Crime and Challenges for the Juvenile Justice and Other Intervention Systems. Proceedings from the 15th Conference of the International Association for Research into Justice Criminology.
        
        Development Services Group, Inc. 2016. Tribal Youth in the Juvenile Justice System. Literature Review. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved February 16, 2018, from the web: https://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg/litreviews/Tribal-youth-in-the-Juvenile-Justice-System.pdf
        
        Melton, A. P., Martinez, R., and Melton, D. J. 2014. Experiences with Incorporating Culture into Tribal Green Reentry Programs. Research Triangle, NC: RTI International.
        
        Address the potential barriers to program completion due to community infrastructure, especially in rural areas.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Bouffard, J. A., and Bergseth, K. J. 2008. The impact of reentry services on juvenile offenders’ recidivism. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 6(3):295–318.
        
        Chapter 6: Procure Funding
        
        Explore the variety of funding opportunities available, including federal and state sources.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Calleja, N. A., Dadah, A. M., Fisher, J., and Fernandez, M. 2016. Reducing juvenile recidivism through specialized reentry services: A Second Chance Act project. OJJDP Journal of Juvenile Justice 5(2):1–11.
        
        Jain, S., Cohen, A. K., Jagannathan, P., Leung, Y., Bassey, H., and Bedford., S. 2018. Evaluating the implementation of a collaborative juvenile reentry system in Oakland, California. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 62(12):3662–3680.
        
        Acoca, L., Stephens, J., and Van Vleet, A. 2014. Health Coverage and Care for Youth in the Juvenile Justice System: The Role of Medicaid and CHIP. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured. Retrieved February 20, 2018, from the web: https://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/8591-health-coverage-and-care-for-youth-in-the-juvenile-justice-system.pdf
        
        Bouffard, J., Bergseth, K., and Ford, S. 2009. A Minnesota County mentors juveniles and provides reentry services. Corrections Today: 54–57.
        
        If you are developing a brand-new reentry program, consider all the costs and resources needed to ensure successful implementation.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Lindquist, C., McKay, T., Melton, A. P., Martinez, R., and Melton, D. J. 2014. Cross-Site Evaluation of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Tribal Green Reentry Program: Final Technical Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
        
        Chapter 7: Provide Program Training
        
        Conduct initial training at the outset of the program and provide immediate training upon hiring new staff.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Young, D. W., Farrell, J., and Taxman, F. 2013. Impacts of juvenile probation training models on youth recidivism. Justice Quarterly 30(6):1068–1089.
        
        Barton, W. H., Jarjoura, G. R., and Rosay, A.B. 2008. Evaluation of the Boys and Girls Club of America Targeted Re-entry Initiative: Final Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
        
        Recognize the importance of providing booster training.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Trupin, E. J., Kerns, S.E.U., Walker, S.C., DeRobertis, M.T., and Stewart D. G. 2011. Family integrated transitions: A promising program for juvenile offenders with co-occurring disorders. Journal of Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse 20:421–436.
        
        Ensure training for staff members and personnel who are directly involved in the implementation of the program.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Texas Juvenile Justice Department. 2012. Comprehensive Report: Youth Reentry and Reintegration. Austin: TX: Texas Juvenile Justice Department.
        
        Unruh, D. K., Gau, J. M., and Waintrup, M. G. 2009. An exploration of factors reducing recidivism rates of formerly incarcerated youth with disabilities participating in a re-entry intervention. Journal of Child and Family Studies 18(3):284.
        
        Develop program manuals or documents, and revise as needed.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Godley, M. D., Godley, S. H., Dennis, M. L., Funk, R. R., and Passetti, L. L. 2006. The effect of assertive continuing care on continuing care linkage, adherence, and abstinence following residential treatment for adolescents with substance use disorders. Addiction 102(1):81–93.
        
        Meyers, R.J., and Squires, D.D. n.d. The Community Reinforcement Approach. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse and Addictions.
        
        Lurigio, A., Bensinger, G., Thompson, S. R., Elling, K., Poucis, D., Selvaggio, J., and Spooner, M. 2000. A Process and Outcome Evaluation of Project BUILD: Years 5 and 6. Unpublished manuscript. Chicago, IL: Loyola University.
        
