Search results

Child Trends was funded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to conduct an implementation and impact evaluation of the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice's (DJJ) Second Chance Act reentry reform efforts. Through a rigorous evaluation of DJJ's reentry efforts and the translation of study findings into recommendations for improving juvenile reentry efforts, this project aimed to enhance public safety and improve outcomes for young people reentering their communities. To achieve these goals, they completed three core objectives: 1) leverage DJJ's robust statewide administrative data system to conduct a quasi-experimental study to examine how the core components of DJJ's reentry reforms impact youth outcomes; 2) conduct an in-depth implementation evaluation to provide other states who are implementing federally funded reentry reforms with context for the study findings, as well as to identify challenges and solutions for implementing and sustaining the reforms; and 3) translate research findings for practitioners, policymakers, and researchers aiming to improve juvenile reentry.

The grant was transferred to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) in October 2018.

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2022, the JRFC was divided into seven sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October (October 26, 2022).

In 2017, the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) began implementation of the Regional Service Coordination (RSC) model. The goal of this initiative was to implement and maintain statewide comprehensive community-based services and alternative placements for youth in Virginia's juvenile justice system. The DJJ partnered with Child Trends to conduct a process evaluation of this RSC model. Child Trends used data from DJJ's administrative data system, and collected qualitative data from groups involved in implementation, such as probation/parole officers, judges, service coordinators, and direct service providers.

This study examines how child characteristics, measures of trauma, risks, strengths, type and duration of child welfare involvement, and community factors affect the likelihood of child welfare system-involved youth encountering the juvenile justice system in Chicago, IL.

This study draws on four sources of administrative data. Data were obtained from the Illinois Department of Child and Family Services (IDCFS) and the Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice (IDJJ); from one county juvenile court and probation services division (Juvenile Probation and Court Services [JPCS] of the Cook County Circuit Court); and from one municipal police department (the Chicago Police Department [CPD]). The researchers used these data to match youth across systems and to provide detailed knowledge about child welfare system involvement, trauma experiences, child strengths and risks, and particular juvenile justice outcomes. Arrest data is available through September 2017. Child welfare and juvenile court data are available through December 2017. Data for juvenile corrections from the IDJJ is only available through June 2016; however, the researchers used a corresponding indicator in the juvenile court data to capture this outcome through December 2017.

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2020, the JRFC was divided into eight sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities
8. Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October (October 28, 2020).

Across the country, child welfare and juvenile justice systems now recognize that youth involved in both systems (i.e., dual system youth) are a vulnerable population who go unrecognized because of challenges in information-sharing and cross-system collaboration. These challenges currently prevent the development of accurate estimations of the number of dual system youth nationally and limit understanding of best practices used by jurisdictions implementing integrated systems models. OJJDP funded this secondary analysis study to address this gap in knowledge.

All data used in the Dual System Youth Design Study were owned or accessed by various partners. No primary data collection occurred in the study. In addition, most of the data accessed by the study partners was confidential, de-identified data that required memorandums of agreement and/or court orders to access and use. Some sites have ongoing or standing agreements with the public agencies who own the data which allow access and use for specific projects. Because, most frequently, the data are owned by the public service agencies and include sensitive information the data are not available to be publicly archived. Instead, here a descriptive overview is provided of the data used and accessed by each study partner as well as contact information of a person at each site that will be able to share syntax and/or coding parameters for those who are considering to replicate the findings or methods.

Researchers interested in inquiring the data and syntax used in this project should refer to the study partners section of the downloadable study documentation. Data provider agency names along with the specific study data that were requested are listed in the documentation.

This two-phase study examined factors influencing decisions that lead from a school-based incident to exclusionary discipline, an arrest, and a referral to the juvenile court. The research team hypothesized that multiple external factors such as race identity, socioeconomic status, and others would negatively impact the decision-maker, and generate harsher punishments for those who are in these vulnerable groups. Phase 1 involved interviewing groups of key stakeholders including school administrators, district administrators, discipline coordinators, juvenile court judges and other staff, law enforcement officers, Positive Behavior Intervention Support (PBIS) coordinators, and child welfare agencies to understand their approaches to behavior management. Phase 2 involved secondary analysis of data from local school districts and the juvenile court with jurisdiction in two counties.

