Evaluation of the Moral Reconation Therapy of the Franklin/Jefferson County Evening Reporting Center Program

• NCJ Number: 210973
• Author(s): T. R. Carr Ph.D.; Jeanie Thies Ph.D.; Rhonda A. Penelton MPA
• Date Published: 2005
• Length: 174 pages
• Grant Number(s): 01-DB-BX-0017
• Sponsoring Agency: Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA); Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
• Corporate Author: Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
• Sale Source: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This report presents the results of an 18-month evaluation of the Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) of the Evening Reporting Centers (ERC) for youthful offenders.

Abstract

Evening reporting centers and after-school programming for youth have emerged as promising alternatives to detention for youth charged with delinquent offenses. In addition to offering supervision during the peak delinquency times, such as after school and during the early evening hours, the programs also offer cognitive behavioral treatments, life skills training, and counseling programs targeting issues such as alcohol and drug abuse. MRT is one example of a cognitive-behavioral therapy that targets the thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes believed to influence delinquent behaviors. The goal of MRT is to facilitate changes in the decisionmaking process and enhance appropriate behaviors through the development of higher moral reasoning. The current evaluation focused on the ERCs in Franklin and Jefferson Counties in Illinois and included both a process and an outcome evaluation at each site. The process evaluation focused on how the program was implemented, how the target population was identified, mechanisms for program referrals, service delivery, and program activities. The outcome evaluation focused on reductions in delinquent behavior among program participants. Data were gathered via structured interviews, field observations, and by document review. The process evaluation identified both strengths and challenges in terms of program implementation. Among the implementation challenges are the need to clearly identify the target population and enhance community collaboration and information-sharing. Among the outcome evaluation results were the findings that 86.5 percent of ERC participants in Franklin Country and 49 percent of participants in Jefferson Country were not arrested for a new offense during the evaluation period. Several recommendations are offered, such as the recommendation to ensure the guidelines and criteria of the ERCs are communicated to probation staff, judges, and other community agencies. Footnotes, tables, bibliography, appendixes