Trends in Delinquency Prevention Building on developmental research JJDPC Presentation Slides – Prepared by Stephanie Bradley, Ph.D. and Brian Bumbarger,

Trends in Delinquency Prevention

Building on developmental research

JJDPC Presentation Slides – Prepared by Stephanie Bradley, Ph.D. and Brian Bumbarger, M. Ed.

August 2014

Emerging Issues

1. Lifecourse, developmental approach to juvenile justice

2. Trauma and adverse childhood experiences3. Universality of risk and protective factors4. Refining “evidence-based”5. Shifting focus to capacity development6. Economic models to guide policy

LIFECOURSE APPROACH IN JUVENILE JUSTICE

Life Course Approach in JJ

• Recent research by the National Research Council acknowledges adolescence as a unique period of development, with specific implications for juvenile justice practices and services

Most important components for healthy psychological development for adolescents1. Involvement of a supportive adult

authority figure.2. Association with prosocial peers.3. Activities that encourage

autonomous decision-making.

Listenbee (2014).


These three components are often missing in

facilities that confine youth!





Listenbee (2014).

• Adolescent development – key tasks– Developing ability to be self-directed

• Increasing autonomy in:– Free-time use– Course selection in education, emerging career

ideas– Peer affiliations – Romantic relationships– Access to media and technology


• Adolescent development – key tasks– Developing an identity

• Through peers, work, education, interpersonal relationships, hobbies, ideological pursuits

• “Trying on” different roles, projecting possible self into the future

• Laying foundation of future beliefs and goals• Youth vary in degree to which they experiment with

different identities and commitment to them• Risk of developing an identity around delinquency• Possibility of reshaping identity toward prosocial


These three components essential to identity and

autonomy development!





Listenbee (2014).


• Adolescent development - neurological– Brain continues to develop until mid-20’s– Regions of brain responsible for planning,

evaluating risk, and inhibiting behaviors are the last to fully mature

– Region of brain responsible for interpreting social cues “hyper-responds” to social stimulus

– Other brain regions are aggressively “pruning” synapses (use it or lose it!), increases in efficiency and critical thinking

• Adolescent development - social– Some risk-taking can produce positive

developmental benefits, “healthful risk taking” (Baumrind, 1991)

– Healthful risk-taking allows for experiences and mastery, and leads to secondary benefits, like development of self-confidence

– Not all risk-taking is “bad”.



• Adoption of a developmental perspective focuses on– the developmental differences of youth, they’re not

children and they’re not adults – youth development as being flexible, adaptable, and– the importance of providing programming upstream

before problem behaviors occur– all youth have the ability to be positive, productive,

contributing members of society

Policy Implications


• Ensuring services:– encourage positive identity development, – support autonomy development, and– connection with supportive adults and prosocial peers– direct “risk-taking” into healthful risk-taking, channel

sensation-seeking into leadership development skills• Attend to skill development, do not overly rely on

cognitive processing – not all brains are ready to process at that level – (CBT okay, cognitive-behavioral)

Programmatic Implications

TRAUMA & ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES (ACES)

Landmark studies from Dept. of Justice, and FL Dept. of JJ, among others demonstrate:– High prevalence of trauma and ACEs in

juvenile populations– Out-of-home placement as trauma– Implications for preventing trauma or

providing early and appropriate response to trauma

Trauma & ACEs

• Defending Childhood Initiative (DoJ); Taskforce on Children Exposed to Violence; Listenbee et al., 2012.

• Focus: to reduce and prevent childhoood exposure to violence

• Exposure to violence as trauma• Violence, broadly defined:

– Sexual abuse– Physical abuse– Intimate partner violence– Community violence– Polyvictims (est. 1 in 10 children)

Trauma: Defending Childhood

• Defending Childhood Initiative (DoJ); Taskforce on Children Exposed to Violence; Listenbee et al., 2012.

“The financial costs of children’s exposure to violence are astronomical. The financial burden on other public systems, including child welfare, social services, law enforcement, juvenile justice, and, in particular, education, is staggering when combined with the loss of productivity over children’s lifetimes.”


Trauma: Defending ChildhoodNoteworthy recommendations:• 1.3 Engage youth as leaders and peer experts in all initiatives

defending children against violence and its harmful effects. • 4.5 Create multidisciplinary councils or coalitions to assure

system-wide collaboration and coordinated community responses to children exposed to family violence.