The Long-Term Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Impact Study was a pre-post, quasi-experimental study of the impact of the implementation of risk-needs assessment (RNA) and risk-need-responsivity-related (RNR) case management in 5 juvenile probation offices in 2 states. This study used 3 time points (pre-implementation, 1st year post-implementation, and 7th-year post-implementation) to examine the 7-year sustainability of impacts on system-responses (rates of informal processing, different dispositions, and out-of-home placements), youth outcomes (school and employment), and recidivism; as well as cost-effectiveness.

This study also examined whether there was a significant difference in the impacts of implementation after 7 years between probation offices that were effective versus ineffective in their first year of implementation.

A critical gap in knowledge about service provision for domestic minor sex trafficking (DMST) victims is why youth resist help from providers. This project asked DMST survivors about the barriers they experienced and their readiness to leave their commercial sexual exploitation. The study included an in-depth qualitative phase of formerly sex trafficked women (n=41), followed by a cross-sectional, self-report survey administered to recently trafficked young adults (n=94).

In response to growing concerns about recidivism and the welfare of youth who return to communities from incarceration, the federal government passed the Second Chance Act (SCA) in 2008 to authorize funding to support the development, implementation, and evaluation of juvenile reentry programs (H.R. 1593, 110th Cong. 2007). Since then, more than 100 juvenile SCA awards have been made to grantees across the U.S. to improve reentry programming and outcomes for youth returning home after placement in juvenile correctional institutions (State Government Justice Center, 2017).

The purpose of this evaluation was to evaluate five FY2010 juvenile SCA grantees who were funded to implement comprehensive reentry programs for high-risk youth, and to provide policymakers, practitioners, and funders with empirical evidence about the degree to which the SCA program effectively reduced recidivism and improved reintegration outcomes for youth offenders, and to inform future comprehensive juvenile reentry efforts.

Specific goals of this study included:

1. identifying strong sites for an impact evaluation;
2. assessing the extent to which the sites successfully implemented a comprehensive and integrated model of juvenile reentry for a high-risk, high-needs population;
3. assessing program operations and adherence to reentry principles;
4. evaluating the impact of the SCA programs;
5. determining the cost effectiveness of the SCA programs, and their cost-benefit in terms of crime prevented; and
6. disseminating evaluation findings to practitioner and researcher audiences.

This study is a redesign study of the Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) Series and the Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC) Series.

As part of this study's redesign, a pilot test was conducted that included new questions, topics, and methods that were reviewed and approved by a panel of 12 juvenile justice experts. The experts provided feedback about questions and topics that should be removed from the current surveys or added to the questionnaires in future waves. Additionally, two survey methodologists reviewed the questionnaires for wording, visual design, and other survey methodology best practices that should be incorporated. Eight cognitive interviews were conducted to review the recommended additions and changes. See the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memo for a detailed list of changes.

Because there are few existing tools for assessing the risk of recidivism for youth with a history of sexual offending that are empirically valid and reliable, knowledge and practice in this area has historically been limited. This project examined current practice and policy in the assessment, treatment, and management of juvenile sex offenders across multiple jurisdictions (Florida, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Virginia). The researchers developed a prototype assessment tool, state-specific risk assessment models, and practical guidance for building a risk assessment for sexual recidivism in juvenile justice settings.

The data file contains individual records for the full sample (n=8,035), including their risk predictors, recidivism measures, and resulting outputs (i.e., predicted probabilities of sexual recidivism) from the risk models.

This project utilizes secondary data analysis of existing data. Recognizing that the school discipline and juvenile justice experience of immigrants may differ from non-immigrant children, the project explores the role immigration status and border location has on these outcomes.

The National Juvenile Court Data Archive houses over 15 million automated records of cases handled by courts with juvenile jurisdiction. Although some states' data contain traffic and dependency cases, the majority are delinquency and status offense records. The collection itself dates back to the 1920s when it was under the Children's Bureau, however in 1974 the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), within the U.S. Department of Justice assumed responsibility for the work of promoting access to automated juvenile court data sets for juvenile justice research and policymaking efforts.

The Archive contains the most detailed information available on juveniles involved in the juvenile justice system and on the activities of U.S. juvenile courts. The Archive houses a sizable collection of automated juvenile court data files that not only support the national estimates but also support the study of a wide range of national and subnational juvenile justice issues. Designed to facilitate research on the juvenile justice system, the Archive's data files are available to policy-makers, researchers, students, and the public. The data have been used to explore a broad range of topics, from investigating the effectiveness of juvenile court programs and examining policy developments in individual jurisdictions, to monitoring the impact of legislative changes, and guiding juvenile justice system reform.

