Evaluation of Boot Camps for Juvenile Offenders in Cleveland, Denver, and Mobile, 1992-1993 (ICPSR 6922)

Version Date: Mar 30, 2006

Cite this study |

Principal Investigator(s):
Blair B. Bourque, Washington Research Center. American Institutes for Research; Daniel B. Felker, Washington Research Center. American Institutes for Research; Mei Han, Washington Research Center. American Institutes for Research; Richard N. White, Washington Research Center. American Institutes for Research

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06922.v1

Version V1

Slide tabs to view more

Summary

Boot camps, a popular alternative to standard correctional facilities, are characterized by a strong emphasis on military structure, drill, and discipline and by an abbreviated period of incarceration. In 1990, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) launched a demonstration program to develop boot camp models for juveniles and to test the feasibility and appropriateness of their implementation. In September 1991, three groups received awards to develop and implement boot camps as intermediate sanctions: the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas in Cleveland, Ohio, the Colorado Division of Youth Services in Denver, Colorado, and the Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater Mobile, Alabama. Simultaneously, the National Institute of Justice sponsored an evaluation of the implementation of the demonstration programs, focusing on the experiences of youths who entered the program during the first year of operation, from 1992 to 1993. This collection contains data from the program evaluation conducted on these three boot camps during the first year. The core of the assessment was a management information system that captured administrative data as the offenders progressed through the demonstration program. At intake, researchers collected demographic, criminal, and family and social information. Demographic information collected at intake includes age, race, education, and employment. Criminal data covers criminal history, current offense, and case information, while family and social history variables include whether the youths' parents had a criminal record, whether their family received public assistance, and whether they had delinquent friends, delinquent siblings, discipline problems at home or school, or a history of psychological problems. At the beginning and end of the boot camp term, staff rated the youths' performance on educational and behavioral measures. The youths were also surveyed about the rules of boot camp, their opinions of instructors, and their self-esteem, drug and alcohol use, and criminal behavior. At the end of the first 90 days (the residential period), data were collected on the date of graduation, infractions during boot camp, honors or awards, and special services received. Five months after graduation, youths were evaluated on their aftercare experiences. Some sites supplemented the basic management information with data collected on educational performance, employment history and expectations, physical fitness, and youth attitudes.

Citation

Bourque, Blair B., Felker, Daniel B., Han, Mei, and White, Richard N. Evaluation of Boot Camps for Juvenile Offenders in Cleveland, Denver, and Mobile, 1992-1993. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2006-03-30. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06922.v1

Export Citation:

  • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
  • EndNote

Funding

United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (92-DD-CX-K043)

Subject Terms

Geographic Coverage

Distributor(s)

Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
Hide

Time Period(s)

1992 -- 1993

Date of Collection

1992 -- 1993

Data Collection Notes

  1. (1) The principal investigators conducted another boot camp evaluation under the same grant from the National Institute of Justice. The scope and methods of the other evaluation differed significantly from this study, and therefore it is archived under a different study number. Users should consult EVALUATION OF THE FIRST INCARCERATION SHOCK TREATMENT (FIST) PROGRAM FOR YOUTHFUL OFFENDERS IN KENTUCKY, 1993-1994 (ICPSR 2698) for further information about this evaluation. (2) The user guide, codebooks, and data collection instruments are provided as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file. The PDF file format was developed by Adobe Systems Incorporated and can be accessed using PDF reader software, such as the Adobe Acrobat Reader. Information on how to obtain a copy of the Acrobat Reader is provided through the ICPSR Website on the Internet.

