Juvenile Second Chance Act Participation in Virginia: Impact on Rearrest, Reconviction, and Reincarceration

Liberman, Akiva; Hussemann, Jeanette; McKeever, Brice

doi:10.1080/10509674.2021.1887426

Cited by 2 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…15 Two studies, Lindquist et al ( 2014 ) and McKay et al ( 2014 ), reported data on the same program, data, and samples; these two publications were treated as a single study for the purposes of the thematic analysis, sensitivity analysis, and heterogeneity assessment. Conversely, four studies presented separate process findings for programs that had been implemented in multiple sites (Barton et al, 2008 ; Iutcovich & Pratt, 1998 ; Liberman et al, 2021 ; Wiebush et al, 2005 ). Where one publication presented findings for multiple sites (and where samples were independent), each site was treated as a separate study.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As such, all studies received a judgment of moderate or higher on that domain, contributing to the final overall judgments. Six program sites were scored as moderate for confounding due to evaluators attempts to control for some potential confounds, such as utilizing multivariate analyses (e.g., Abrams et al, 2008 ; Andersson Vogel et al, 2014 ; Bouffard & Bergseth, 2008 ; Liberman et al, 2021 ; Stafford & Glassner, 2012 ) or propensity score matching (e.g., Liberman et al, 2021 ). We note that these studies and methods were unable to account for all possible confounding factors.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Results of the influence analysis indicate that the pooled finding is not robust; removing any of 8 of the 13 effect sizes is sufficient to reduce the aggregate LOR to a non‐statistically significant level favoring the treatment group. For example, removing the study by Liberman et al ( 2021 ) ‐ Virginia would result in a pooled odds ratio of 1.172 (i.e., LOR = 0.159, 95%CI [−0.053, 0.372]). See Figure 11 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies noted that programs had been terminated during the study period, in some cases due to funding issues (Barton et al, 2008 ; Liberman et al, 2021 ). In multiple program sites, a lack of leadership and difficulties operating the program past a term of grant funding led to program termination.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in its Alabama site, the Targeted Re‐Entry (TR) program suffered from a lack of administrative commitment and a weakened community network, which led to the decision to “…discontinue TR programming when the funding from the national [Boys and Girls Clubs of America] office was due to expire in December, 2006” (Barton et al, 2008 , p. 26). Similarly, a reentry program implemented in Texas was terminated due to a lack of funding after Second Chance Act grant funding expired, while services in California and Oklahoma sites were reduced and enrollment waned (Liberman et al, 2021 ). Though it is not clear if the Green Reentry program is still running, Lindquist et al ( 2014 ) also noted that “…at the conclusion of grant period, it was unclear how the overall planning and coordination of green activities and the oversight of specific green projects would be accomplished” (pp.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The effects of aftercare/resettlement services on crime and violence in children and youth: A systematic review