This project was centered on the apparent tension between keeping schools safe and keeping students attached to school. The project used comprehensive administrative data from the North Carolina public school system available through the North Carolina Education Research Data Center (NCERDC).

This dataset, along with juvenile court record data and publicly-available data from the North Carolina adult criminal justice system, linked administrative information from the same individuals in both school disciplinary records and the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems. The ultimate goal of this project was to determine if different policy choices by schools causally decrease rates of in-school violence in the short run and/or increase rates of conviction and incarceration in the long term.

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2018, the JRFC was divided into seven sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October.

This study was conducted to address the dropping rates in residential placements of adjudicated youth after the 1990s. Policymakers, advocates, and reseraches began to attirbute the decline to reform measures and proposed that this was the cause of the drop seen in historic national crime. In response, researchers set out to use state-level data on economic factors, crime rates, political ideology scores, and youth justice policies and practices to test the association between the youth justice policy environment and recent reductions in out-of-home placements for adjudicated youth.

This data collection contains two files, a multivariate and bivariate analyses. In the multivariate file the aim was to assess the impact of the progressive policy characteristics on the dependent variable which is known as youth confinement. In the bivariate analyses file Wave 1-Wave 10 the aim was to assess the states as they are divided into 2 groups across all 16 dichotomized variables that comprised the progressive policy scale: those with more progressive youth justice environments and those with less progressive or punitive environments. Some examples of these dichotomized variables include purpose clause, courtroom shackling, and competency standard.

The Hennepin County Department of Community Corrections and Rehabilitation Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluations surveyed 150 youth to examine the role of trauma and violence on justice-involved lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning/unsure or asexual (LGBTQA) and gender non-conforming youth (GNC).

Youth were surveyed and administrative human services and juvenile justice data were also analyzed. The correctional staff were surveyed with an organizational self-assessment on employee perceptions of trauma-informed practices and policies. A subset of youth (N = 60) were interviewed using the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire Revised Version 2 (JVQ-R2) and the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) tool to assess trauma and victimization.

This survey also collected demographic information as well as the participants' history of harassment, bullying, suspension, expulsion, housing arrangements, and foster care involvement.

The Accountability and Incentives Management (AIM) system is a graduated response system that was implemented by the Maryland Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) to promote supervision compliance and reduce rates of supervision violations and recidivism, among other juvenile justice-related outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess AIM's implementation and outcomes. The treatment group (or AIM group) included adjudicated youths who started/completed probation or aftercare supervision with DJS between November 1, 2015 and October 30, 2017. A comparison group was comprised of youth who were supervised prior to AIM implementation (July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2015).

Data were gathered from de-identified administrative records provided by DJS. The unit of analysis is the individual. Variables include: youth delinquency history before supervision; risk/needs assessment; detentions, complaints, and arrests during supervision; AIM sanctions and incentives; youth responses in the AIM program; and demographic characteristics such as age, gender, and race/ethnicity.

To better understand the factors that may help or hinder effective implementation of risk and needs assessments, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) in 2015 launched a study led by the University of Cincinnati to examine the Ohio Youth Assessment System (OYAS) in three states-Arizona, Indiana, and Ohio. The OYAS tools measure risk and needs to inform court decisions as well as the delivery of services and treatment. Researchers collected data through a variety of methods, including in-person interviews with personnel at juvenile justice agencies; web-based surveys; comprehensive case record data for youths assessed by the OYAS; and phone interviews of youth following their case disposition and/or facility release.

One of the study's key objectives was to understand how staff perceived the implementation of the OYAS. To assess the impact of the OYAS on youth outcomes--including reduced recidivism and other prosocial behavior and attitudes--the research team analyzed juvenile justice case records and conducted followup interviews with youth. Demographic variables included in this study include the race, gender, age, ethnicity, and level of education of participants.

Much of the analysis of juvenile justice reform to date has focused on assessing particular programs and their impacts on subgroups of cases at a particular point in time. While this is instructive as to the effects of those initiatives, it is essential to evaluate the impact of policy across multiple levels and with multiple stakeholders in mind. Ohio has implemented a series of initiatives in its juvenile justice system designed to reduce reliance on state custody of youth in favor of local alternatives. In doing so, they have focused on multiple segments of the population of justice involved-youths throughout the state. The main vehicle for these shifts has been the state's Reasoned and Equitable Community and Local Alternatives to the Incarceration of Minors (RECLAIM) legislation and a series of initiatives that have followed from its inception. Other steps were followed and programming modifications were made during the study period as well.

