Recent research has increasingly focused on interactions between multiple social determinants, interventions to address upstream causes of mental health challenges, and use of simulation models to represent complex systems. However, methodological challenges and inconsistent findings prevent a definitive understanding of which social determinants should be addressed to improve mental health, and within what populations these interventions may be most effective. Recent advances in strategies to collect, evaluate, and analyze social determinants suggest the potential to better appraise their impact and to implement relevant interventions.

Probation is the most common disposition for adjudicated youth, but little is known about which specific requirements are commonly imposed on juveniles, the requirements with which juveniles most often fail to comply, and how certain youth characteristics and/or imposed requirements might relate to probation noncompliance. An investigation of 120 archived files of youth represented by an urban public defender's office identified 29 probation requirements imposed on youth and 18 requirements with which youth commonly failed to comply. Results revealed that 52% of youth failed to comply with at least one probation requirement; prior probation noncompliance and race were both significantly associated with noncompliance in the examined probation disposition. In addition, the probability of probation noncompliance was significantly higher when youth received either of two substance-related probation requirements: drug tests or drug and alcohol counseling. Such results may prompt further investigation of juvenile probation-related predictors, identify areas of need for clinical service provision to foster successful completion of probation requirements, and help identify areas of potential biases among juvenile court personnel.

No abstract

Few longitudinal studies have explored to date whether minority status in disadvantaged neighborhoods conveys risk for negative mental health outcomes, and the mechanisms possibly leading to such risk. We investigated how minority status influences four developmental mental health outcomes in an ethnically homogeneous sample of Puerto Rican youth. We tested models of risk for major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), depressive and anxiety symptoms (DAS), and psychological distress, as Puerto Rican youth (aged 5-13 years) transitioned to early adulthood (15-29 years) in two sites, one where they grew up as a majority (the island of Puerto Rico), and another where they were part of a minority group (South Bronx, New York). At baseline, a stratified sample of 2,491 Puerto Rican youth participated from the two sites. After baseline assessment (Wave 1), each youth participant and one caregiver were assessed annually for two years, for a total of three time points (Waves 1-3). From April 2013 to August 2017, participants were contacted for a Wave 4 interview, and a total of 2,004 young people aged 15 to 29 years participated in the assessment (response rate adjusted for eligibility = 82.8%). Using a quasi-experimental design, we assessed impacts of minority status on MDD, GAD, DAS and psychological distress. Via mediation analyses, we explored potential mechanisms underlying the observed relationships. Data from 1,863 Puerto Rican youth (after exclusion of those with MDD or GAD during Waves 1-3) indicated links between minority status and higher rates of lifetime and past-year GAD, DAS and past 30-day psychological distress at Wave 4, and a marginal trend for MDD, even after adjustments. Childhood social support and peer relationships partially explained the differences, as did intercultural conflict, neighborhood discrimination, and unfair treatment in young adulthood. The experience of growing up as a minority, as defined by context, seemingly elevates psychiatric risks, with differences in social relationships and increased social stress as mediators of this relationship. Our findings suggest that interventions at the neighborhood context rather than at the individual level might be important levers to reduce risks for the development of mood disorders in minority youth.

Application of the Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model in adult correctional research and practice is well developed, but remains underway in the juvenile justice system. The RNR model may facilitate a shift from punitive practices in the juvenile justice system toward individualized assessment and treatment of youth fostering rehabilitation and reintegration. This article reviews the history of the RNR model in adult correctional settings, its theoretical application to the juvenile justice system, and available tools and literature utilizing RNR principles in juvenile justice settings. Criticisms of applying the RNR model to the juvenile justice system and future research directions are addressed.

No abstract

No abstract

Although most justice-involved youth receive probation as a community-based alternative to residential facility placement, many of these youth are later committed to residential facilities when their probation dispositions are revoked at probation review hearings. The limited research investigating predictors of facility placement following juvenile probation revocation has focused primarily on youth-specific factors rather than on factors that can change from hearing to hearing, such as noncompliance with court-imposed probation conditions. The current study addressed this gap, using generalized estimating equation analyses with 77 youths' archived public defender files--providing data from 268 review hearings--to evaluate the role of both youth-specific factors (e.g., demographic characteristics) and hearing-specific factors (e.g., noncompliance with imposed probation requirements) in residential facility commitment. Results revealed that youth who were absent from the examined review hearing, were rearrested, failed to comply with school-related probation requirements, or failed to appear as directed at the prior review hearing were more likely to have probation revoked and be placed in a juvenile correctional facility. Such findings might help identify groups of youth at greater risk for facility commitment and might inform the guidance provided to juvenile probationers by their families, attorneys, and probation officers.