        Consider the time commitment of program training.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Young, D.W., Farrell, J., and Taxman, F. 2013. Impacts of juvenile probation training models on youth recidivism. Justice Quarterly 30(6):1068–1089.
        
        Godley, M.D., Godley, S.H., Dennis, M. L., Funk, R. R., and Passetti, L.L. 2006. The effect of assertive continuing care on continuing care linkage, adherence, and abstinence following residential treatment for adolescents with substance use disorders. Addiction 102(1):81–93.
        
        Smith, C. J., Hayler, B., and Craig, K. S. 2000. The Illinois Department of Corrections’ Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment Program: The Final Report of the Program Evaluation. Springfield, IL: Center for Legal Studies, University of Illinois at Springfield.
        
        Recognize staff may need additional time to learn material outside of formal training.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Greenwood, P. W., Deschenes, E. P., and Adams, J. 1993a. Chronic Juvenile Offenders: Final Results from The Skillman Aftercare Experiment. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
        
        Chapter 8: Address Adaptation
        
        Assess how core program components fit with the needs and available resources of your community and whether additions and minor adjustments are possible.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Bouffard, J. A., and. Bergseth, K. J. 2008. The impact of reentry services on juvenile offenders’ recidivism. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 6(3):295–318.
        
        Ringle, J. L., Thompson, R. W., and Way, M. 2015. Reunifying families after an out-of-home residential stay: Evaluation of a blended intervention. Journal of Child and Family Studies 24:2079–2087.
        
        Consider adapting evidence-based programs that are not usually implemented in reentry settings.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Aos, Steve. 2004. Washington State’s Family Integrated Transitions Program for Juvenile Offenders: Outcome Evaluation and Benefit-Cost Analysis. Olympia, Wash.: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
        
        Lucenko, B. A., He, L., Mancuso, D., and Felver, B. 2011. Effects of Functional Family Parole on Re-Arrest and Employment for Youth in Washington State. Research and Data Analysis Report 2.24. Olympia: WA: Department of Social and Health Services.
        
        Make sure changes and adaptations do not conflict with the theoretical foundations of evidence-based programs, and match adaptations with evaluation.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Aos, S. 2004. Washington State’s Family Integrated Transitions Program for Juvenile Offenders: Outcome Evaluation and Benefit-Cost Analysis. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
        
        Lee, T., and DeRobertis, M. 2006. Overview of the FIT treatment model. Focal Point 20(2):17–19.
        
        Be responsive to issues that occur during implementation and prepare to make unplanned changes to the program model as needed.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Goodstein, L., and Sontheimer, H. 1997. The implementation of an intensive aftercare program for serious juvenile offenders: A case study. Criminal Justice and Behavior 24(3):332–359.
        
        Chapter 9: Unanticipated Setbacks
        
        Consider whether the program setting is accessible, and consider consolidation or relocation of service delivery settings.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Altschuler, D. M., Hussemann, J., Zweig, J., Banuelos, I., Ross, C., and Liberman, A. 2016. Sustainability of Juvenile Programs beyond Second Chance Act Funding. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
        
        Partner with neighboring jurisdictions if faced with low program participation.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Chrissy, J., Asscher, J. J., Dekovic, M., Van der Leaan, P. H., and Stams, G. J. J.M.2012. Endeavors in an experimental study on the effectiveness of an aftercare program in the Netherlands: Research Note. Criminal Justice Policy Review 24(1):123–138.
        
        Use training to prepare for possible changes in staffing and management.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Smith, C. J., Hayler, B., and Craig, K. S.2000. The Illinois Department of Corrections’ Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment Program: The Final Report of the Program Evaluation. Springfield, IL: Center for Legal Studies.
        
        Develop a flexible timeline that accommodates for early or unexpected release of juveniles from residential facilities.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        James, C., Asscher, J. J., Dekovic, M., Van der Laan, P.H., and. Stams, G. J. J. M. 2013. Endeavors in an experimental study on the effectiveness of an aftercare program in the Netherlands: Research note. Criminal Justice Policy Review 24:123–138.
        