This research project focused on these initiatives as a case study of juvenile justice reform initiatives in order to provide insights about the impact of those recent reforms across multiple dimensions that were viewed as relevant to the discussion of juvenile justice reform. The data set analyzed at the individual level included the records of more than 5,000 youths sampled from cases processed from 2008 to 2015. First, presumed reductions in the number of youth committed to state residential correctional facilities in favor of community-based alternatives were analyzed. The relative effectiveness of residential facilities and community-based alternatives in terms of youth recidivism were then assessed with a subsample of 2,855 case records from randomly-selected counties.

A third research objective focused on county-level trends and variation. Specifically, the longitudinal trends in key juvenile justice inputs and official juvenile crime rates across Ohio's 88 counties were formally modeled using data from public reports, data collection with counties, and official juvenile arrest data archived by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Elements of the previous analyses (especially comparative recidivism rates) and cost data collected from existing sources and public reports were used in a preliminary fashion to quantify the potential return on investment that accrued from Ohio's investment in these juvenile justice initiatives.

This deposit contains two datasets: Individual Level Data and County Level Data. The Individual Level Data contains the following demographic data: age at admission, sex, and race (White, Black, Asian, Native American, and other).

Research over the past decade has identified a sub-group of traumatized youths who have had extensive exposure to multiple types of victimization, interpersonal violence, and loss. These poly-victims are at risk for involvement in delinquency, and if they become involved in juvenile justice they have more severe emotional, behavioral, interpersonal, and school problems than other justice-involved youth (Ford, Grasso, Hawke, and Chapman, 2013). However, there is no validated tool or procedure to screen for poly-victimization with justice-involved youth. This project therefore was designed to test the feasibility of and validate a poly-victimization screen with youth in juvenile detention facilities. The project's specific aims were as follows: Aim 1: To conduct a quasi-experimental study of the effectiveness of poly-victimization enhanced screening (PVES) in increasing the identification of traumatized juvenile justice-involved youth. Aim 2: To test the effectiveness of PVES in reducing subsequent adverse legal outcomes: (a) number and severity of juvenile offenses, (b) extent of justice involvement. Aim 3: To determine if implementation of the PVE results in consistent (replicable) outcomes across two Juvenile Detention Centers.

The purpose of the Census of Juveniles on Probation (CJP) was to collect individual-level data about youth on probation, including their numbers and characteristics. The CJP survey asked respondents to report the total number of juveniles on formal probation within their reporting jurisdiction on the reference date of October 24, 2012.

For each youth on probation, responding agencies were asked to provide the following information: sex, date of birth, race, most serious offense, state and county where most serious offense was committed, and the state and county where the juvenile resided on the census reference date.

This data collection contains the national data.

The objective of the Trauma-Focused Interventions for Justice-Involved and At-Risk Youth meta-analysis was to systematically review and statistically synthesize all available research on the effectiveness of trauma-informed treatment programs for justice-involved youth and youth at-risk of justice system involvement who experienced some form of trauma in their lives. A systematic search identified 29 publications that met the eligibility criteria and represented 30 treatment-comparison contrasts. Of these studies, 6 evaluated the effectiveness of trauma-informed programs for justice-involved youth, and the remaining 24 evaluated programs for at-risk children and youth. From these studies, researchers extracted results related to delinquency, problem behaviors, aggression, antisocial behavior, substance use, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) outcomes. Most of these studies (24) used random assignment to conditions designs, with the remaining 6 using a quasi experimental design with a comparison condition.

Variables in this collection include type of publication, authors, country of study, type of primary study design, publication year, youth type (at-risk or delinquent), frequency and duration of treatment, treatment techniques and types of therapy, treatment and control group sample sizes, as well as variables summarizing respondent histories of abuse, neglect, trauma, violence, delinquency, institutionalization, homelessness, and involvement in foster care. Demographic information on primary study respondents includes overall sample, treatment, and control group percentage breakdowns by ethnicity and respondent age summary statistics.

The Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) is part of the larger "Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency" initiated by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in 1986. PYS aims to document the development of antisocial and delinquent behavior from childhood to early adulthood, the risk factors that impinge on that development, and help seeking and service provision of boys' behavior problems. The study also focuses on boys' development of alcohol and drug use, and internalizing problems.

