Evidence-Based Practice in the Juvenile Justice System: Balancing Clinical Expertise with Best Available Research and Client Variables

Each year, thousands of adolescents are processed through the juvenile justice system -- a system that is complicated, expensive, and inadequately addressing the needs of the youth in its care. While there is extensive literature available in support of interventions for youthful offenders that are clinically superior to current care and more cost-effective than the existing structure, there is a gap between research and practice that is preventing their implementation. The use of Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology (EBPP) as defined by the American Psychological Association is presented as one method to bridge this gap. This paper identifies and discusses each of five barriers to effective use of EBPP: cost, fragmentation of the mental health system, historical and systemic variables, research methodology, and clinician variables. These barriers are first defined and then illustrated using examples from the author's experience working in the juvenile justice field. Finally, recommendations for the field are presented.

Correlates of Program Completion in Juvenile Diversion

The current study evaluated the State Juvenile Diversion Program, managed by the District Attorney’s (DA) office in Denver Colorado. The purpose of this study was to review factors, which potentially contribute to success or failure in diversion. Research in diversion programing typically focuses on recidivism rates, but fails to examine which factors contribute to program completion. The analysis was conducted using data from 57 juveniles who entered the DA diversion program in 2015. This represents the majority of juveniles in the diversion program rather than a sample. The current study confirmed prior research findings that those juveniles who do not successfully complete a diversion program are more likely to reoffend. Additionally, the factors which were significantly correlated with successful completion of the diversion program were grade point average (GPA) and number of municipal tickets. The number of behavior reports in school before and after the Diversion program was significantly lower for both groups. Non-significant findings are also discussed as they may help guide future research.