Hide

Study Purpose

Boot camps, a popular alternative to incarceration, are characterized by a strong emphasis on military structure, drill, and discipline and by an abbreviated period of incarceration. In 1990, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) launched a demonstration program to develop boot camp models for the juvenile system and to test the feasibility and appropriateness of their implementation. In September 1991, three groups received awards to develop and implement boot camps as intermediate sanctions: (1) the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas in Cleveland, Ohio, (2) the Colorado Division of Youth Services in Denver, Colorado, and (3) the Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater Mobile, Alabama. Simultaneously, the National Institute of Justice sponsored an evaluation of the implementation of the demonstration programs, focusing on the experiences of youths who entered the program during the first year of operation, from 1992 to 1993. The evaluation sought to address the following research questions: (1) To what extent do juveniles in boot camps receive the services prescribed for them? (2) What is the recidivism rate of the juveniles in the boot camp group as compared with that of the control group? (3) What short-term benefits, such as educational or vocational training, employment, or restitution, result from participation in the program? (4) Are the boot camps cost effective?

Study Design

This study was designed to be a process evaluation and not an impact evaluation. The core of the assessment was a management information system that captured administrative data as the offenders progressed through the demonstration program. At intake, researchers collected demographic, criminal, and family and social history information. At the beginning and end of the boot camp term, staff rated the youths' performance on educational and behavioral measures. At the end of the first 90 days (the residential period), data were collected on the date of graduation, infractions during boot camp, honors or awards, and special services received. Five months after graduation, youths were evaluated on their aftercare experiences. Some sites were able to supplement the basic management information with data collected on educational performance, employment history and expectations, physical fitness, and youth attitudes.

Sample

Random assignment of eligible participants.

Universe

Young male delinquents in Cleveland, Denver, and Mobile.

Unit(s) of Observation

Individuals.

Data Source

official juvenile corrections records, and self-enumerated questionnaires

Data Type(s)

Description of Variables

At intake, information was gathered on the degree of the most serious current offense, the weapon involved, status in the system at the time of arrest, score on drug screening questionnaire, and primary court disposition imposed. Demographic information collected at intake includes age, race, education, and employment. Family and social history variables include whether the youths' parents had a criminal record, whether their family received public assistance, and whether they had delinquent friends, delinquent siblings, discipline problems at home or school, or a history of psychological problems. Criminal history data were collected on prior sentence, filing complaint date, sentence date, and offense status. Upon exiting the camp, data on infraction type, reason for exiting camp, aftercare placement, and any new sentence were recorded. For the aftercare program, data were collected on the date released from boot camp to aftercare, type of educational program and counseling received during aftercare, types of serious disciplinary infractions, and length of new sentence. At program completion, data were gathered on program completion status, reasons for dropping out, charges, outcome, and placement. In Cleveland and Mobile education data were recorded on reading, spelling, and math scores at the beginning and end of the program. Cleveland also collected baseline data on education completed, youth employment, type of work the youths expected to do as adults, behavior with close friends, behavior of close friends, and drug use. Physical fitness data, including number of push-ups, sit-ups, and running time at the beginning and end of the program, were also gathered in Cleveland. In all three sites, staff were asked to rate the youths with regard to respecting authority, maintaining self-control, acting responsibly, working well with others, and maintaining their physical appearance. All three sites also surveyed the juveniles about the rules of the boot camp, their opinions of instructors, and their self-esteem, drug and alcohol use, and criminal behavior.

Response Rates

Not applicable.

Presence of Common Scales

The Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) and several Likert-type scales were used.

Hide

Original Release Date

1999-11-02

Version History

2018-02-15 The citation of this study may have changed due to the new version control system that has been implemented. The previous citation was:
  • Bourque, Blair B., Daniel B. Felker, Mei Han, and Richard N. White. Evaluation of Boot Camps for Juvenile Offenders in Cleveland, Denver, and Mobile, 1992-1993. ICPSR06922-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1999. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06922.v1

2006-03-30 File CB6922.ALL.PDF was removed from any previous datasets and flagged as a study-level file, so that it will accompany all downloads.

2005-11-04 On 2005-03-14 new files were added to one or more datasets. These files included additional setup files as well as one or more of the following: SAS program, SAS transport, SPSS portable, and Stata system files. The metadata record was revised 2005-11-04 to reflect these additions.

1999-11-02 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

  • Standardized missing values.
  • Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
Hide

Notes

  • The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.