top of page
This site was designed with the
.com
website builder. Create your website today.Start Now

Implement Community-Based Programs 

with Fidelity

The most effective programs at reducing recidivism and promoting positive life outcomes for youth are administered in the community and in the context of family and culture.  

Over the past decade, researchers have identified intervention strategies and program models that reduce delinquency and promote pro-social development.  Researchers have determined that the most effective services are those that attempt behavior change through improving life skills, counseling, and case management. This therapeutic philosophy includes the following categories of programs:​​

Restorative 

  • Restitution

  • Victim-offender mediation

​

Skill Building

  • Cognitive-behavioral techniques

  • Academic and vocational skill building

​

Counseling

  • Individual, group and family therapy

  • Mentoring

 

Multiple Coordinated Services

  • Case management

  • Wraparound

On the other hand, research shows that programs focusing on deterrence via surveillance and control, like confinement, intensive probation and boot camps, are shown to increase delinquency rates.

Achieve a Positive Return on Investment

Cost-Savings of Evidence-Based Programs 

Functional Family Therapy

Recidivism: Lowered by 15.9% 

For every dollar invested: $10.59 in benefits

Aggression Replacement Training

Recidivism: Lowered by 7.3% 

For every dollar invested: $11.66 in benefits

Multi-Systemic Therapy

Recidivism: Lowered by 10.5% 

For every dollar invested: $13.36 in benefits

Multidimensional Foster Care Treatment

Recidivism: Lowered by 22% 

For every dollar invested: $10.88 in benefits

Evidence shows that high-quality prevention and early intervention programs can achieve significantly more benefits than costs.  In 2004, the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) found that delinquency prevention programs could save taxpayers $7 - $10 for every $1 invested, primarily in the form of reduced spending on prisons.  In 2007, WSIPP found that the most popular evidence-based programs had a significant return on investment in terms of costs and reductions in recidivism. (See Appendix B: Brief Descriptions of Evidence Based Programs).

Implement Community-Based Programs

There are a wide range of community-based programs offered all across Michigan. While most, if not all jurisdictions offer some type of community-based service, it is important to continually evaluate outcomes of each program and make enhancements or changes as needed.

Step 1: Determine the Purpose of the Program

A treatment intervention should be applied with purpose as youth should only participate in services that are designed to reduce risks and address needs.

 

  • What are the goals, objectives, and activities for this program?  Is there a curriculum to support these goals and objectives?

  • Who is the target population? Provide clear parameters for which youth are included and excluded. What are the risk reduction goals the program is trying to achieve

  • What desired outcomes (short-term) or impact (long-term) do you want this program to achieve?

Step 2: Develop Clear Policies and Procedures

Before jumping into day one, there should be clear guidelines covering how the goals, objectives, and activities will be achieved.

 

  • Who will manage the program? What are the roles of staff who will be implementing the program? Who will conduct oversight or quality management?

  • How will program assignments or referrals be managed? How will the program staff communicate with the court and with service providers?

  • What are the terms and conditions for participation in the program?  What incentives or positive reinforcements exist for completing the program?  What consequences exist if the youth violates conditions of the program?

  • What are the expectations for family involvement?  How is this communicated and encouraged with the family?

Step 3: Implement the Program

The key to successfully implementing a program is to follow procedures exactly in line with the program’s original design, referred to as program fidelity.  This helps ensure that youth receive the appropriate dosage and type of intervention.  

 

  • Who will train staff on the program design as well as any new policies and procedures?

  • What is the plan for information management?  What protocols are in place to release information to partner agencies?  What protections are in place to protect client confidentiality?

  • How will program expectations be communicated to staff, youth, and families? Some examples include program brochures, frequently asked questions, logic models, and flow charts.

Step 4: Measure Fidelity to Program Design

An effective quality management system helps monitor how effectively procedures are being followed.  Quality management is most effective when it is incorporated as part of the everyday procedures. 

 

  • What indicators will you use to measure quality of the program?  Who is responsible for monitoring quality indicators? [Learn more about this in the Evaluation Section.]

  • How closely is the program being implemented in line with policies and procedures?  Are timelines consistently met?

  • How frequently does the management team convene to discuss quality improvement?

Step 5: Evaluate Program Outcomes

Program evaluation is a critical part of measuring success and sustaining positive outcomes. For a more detailed explanation, see the next section Measuring Success: Outcome Evaluation.

 

  • Are there intermediate or short-term performance measurements in place?

  • Are there longer term evaluations of program fidelity and impact?

1. Steinberg, L., Chung, H. L., & Little, M. (2004, January 1). Reentry of young offenders from the justice system: A Developmental Perspective. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1(1). doi: 10.1177/1541204003260045

2. Lipsey, M.W., Howell, J.C., Kelly, M.R., Chapman, G., & Carver, D. [Center for Juvenile Justice Reform]. (2010, December). Improving the effectiveness of juvenile justice programs: A new perspective on evidence-based practice. Retrieved from Georgetown University website: http://cjjr.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ImprovingEffectiveness_December2010.pdf

3. Ibid.

4. Aos, S., Miller, M., & Drake, E. (2006, October). Evidence-based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates. Washington State Institute for Public Policy.

5. Ibid.

bottom of page