Risk assessment instruments are increasingly employed by juvenile justice settings to estimate the likelihood of recidivism among delinquent juveniles. In concert with their increased use, validation studies documenting their predictive validity have increased in number. The purpose of this study was to assess the average predictive validity of juvenile justice risk assessment instruments and to identify risk assessment characteristics that are associated with higher predictive validity. A search of the published and grey literature yielded 28 studies that estimated the predictive validity of 28 risk assessment instruments. Findings of the meta-analysis were consistent with effect sizes obtained in larger meta-analyses of criminal justice risk assessment instruments and showed that brief risk assessment instruments had smaller effect sizes than other types of instruments. However, this finding is tentative owing to limitations of the literature.

On average, three to four feedback/coaching sessions over a 6-month period sustain skills among trainees for motivational interviewing, mainly for substance use disorder treatment. However, high rates of attrition from feedback/coaching contributes to post-workshop skill erosion.

Results of collaborations with juvenile justice agencies nationwide were examined to provide generalizable estimates of psychiatric disorder and suicidality among justice system youth. Diagnostic assessments were aggregated from 57 sites (N = 9,819) from an automated computer-assisted self-interview (Voice Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children). Disorder was predicted from setting type (system intake, detention, corrections), adjusting for demographic and offense characteristics, and for cross-site variability within settings. Race by comorbid disorder interactions were examined in predicting substance use disorder (SUD). White youth, repeat offenders, and those with further justice system penetration reported higher rates of most disorders; girls reported higher rates of internalizing conditions only. Although presence of another disorder increased SUD for most groups, SUD was high in American Indians regardless of either affective disorder or recent suicide attempt. Findings highlight (a) varying mental health needs across settings, (b) prior justice contact relating strongly to need, (c) girls' elevated rates of internalizing disorder, and (d) racial/ethnic differences in diagnostic profiles.

Juvenile justice systems have widely adopted risk assessment instruments to support judicial and administrative decisions about sanctioning severity and restrictiveness of care. A little explored property of these instruments is the extent to which their predictive validity generalizes across gender. The article reports on a meta-analysis of risk assessment predictive validity with male and female offenders. Nineteen studies encompassing 20 unique samples met inclusion criteria. Findings indicated that predictive validity estimates are equivalent for male and female offenders and are consistent with results of other meta-analyses in the field. The findings also indicate that when gender differences are observed in individual studies, they provide evidence for gender biases in juvenile justice decision-making and case processing rather than for the ineffectiveness of risk assessment with female offenders.

No abstract

Mental disorders are a significant individual, family and societal burden experienced in countries and cultures throughout the world (WHO, 2001). From limited research, the prevalence of mental illness in the Middle East has been found to be comparable to other parts of the world (Karam et al., 2006), with overall 12-month prevalence rates of 17% and lifetime rates of 33% (Kessler et al., 2007; WHO World Mental Health Survey Consortium, 2004). Compared to individuals in western countries, however, those in the Middle East with mental illness receive treatment at considerably lower rates (

Youths formally referred to probation authorities in Texas (791 male, 200 female) self-administered a structured diagnostic interview at intake. Data on demographics, offense characteristics, and reoffending (within 12 months of baseline) were extracted from official justice records. Logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the contribution of diagnosis to recidivism, adjusting for demographic and offense characteristics. Baseline externalizing disorders were associated with increased recidivism risk for both genders, whereas youths’ recidivism risk was not influenced by anxiety disorder. Girls with comorbid substance use and affective disorder were nearly four times more likely to reoffend than girls with no disorder. In contrast, among males, this disorder profile was associated with only approximately half the level of recidivism risk. Results substantiate practice guidelines that recommend comprehensive mental health assessment in juvenile justice settings and identify youths with certain mental health needs who might be well served by diversion programs.

Structured risk assessment instruments are increasingly used in juvenile justice systems to support judicial decision making. They help juvenile justice authorities identify youths with a higher likelihood of repeat delinquency and reduce discretion associated with disposition decision making. To be effective, these instruments should be accurate across diverse populations. This study describes the predictive validity of the North Carolina Assessment of Risk (NCAR) in a sample of 9,534 adjudicated juveniles in North Carolina. Results show the predictive validity of the NCAR to differ by gender and race/ethnicity. Closer inspection reveals that risk factors for recidivism differed according to demographic group and that brief risk assessment instruments such as the NCAR leave other risk factors unmeasured. The results support the utility of risk assessment for juvenile justice decision making and suggest strategies to improve the validity of risk assessment for all offender groups.