Wong,

Lee,

Beck

2024

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHigh rates of youth re‐offending indicate that young custody‐leavers face challenges when reintegrating into their communities. Aftercare and resettlement programs can occur pre‐, during, and post‐release and generally provide multiple forms of support services to address youths' transitional needs.ObjectivesThe present review examines (1) the impact of youth aftercare/resettlement programs on crime‐related outcomes, (2) how treatment effect is moderated by participant, program, and study characteristics, (3) whether some types of interventions are more effective than others, (4) barriers/facilitators to effective program implementation, (5) the theory of change underlying resettlement interventions, and (6) available research on intervention cost.Search MethodsA comprehensive set of keywords and synonyms was combined in a Boolean search across 26 electronic databases. Multiple gray literature sources were also searched, including 23 journals, 4 meeting archives, 11 organization websites, 3 open access journal websites, and the CVs of 8 well‐known researchers in the field. The search was completed in January 2023.Selection CriteriaFor objectives 1–3, studies were included if they utilized a randomized controlled design or quasi‐experimental comparison group design in which participants were matched on at least some baseline variables and included at least one quantitative individual‐measure of crime. For objective 4, included studies presented process evaluations of aftercare/reentry programs, clearly stated their research goals, and used qualitative methods in an appropriate way to answer the stated research question. For objectives 5 and 6, no specific methods were required; any study meeting the criteria for objectives 1–4 which presented findings on theory of change or cost data were included. For all outcomes, only studies conducted in a westernized country, and published after 1991 in English, French, or German were considered.Data Collection and AnalysisTwo coders conducted primary data extraction for the included studies. Data were entered into a Microsoft Excel database. After data extraction, the two coders validated the coding by cross‐checking the database with each research report. Discrepancies between coders were discussed until consensus was reached. Where consensus could not be reached, a third coder was consulted. Study risk of bias was addressed using the ROBINS‐I (Sterne et al., 2016), ROB‐2 (Higgins et al., 2019), and the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP, 2018). Objectives 1–3 were addressed by synthesizing quantitative outcomes from rigorous impact evaluations of aftercare interventions using random effects models and meta‐regression. Thematic and narrative analysis was conducted to address objectives 4–6.ResultsThe search resulted in 15 impact studies, representing 4,718 participants across 21 program sites, and 35 effect sizes. The 21 impact evaluations were rated as having either low/moderate bias (k = 11) or serious bias (k = 10). The synthesis of 15 impact studies found no significant effects for arrest (k = 14; OR = 1.044, 95% prediction interval [0.527, 2.075], t = 0.335) or incarceration (k = 8, OR = 0.806, 95% prediction interval [2.203, 1.433], t = −1.674). A significant pooled effect was found for conviction (k = 13, OR = 1.209, 95% prediction interval [1.000, 1.462], t = 2.256), but results were highly sensitive to the inclusion of specific studies. No meaningful pattern of results emerged in moderator analyses with respect to study, sample, program component, or program delivery characteristics. The 19 process studies were rated as either high quality (k = 12) or moderate quality (k = 7). Thematic synthesis of the process evaluations revealed 15 themes related to the strengths/challenges of program implementation. The assessment of program cost (k = 7) determined a lack of data within the literature, preventing any summative analysis.Authors' ConclusionsCurrent evidence is promising with respect to conviction outcomes but overall does not find that aftercare/resettlement interventions have a reliably positive impact on crime‐related outcomes for young people who have offended. High variability across outcomes and reported data resulted in small sample sizes per outcome and limited moderator analyses. Multiple challenges for program implementation exist; additional rigorous research is sorely needed to further investigate the nuances of the program effects.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The effects of aftercare/resettlement services on crime and violence in children and youth: A systematic review

Wong,

Lee,

Beck

2024

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Philosophies in Community Supervision of Gang-Involved Youth and Adults

Craig,

Zurn,

Elliott

et al. 2024

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The wide expansion of community supervision has resulted in large-scale reliance on probation officers to facilitate change among both youth and adults. This is especially true for supervising high-risk populations, such as gang-involved individuals. To understand how probation officers balance the dual goals of public safety and rehabilitation, in-depth interviews with 12 youth and adult officers in Oregon were conducted. Results revealed that both groups had a shared understanding of gang pathways and desistance barriers. However, they held differing views on the factors that drive success and compliance. Youth officers utilize therapeutic philosophies and emphasize restoration through community resources to help youth desist from gang activity. Adult officers endorse law enforcement philosophies, emphasize accountability and personal choices, and center punitive strategies when using interagency collaboration. This study contributes to the literature on role perceptions and decision-making, and suggests that continuity of care in supervision philosophies can yield more successful outcomes for high-risk youth and adults.

show abstract

Juvenile Second Chance Act Participation in Virginia: Impact on Rearrest, Reconviction, and Reincarceration

Cited by 2 publications

References 20 publications

The effects of aftercare/resettlement services on crime and violence in children and youth: A systematic review

The effects of aftercare/resettlement services on crime and violence in children and youth: A systematic review

Philosophies in Community Supervision of Gang-Involved Youth and Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About