• 4.8 Provide support and counseling […] for children exposed to lethal violence…

• 5.3 Involve men and boys as critical partners in preventing violence.

• 5.5 Develop and implement policies to improve the reporting of suspected child sexual abuse in every institution entrusted with the care and nurturing of children.

Trauma: Defending ChildhoodNoteworthy recommendations:• 4.5 Create multidisciplinary councils or coalitions to assure

system-wide collaboration and coordinated community responses to children exposed to family violence.

• National Youth Forum on Youth Violence Prevention– Philadelphia Strategic Plan to Prevent Youth Violence

10 childhood experiences identified in research to be associated with chronic disease in adulthood:

1. Emotional abuse2. Physical abuse3. Sexual abuse4. Emotional neglect5. Physical neglect6. Violent treatment toward mother7. Household substance abuse8. Household mental illness9. Parental separation/divorce10. Incarcerated household member

ACEs

• Study from FL Dept. of Juv. Justice (JJSIP peers) analyzed presence of adverse childhood experiences in FL population of 64,000 juvenile justice youth.

• The top three most prevalent ACE indicators were the same for both males and females:

1. family violence, 2. parental separation or divorce, and 3. household member incarceration.

• 2/3 or more of juveniles reported these three ACEs

Baglivio, M. T., Epps, N., Swartz, N., Huq, M. S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N. S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood events in lives of juvenile offenders. Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3 (2), p.1-23.

ACEs in JJ: FL Study

• Most youth reported experiencing 3-4 ACEs in their lifetime.

• Low-risk youth are 35.6 times more likely than high-risk youth to report no ACE indicators, whereas

• High risk youth make up almost 50% of youth reporting 4 or more ACEs.

• Females reported more ACEs than males across all 10 indicators.

• Females reported sexual abuse 4.4 times more often than males.

• ACEs not only increase the chances of involvement in the juvenile justice system, but increase the risk of re-offense.

Baglivio, M. T., Epps, N., Swartz, N., Huq, M. S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N. S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood events in lives of juvenile offenders. Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3 (2), p.1-23.

ACEs in JJ: FL Study

MODELS OF TRAUMA IMPACT ON FUNCTIONING

Survival Brain

Hyper-vigilance

Emotional DysregulationAggression

Complex Trauma

Complex trauma, Emotion dysregulation, and Aggression

Ford J.D., J. Chapman, D.F. Connor, and K.R. Cruise. (2012). Complex trauma and aggression in secure juvenile justice settings. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39(6), 694-724.

Maltreatment

HPA axisdysregulation

Brainmaldevelopment

Neurocognitiveimpairment

High-risk Social/Emotionalfunctioning

Outcomes: Alcohol, tobacco substance use

Maltreatment: Neurocognitive mechanisms for Alcohol and

Substance Abuse

Noll, J. (2014).

Trauma: Psychological Mechanisms for Alcohol and Substance Use

Trauma

PTSD

Re-experiencing

symptoms

Avoidantsymptoms

Arousalsymptoms

Numbingsymptoms

Alcohol and Substance Abuse

Noll, J. (2014).

• Reframes offenders as victims• Broadens scope of understanding causes for youth problem

behaviors• Preventing, identifying, responding to trauma is essential across all

systems with youth contact• Cross-system coordination (e.g. welfare & juv. justice).• Trauma prevention through

• violence prevention, • early parenting programs, • sexual abuse prevention, and• family conflict/domestic violence prevention• And adequate response to the above (intervention)

Implications

Trauma & ACEs

UNIVERSALITY OF RISK AND PROTECTIVE FACTORS

Universality of Risk & Protective Factors

• Trauma as a precursor to some risk factors, and as a risk factor• Implications of problem behaviors for other agencies: welfare, law enforcement,

education, social services• Highlights need for interagency coordination, collaboration, and role of intermediary

organizations


Promoting protective factors for in-risk families and youth: A brief for researchers. Children’s Bureau, Administration of Children, Youth, and Families. 2014.


Promoting protective factors for in-risk families and youth: A brief for researchers. Children’s Bureau, Administration of Children, Youth, and Families. 2014.


