Recent increases in the delinquency and incarceration of girls have prompted juvenile justice professionals to search for effective, gender-specific prevention and treatment strategies. Given the dearth of research on girls' programming, these professionals are often left to sort out discrepancies between two major bodies of literature that address the needs of delinquent girls-the "what works" literature and the "gender-responsive" literature. This article culls the best of what is available within both these bodies of literature and suggests programmatic elements deemed essential for working effectively with girls.

The research on what works in correctional interventions provides a powerful agenda for correctional programming. Evaluability assessment is a tool that can be used to help put this research into practice by providing a measure of program quality. This article describes Gendreau and Andrews's Correctional Program Assessment Inventory (CPAI) as one example of an evaluability assessment tool that is designed to ascertain how well programs are meeting certain principles of effective intervention. It also reports the results of CPAIs conducted on 86 treatment programs. The results indicate that these programs are not adequately incorporating the principles into their correctional programming. Common shortcomings are discussed, and potential resolutions are offered.

No abstract

Over the past 20 years, much has been learned about the elements of effective correctional interventions through a body of literature known as "what works." The primary foci within this literature are assessment, treatment models, and treatment setting. Relatively little is said about the specific knowledge, attitudes and skill sets that correctional staff should possess to be effective change agents, or about the importance of the relationships that form between correctional staff and the offenders they serve. This stands in contrast to the counseling profession, where the therapeutic, or helping, alliance has long been viewed as an intermediate criterion of counseling effectiveness. The purpose of this article is to examine the role of the helping alliance in juvenile probation settings. Strategies for facilitating the development of the helping alliance and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Background Drowning risk is reported to be increased in people from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities, due to a limited awareness of hazards and risks, as well as a lack of aquatic participation and skills. However, there is limited information detailing these potential contributing factors in diverse communities. Aims This study aimed to determine: the level of aquatic participation, self-reported aquatic skills, and behaviours in people from different cultural backgrounds. Methods A survey was developed to assess participation, skill levels and behaviours among diverse community groups in Victoria, Australia. Demographic data were also collected. The study consisted of: A general community survey conducted among 601 residents of Victoria. Respondents were selected by a random sample process with interviews conducted by telephone. Telephone surveys with an additional 506 members of the Italian, Sudanese, Vietnamese, Chinese and Indian communities collectively were conducted. Focus group sessions with these communities further explored issues or trends emerging from the telephone surveys. All respondents were aged 18 years and over. Results 63% of CALD groups had not been swimming in the past year compared to 33% of the general community. Only 23% CALD had formal swimming lessons compared to 71% general community; 37% CALD said they could not swim compared to 5% general community. CALD groups were less likely to consume alcohol and participate in aquatic activities. Significance CALD groups had reduced participation and swimming ability but reported certain safer behaviours around water. This evidence will assist development of culturally appropriate programs and water safety messages for drowning prevention.

The Risk-Need-Responsivity model of correctional intervention has become the cornerstone of correctional practice in the United States. With a primary focus on building human capital through interventions aimed at developing knowledge and skills needed for prosocial behavior, the model enjoys widespread empirical support. This approach, however, has been criticized by desistance-focused scholars for its failure to recognize social capital and the importance of social networks for facilitating behavior change. The current article examines the concept of individual-level social capital and describes how its development can be integrated into the Risk-Need-Responsivity model of correctional interventions as an important responsivity factor. Recommendations include assessing for social capital and strategies for enhancing both bonding and bridging social capital.

No abstract

No abstract