EVIDENCE-BASED TARGETING A New Approach to Juvenile Crime Prevention.

EVIDENCE-BASED TARGETING

A New Approach to Juvenile Crime Prevention

“Evidence-Based Models” Guide HOW You Serve

“Evidence-Based Targeting” Guides WHO You Serve

Grant Funding is Shrinking

Two wars Tax cuts Economic recession Rising energy costs Subprime mortgage bailout Costly (and more frequent?) natural disasters

WHY?

Need to Target Limited Resources

Option 1: Wait Until Kids Get Arrested

Option 2: MOVE UPSTREAM

54 Risk Factors!

Being Male

Being Poor

Being a Gang Member

We Need Weighted Risk Factors

The Standard Approach

Survey Your Community

Identify the Most Common Risk Factors

Choose Which of the Most Common Risk Factors to Target

The Standard Approach is WEAK!

To Maximize Effectiveness

DON’T Target the Most Common Risk Factors

Target Those UNCOMMON Risk Factors (Or Combinations of Risk Factors) Most Closely Associated With Crime

The Challenge

How To Identify the Most Significant Risk Factors

The Yonkers JCEC Database

Uses Unique IDs to Maintain Confidentiality

Unique IDs Based on System Used for HIV Records

Cross-References Multiple Data Sets

The Yonkers JCEC Database

Police Data

School Data

Social Service Data

Census Data

Police Data

Juvenile Arrests

School Data

Truancy

Suspensions

Serious School Incidents

Special Education Status

Social Service Data

Foster Care

Census Data

Gender

Age

High Poverty Census Tracts (>20%)

The Pyramid of Risk

4326,071All Youth Aged 7-15

7513,206Males Aged 7-15

1076,614Aged 10-14, High Poverty

3621709Grades 7-8, 20+ Absences

3824230Grades 1-12, 3-Day Suspension

4941170Aged 11-13, Arrested in 2003

1286141Grades 6-8, 20+ Absences AND 3-Day Suspension

# Arrests (Per 100, 3 Years)

# Arrested (Per 100, 3 Years)

Group Size

(1 Year)

Risk Factor

All Youth Aged 7-15 (2000-2003)

26,071 (3%)

Males Aged 7-15 (2000-2003)

13,206 (5%)

Aged 10-14 in High-Poverty Neighborhoods (>20%), 2000 Census

6,614 (7%)

709 (21%)

230 (24%)

170 (41%)

The Pyramid of Ri sk: 3 -yea r arres t rate

LEGEND:

Average # in sample per year(% of group arrested within 3 years) 41 (61%)

Traditional Focus:

“Neighborhood-BasedTargeting”

New Focus:“Evidence-Based Targeting”

Grades 6-8, 20+ Absences AND3-Day Suspension, 2004-2005

Aged 11-13, Arrested in2003

Grades 1-12 with 3-daysuspension, 2000-2004

Grades 7-8 with20+ Absences,

2004-2005

© Program Design and Development, LLC, 2008.

All Youth Aged 7-15, 2000-2003

26,071 (4)

Males Aged 7-15, 2000-2003

13,206 (7)

Aged 10-14 in High-Poverty Neighborhoods (>20%), 2000 Census

6,614 (10)

709 (36)

230 (38)

170 (49)

The Pyramid of Ri sk: # of A rrests per 100

LEGEND:

Average # in sample per year(# of arrests in 3 years per 100 youth) Grades 6-8, 20+ Absences AND

3-Day Suspension, 2004-200541 (128)

Aged 11-13, Arrested in2003

Traditional Focus:

“Neighborhood-BasedTargeting”

New Focus:“Evidence-Based Targeting”

Grades 1-12 with 3-daysuspension, 2000-2004

Grades 7-8 with20+ Absences,

2004-2005

© Program Design and Development, LLC, 2008.

Recommendations for Providers

1. Target the Highest Risk-Groups

HOW?

Use the Pyramid of Risk


2. But AVOID CREATING GANGS!

HOW?

Provide One-On-One Services

Mentoring

Functional Family Therapy

Scatter in Pro-Social Groups


3. Track Arrests (The Ultimate Outcome Measure)

HOW?

Preserve Confidentiality

Obtain Parental Consent

Give Program Participant Names to Police

Get Back ONLY Aggregate Number of Arrests


4. Use Yonkers Data as “Estimated Baseline”

HOW?

See “Sample Program Outcomes Form”


5. Estimate Cost Per Arrest Prevented

HOW?

Calculate Yonkers Baseline for Your Group

Compare Your Results to Estimated Baseline

Calculate Estimated Number of Arrests Prevented

Divide Costs By Number of Arrests Prevented


1. Target the Highest-Risk Groups

2. But AVOID CREATING GANGS

3. Track Arrests

4. Use Yonkers Data as “Estimated Baseline”

5. Estimate Cost Per Arrest Prevented

Recommendations for Communities

1. Share This Information

CDBG Applicants

Weed & Seed Programs

Youth Bureau-Funded Agencies

Other Youth-Serving Agencies


2. Survey % of Highest-Risk Youth Currently Served

CDBG

Youth Bureau

NYS DCJS Grant Funding

Other Locally-Controlled Grant Funding for Youth


3. Use School Data to Identify Specific High-Risk Youth

Identify Chronic Truants

Identify Youth with Serious School Incidents

HOW?

Identify Youth with Multiple Suspensions


4. Use Police Data to Track Real Outcomes

Give Programs Group-Level Arrest Data

HOW?

Compare Across Similar Programs

Compare to Baseline Data


5. Refocus Existing Youth Funding for Greater Impact

Use “Best Practice” Programs

Target Highest-Risk Youth AND

Prioritize Funding for Programs That:

HOW?

Report Outcomes on Actual Arrests

Prioritize Funding for Training in Best Practices


6. Mobilize the CPS Educational Neglect Process

County-Funded Investigation & Assessment

County-Funded Intervention & Tracking

Hire PD&D to Coordinate a 1-Year Plan

HOW?

BENEFITS:


7. Localize the Pyramid of Need

Identify Highest-Risk Groups More Accurately

Provide More Accurate Baseline Data

Have PD&D Calculate Local Arrest Rates

HOW?

BENEFITS:


1. Share This Information

2. Survey % of Highest-Risk Youth Currently Served

3. Use School Data to Identify Specific High-Risk Youth

4. Use Police Data to Track Real Outcomes

5. Refocus Existing Youth Funding for Greater Impact

6. Mobilize the CPS Educational Neglect Process

7. Localize the Pyramid of Need

Karl Bertrand, L.M.S.W., President

Program Design and Development, LLC47 Wayside Drive

White Plains, NY 10607

(914) 592-1272

[email protected]

www.programdesign.com

For more information, contact:

EVIDENCE-BASED TARGETING A New Approach to Juvenile Crime Prevention.

Documents

Transcript of EVIDENCE-BASED TARGETING A New Approach to Juvenile Crime Prevention.