        James, C., Asscher, J. J., Stams, G. J. J. M, and van der Laan, P.H. 2016. The effectiveness of aftercare for juvenile and young adult offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 60(10): 1159–1184.
        
        Identify challenges experienced by staff throughout the implementation process.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Altschuler, D. M. 2016. The Sustainability of Juvenile Program Beyond Second Chance Act Funding: The Case of Two Grantees. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
        
        Stay engaged with community stakeholders to maximize positive youth reentry outcomes.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Bouffard, J., Bergseth, K., and Ford., S. 2009. A Minnesota County mentors juveniles and provides reentry services. Corrections Today 71(6): 54.
        
        Chapter 10: Sustainability
        
        Consider additional funding streams to help secure the future of your reentry program.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Lindquist, C., McKay, T., Melton, A. P., Martinez, R., and Melton, D. J. 2014. Cross-Site Evaluation of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Tribal Green Reentry Program: Final Technical Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
        
        Generate investment from community partners to help sustain important program elements.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Altschuler, D. M. 2016. The Sustainability of Juvenile Program Beyond Second Chance Act Funding: The Case of Two Grantees. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
        
        Know what to measure in evaluations of your reentry program.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Zimmerman, C. R., Hendrix, G., Moeser, J., and Roush, D. W. 2004. Desktop Guide to Reentry For Juvenile Confinement Facilities. Easy Lansing, MI: Center for Research & Professional Development.
        Godley, M.D., Godley, S.H., Dennis, M.L., Funk, R.R., and Passetti, L.L. 2006. The effect of assertive continuing care on continuing care linkage, adherence, and abstinence following residential treatment for adolescents with substance use disorders. Addiction 102(1): 81–93.
        
        Conduct regular process evaluations focused on program fidelity.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Bouffard, J., Bergseth, K., and Ford, S. 2009. A Minnesota County mentors juveniles and provides reentry services. Corrections Today 71(6): 54.
        
        Conduct an outcome evaluation to determine if a reentry program is meeting the desired goals and objectives.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Lurigio, A., Bensinger, G., Thompson, S.R., Elling, K., Poucis, D., Selvaggio, J., Spooner, M. 2000. A process and outcome evaluation of project BUILD: Years 5 and 6. Unpublished Report. Chicago, Ill.: Loyola University.
        
        Capture the whole picture both numerically and qualitatively.
        
        Reasonable Evidence:
        Mathur, S. R., and Clark, H. G. 2014. Community engagement for reentry success of youth from juvenile justice: Challenges and opportunities. Education and Treatment of Children 37(4): 713–734.
        
        Present cost savings in support of continuation of reentry efforts.
        
        Compelling Evidence:
        Aos, S. 2004. Washington State’s Family Integrated Transitions Program for Juvenile Offenders: Outcome Evaluation and Benefit-Cost Analysis. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.

double arrow: expand all reference sections

Juvenile Reentry Programs

Introduction

I-Guide Goals
Implementation Steps
Start
Support
Secure
- Handling unanticipated problems or setbacks
- Ensuring long-term sustainability
I-Guide Category Reference

Learn more about the Categories and Steps of the I-Guides

Start:

These components relate to building a solid foundation before implementing an evidence-based intervention.

Support:

These components assist with putting a program or practice into place.

Secure:

These components relate to stabilizing and sustaining the program or practice within the community or jurisdiction.
Glossary

Review the I-Guide Glossary Page for a complete listing.
I-Guide Citation

Development Services Group, Inc. 2018. MPG I-Guides: Juvenile Reentry Programs. Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. https://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg-iguides/topics/juvenile-reentry-programs/

Prepared by Development Services Group, Inc., under contract number GS–10F–0166K.

¹Minimum standards for review: The program must be evaluated with at least one randomized field experiment or a quasi-experimental research design (with a comparison condition); the outcomes assessed must relate to crime, delinquency, or victimization prevention, intervention, or response; the evaluation(s) must be published in a peer-reviewed publication or documented in a comprehensive evaluation report; and the year of publication must be 1980 or after.