Community‐Based Sanctions and Juveniles

An Assessment of Juvenile Justice Reform in Ohio: Impact on Youth Placement and Recidivism From 2008 to 2015

“…Our findings reinforce the notion that successful reduction in institutionalization requires proper alternatives that incorporate evidence-based treatment options. As documented in previous examples, reform initiatives were more effective in reducing incarceration when local and state entities worked together to create a wide range of disposition options (Garcia, 2015). Texas's reform included reallocating funds to local juvenile probation departments for expanding alternative options through the Community Corrections Diversion Program (Fabelo et al, 2015).…”

“…Community safety and resource use efficiency may be negatively impacted if youths are diverted from institutions only to return later or engage in more serious offending. Therefore, the deinstitutionalization movement requires expanding the range of disposition options from one focused on a probation or residential facility dichotomy to one that offers a range of alternatives that can be delivered effectively in the community (Garcia, 2015). In terms of systemized support, previous efforts tended to be more successful when state and local governments collaborated (e.g., Georgia, South Dakota, Texas;Carter, 2020;Fabelo et al, 2015;Hess & Verhine, 2017).…”