Risk Assessment for Juvenile Justice: A Meta-Analysis

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.     

Investigating Probation Strategies with Juvenile Offenders: The Influence of Officers’ Attitudes and Youth Characteristics

Probation officers are the focal point for most interventions with delinquent youths in the juvenile justice system. The present study examines probation strategies and interventions in a sample of 308 probation officers who completed the Probation Practices Assessment Survey (PPAS) in a web-based survey. The PPAS measures six probation approaches: deterrence, restorative justice, treatment, confrontation, counseling, and behavioral tactics. Structural equation models and latent class analyses showed that probation officers use multiple approaches with delinquent youths consistent with the balanced and restorative justice movement. Younger youths, high-risk youths, and youths with prior social service involvements are likely to receive more intensive interventions. The implications of these findings for improving probation practices with delinquent youth are discussed.     

The Public/Private Cleavage in a Welfare State: Attitudes Toward Public Management Reform

This study contributes to the growing literature on differences in attitudes between public and private sector employees, particularly with respect to their receptivity or resistance to public management reforms. We begin by asking the question: to what degree does perceived self-interest play a role in accounting for attitudes toward public management reforms such as downsizing, privatization, and public spending? Using attitudinal data from Sweden, a social welfare state with a large public bureaucracy, a tension is observed both among public employees in different levels of government and between public and private sector employees. In the context of public management reforms, national government employees emerge as more right-leaning politically and more supportive of public management reforms than those working in local government. The analysis finds, particularly among national government employees, that while interest as measured here is strongly related to attitudes toward reform, status as a public employee and status as a public bureaucrat are not as significant as other components of interest in accounting for attitudes toward public management reform.