California Department of the Youth Authority - Evaluation of Juvenile Diversion Projects - Final Report

• NCJ Number: 73532
• Author(s): T Palmer; M Bohnstedt; R Lewis
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 387 pages
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice; California Office of Criminal Justice Planning
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The effectiveness of California's juvenile diversion programs was evaluated by means of a detailed examination of 15 diversion projects, which were chosen to represent the 74 projects evaluations in an earlier study.

Abstract

The evaluation was designed to determine the number of youths diverted from the traditional justice system, the impact of diversion on recidivism, and diversion projects' costs. Most study data were gathered via site visits and detailed record searches on individual youths. Whenever possible, diversion clients were compared with youths who had not been diverted. Results showed that about half the projects' clients were diverted from initial processing or further processing within the traditional justice system. The other half would not have been processed within the traditional justice system had the diversion projects not existed. Over one-fourth of these individuals were referred to the diversion projects by thenselves, their parents, or their schools. Recidivism was studied by means of quasi-experimental designs and individual record searches on 1,345 clients and 1,192 comparison individuals. Results indicated that diversion reduced recidivism by 17.3 percent during the 6-month followup period. However, recidivism was not significantly reduced for clients with no prior arrests or with two or more prior arrests. Average cost per case for all clients was $250. Over 70 percent of the youths were exposed to family counseling, just over half to individual counseling. Few clients received such services as academic tutoring and employment counseling. Most youths maintained contact with their programs for about 6 weeks. Youths who received individual counseling performed better in the 6-month followup period than did youths who did not. Findings suggest that diversion should optimally be used following most youths' second offenses and no later than their third. Moreover, different types of diversion programs should be used for different types of youths. A series of recommendations were developed for specific categories of youths. Tables, footnotes, 27 references, and 27 appendixes presenting data collection instruments and additional study results are included. For an executive summary of this report, see NCJ 73533.