• Including risk for heroin and opioid prescription drug use

• Risk and protective factors for using these substances:– Nicotine use, cigarettes, smokeless tobacco– Sensation-seeking– Perceived harm of use – Externalizing– Antisocial behavior– Peer use (access/affiliation)– Use of multiple hard drugs– Parent alcohol use (yes/no)

• PA’s Violence Prevention Programs target many of these risk factors, and have demonstrated outcomes on illicit substance use

Violence Prevention Programs and Drug Use Outcomes

Program Name Setting/Model Target Pop. Substance use outcomes

Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS)

Community-based;Mentoring

Youth aged 6-18 Less likely to initiate drug use

Project Toward No Drug Abuse (TND)

School-based; High school youth

Lower prevalence of past 30-day hard drug use; effects maintained at 5 yr. follow-up.

LifeSkills Training (LST)

School-based; General self-mgmt skills, social skills development, ATOD knowledge and refusal skills.

Middle school youth

Lower use of alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana; lower rates of poly-substance use; effects maintained at 6.5 yr. follow-up.

Strengthening Families Program 10-14 (SFP 10-14)

Community-based; Family program to promote balance of love & limits in parent-child relationship; peer pressure refusal skills for youth

Parents and their youth aged 10-14.

Lower use rate of methamphetamines (12th gr), slower rate of polydrug use (6-12th) narcotic and barbituate misuse (young adult), Rx opiod misuse (25), lifetime Rx drug misuse (25);

LST + SFP 10-14 Combination of above two programs.

Middle school/middle adolescence

Less Rx drug use (11th, 12th); lower lifetime Rx opioid misuse and Rx drug misuse (21,22); esp. strong effects for youth at high risk at program start (25).

• FY12-13 PA prevention outcomes data:– 54% of parents increase substance use rules and expectations– 28% of youth improve skills for resisting peers– 61% of youth have improved knowledge of negative consequences

of substance use– 16% have reduced intent to use (middle school & high school, typically have

low intent to use to begin with)

Violence Prevention Program Outcomes: PA FY2012-2013

Violence Prevention as Health Equity

• CDC and Prevention Institute have described violence as a health equity issue

• Youth of color and impoverished communities experience a disproportionate amount of violence

• Threat of violence impacts health behaviors such as walking, bicycling, use of recreational spaces, access to healthy foods

• “Persons who described their community as ‘not at all safe’ were nearly three times more likely to be physically inactive”

• Addressing violence in these communities provides the possibility for improved healthy behavior and lifestyle

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – Division of Community Health. A Practitioner’s Guide for Advancing Health Equity: Community Strategies for Preventing Chronic Disease. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2013.

Fact Sheet: Violence and Health Equity. Prevention Institute. 2011.

• Highlights need for and value of inter-agency collaboration on prevention efforts and for the role of intermediary organizations

• Addressing violence prevention in at-risk communities to decrease DMC and improve health outcomes

• Increased use and development of PAYS for surveillance and prevention planning, use and education across agencies

• Include community members in violence prevention efforts• Integrate violence prevention across local systems and

organizations

Universal Risk & Protective FactorsImplications

Refining “Evidence-Based”

• Federal standardized metrics and definitions for considering a program effective*– Experimental Design/RCT– Effect sustained for at least 1 year post- intervention– At least 1 independent replication with RCT– RCT’s adequately address threats to internal validity– No known health-compromising side effects

*Adapted from Hierarchical Classification Framework for Program Effectiveness, Working Group for the Federal Collaboration on What Works, 2004.

** Slide drawn from Dr. Del Elliott Blueprints 2014 conference presentation: “The Future of Blueprints and Prevention Science”.

• Beyond the “either-or” framework – Not all issues have an evidence-based program to

address them– Some EBPs may not be a good fit culturally,

programmatically, fiscally– Value of “local” programs– Validity of using meta-analytic research (SPEP; Lipsey,

2009)

– Emphasis on strong evaluations of programs that do not have research evidence (Elliott, 2014)

– Acceptance of “evidence-based principles of change” (vs. name-brand, copyrighted program). (Dodge & Mandel, 2012)



• Increased ability to standardize expectations related to implementation of “evidence-based” programs and practices

• Reduced “pedaling” ineffective, harmful, or unevaluated programs as “evidence-based” to communities and providers attempting to implement proven-effective programs

• Improves possibility of alignment across agencies in accepting a common definition, and associated funding and program monitoring practices

• Insight into effectiveness of locally-developed programs

Implications

SHIFTING FOCUS TO DEVELOPING CAPACITY

• Conventional wisdom of funding service delivery• Emerging knowledge base suggests strategic

development of service provider capacity• Existing systems developed prior to current research

on adolescent development, epidemiology of behavioral health, delinquent behavior, prevention science

