NCJ Number
83724
Date Published
1981
Length
187 pages
Annotation
Juvenile court diversion program clients in five cities were studied to determine whether the introduction of fees for family counseling services delivered to these clients would affect the quantity and quality of counseling received and clients' recidivism rates.
Abstract
The study was prompted by the recognition that diversion programs must secure new sources of revenue if they are to survive in the face of the elimination of Federal subsidies. The study subjects were randomly assigned to either fee or free service conditions after agreeing that family counseling was the treatment of choice. Counselors were not told which clients were in the fee-paying group. The study group included 218 juvenile offenders with an average age of 14.3 years. Over 71 percent of the families had an annual income over $14,000, while 12 percent earned less than $8,000 per year. Three subgroups emerged from the study subjects: a group which was assigned and paid fees, a group which was assigned fees but did not pay them, and a group receiving free service. On most outcome measures, fees exerted no independent effect on family counseling services. However, fee-paying clients attended significantly more sessions than nonpaying clients and were rated significantly higher on service impact at the end of counseling. Findings support the desirability of charging fees for professional family counseling services delivered in a juvenile diversion program. A review of the history of interventions with juvenile delinquents, a summary of the research on fee-charging for mental health and social services, tables, footnotes, 134 references, and appendixes presenting forms and related materials are provided. (Author abstract modified)