• Funding service delivery unlikely to result in generalized knowledge and competency for public health model or sustained focus on refining such skills

Shifting Focus to Develop Capacity

• BARJ and Motivational Interviewing as examples from juvenile justice

• Sea change in thinking about role of probation officer and juvenile court in evoking change, competency development in juveniles

• Has required extensive training efforts to train juvenile probation offices in use of evidence-base, standardized assessments, motivational interviewing techniques

• Similar efforts are now due in delinquency prevention – with an emphasis on organization and workforce development


• Emphasis on developing capacity for prevention at local level

• Organizational development – internal resources for using the public health approach; staff, data, analysis, collaboration

• Workforce development – individual competencies for employing public health model, identification of relevant resources, access to “subject matter expert” peers and communities of practice

• Teach a man to fish

Implications


ECONOMIC MODELS TO GUIDE POLICY

Economic Models to Guide Policy

• Cost-benefit analyses, return-on-investment– Are we getting our money’s worth?– How much are we saving, where, and when?

• Pay-for-success, and social-impact bonds– Where will funds come from to support

effective programming?

• Justice reinvestment– How will savings be reinvested?


The COST of Not Investing in Prevention Annual cost of CJ & JJ for State and County Gov’t . Slide developed by Robert Orth, PA Commission on Crime & Delinquency, 2013.

Cost-Benefit, Return-on-Investment

• Continual refinement of cost-benefit models to estimate savings from effective programs and policies

• Increasing reliance on cost-benefit data to inform policy and funding

• Results First Initiative, Pew-MacArthur Foundation– Cost-benefit analyses of programs in state– Estimated cost of “doing nothing”– Analyses formulated to guide policy making– Projected cost-benefits of proposed changes

Social Impact Bonds, aka “Pay for Success” Bonds

• Private capital to fund social programs• If program is successful then the government pays• Bond parameters are structured by financial

intermediaries• Program selection, implementation, and pricing

are overseen by knowledge intermediaries• Project success determined by independent,

external evaluation

Justice Reinvestment• Allocation of savings that have been accrued

through effective policy, program, practice back into the system

• Reinvestment in strategies that can reduce crime and recidivism

• Increasing number of states adopting justice reinvestment


Implications

• Continued support for programs and policies demonstrating return on investment

• Identification of methods for determining where and how savings will be reinvested

• Exploring the sharing of costs or savings across state agencies that may disproportionately represented on the cost or savings side of the equation (Greenwood & Welsh, 2012)

Conclusions

• Increasing convergence of evidence of basic human need, risk, protection – are relevant across systems and agencies

• Less able to “silo” problems in one system or agency – problems in one may be “paid for” by one or more other agencies

• Concept of centers of excellence, resource centers, intermediary organizations is still progressive and is beginning to gain momentum nationally

Recommendations

• Commitment to collaboration and coordination in addressing delinquency prevention and use of evidence-based practice is essential to achieving cost-effectiveness and dissemination goals (Greenwood & Welsh, 2012).

• Ongoing need to identify and engage missing and non-traditional partners in community, public, private, state, and national sectors.

• For any identified programmatic need, first fund an evidence-based program (consider the medical model). If none available, commit to rigorously evaluating the program implemented (Dodge & Mandel, 2012).

SLIDES FOR PRINTING SEPARATELY


Recommendations span:• Federal policy, legislation, funding• National centers of excellence• Professional development, workforce development• Data collection and surveillance• Public awareness and advocacy• Evidence-based, trauma-informed care/services• Research-funding to continue development of

evidence-based treatments• Multi-disciplinary, multi-agency collaboration and

coordination in response, treatment, services


Recommendations span:• Parenting programs for healthy relationships; especially

fathers who use violence• Early childhood, home visiting• Support for children exposed to lethal violence

– See JCJC recidivism data – youth with two deceased parents recidivate at highest rate of all types of family background

• Culturally appropriate services• Military-specific services• Community coalitions• Improved reporting of suspected child sexual abuse• Assessment, screening, identification


Recommendations span:• Address bullying, suicide• Support trauma-informed school services• Mentoring as prevention and intervention• Research translation of effective programs into

practice• Juvenile justice improvements – trauma informed

screening, detention and suspension alternatives, culturally appropriate services, girls, LGBTQ, avoid punishments for sex-trafficking.

Documents

Trends in Delinquency Prevention Building on developmental research JJDPC Presentation Slides – Prepared by Stephanie Bradley, Ph.D. and Brian Bumbarger,