PYS consists of three cohorts of boys who were in the first, fourth, and seventh grades in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania public schools during the 1987-1988 academic year (called the youngest, middle, and oldest cohorts, respectively). Using a screening risk score that measured each boy's antisocial behavior, boys identified at the top 30 percent within each grade cohort on the screening risk measure (n=~250), as well as an equal number of boys randomly selected from the remainder (n=~250), were selected for follow-up. Consequently, the final sample for the study consisted of 1,517 total students selected for follow-up. 506 of these students were in the oldest sample, 508 were in the middle sample, and 503 were in the youngest sample.

Assessments were conducted semiannually and then annually using multiple informants (i.e., boys, parents, and teachers) between 1987 and 2010. The youngest cohort was assessed from ages 6-19 and again at ages 25 and 28. The middle cohort was assessed from ages 9-13 and again at age 23. The oldest cohort was assessed from ages 13-25, with an additional assessment at age 35. Information has been collected on a broad range of risk and protective factors across multiple domains (e.g., individual, family, peer, school, and neighborhood). Measures of conduct problems, substance use/abuse, criminal behavior, mental health problems have been collected.

This collection contains data and syntax files for demographic constructs. The datasets include constructs on repeated grade status, demographic information of participants, participants' biological mother, biological father, female caretaker, and male caretaker, change of caretaker since last phase, number of family members and other adults or children in the home, family structure, followup participation by youth, caretaker, and teacher, and housing characteristics.

The demographic constructs were created by using the PYS raw data. The raw data are available at ICPSR in the following studies: Pittsburgh Youth Study Youngest Sample (1987 - 2001) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania], Pittsburgh Youth Study Middle Sample (1987 - 1991) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania], and Pittsburgh Youth Study Oldest Sample (1987 - 2000) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania].

The Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) is part of the larger "Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency" initiated by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in 1986. PYS aims to document the development of antisocial and delinquent behavior from childhood to early adulthood, the risk factors that impinge on that development, and help seeking and service provision of boys' behavior problems. The study also focuses on boys' development of alcohol and drug use, and internalizing problems.

PYS consists of three samples of boys who were in the first, fourth, and seventh grades in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania public schools during the 1987-1988 academic year (called the youngest, middle, and oldest sample, respectively). Using a screening risk score that measured each boy's antisocial behavior, boys identified at the top 30 percent within each grade sample on the screening risk measure (n=~250), as well as an equal number of boys randomly selected from the remainder (n=~250), were selected for follow-up. Consequently, the final sample for the study consisted of 1,517 total students selected for follow-up. 506 of these students were in the oldest sample, 508 were in the middle sample, and 503 were in the youngest sample.

Assessments were conducted semiannually and then annually using multiple informants (i.e., boys, parents, teachers) between 1987 and 2010. The youngest sample was assessed from ages 6-19 and again at ages 25 and 28. The middle sample was assessed from ages 9-13 and again at age 23. The oldest sample was assessed from ages 13-25, with an additional assessment at age 35. Information has been collected on a broad range of risk and protective factors across multiple domains (e.g., individual, family, peer, school, neighborhood). Measures of conduct problems, substance use/abuse, criminal behavior, mental health problems have been collected.

This collection contains data for participants' ages at each phase of the PYS study and were created by using the PYS raw data. The raw data are available at ICPSR in the following studies: Pittsburgh Youth Study Youngest Sample (1987 - 2001) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania], Pittsburgh Youth Study Middle Sample (1987 - 1991) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania] , and Pittsburgh Youth Study Oldest Sample (1987 - 2000) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania].

The Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) is part of the larger "Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency" initiated by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in 1986. PYS aims to document the development of antisocial and delinquent behavior from childhood to early adulthood, the risk factors that impinge on that development, and help seeking and service provision of boys' behavior problems. The study also focuses on boys' development of alcohol and drug use, and internalizing problems.

PYS consists of three samples of boys who were in the first, fourth, and seventh grades in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania public schools during the 1987-1988 academic year (called the youngest, middle, and oldest sample, respectively). Using a screening risk score that measured each boy's antisocial behavior, boys identified at the top 30 percent within each grade sample on the screening risk measure (n=~250), as well as an equal number of boys randomly selected from the remainder (n=~250), were selected for follow-up. Consequently, the final sample for the study consisted of 1,517 total students selected for follow-up. 506 of these students were in the oldest sample, 508 were in the middle sample, and 503 were in the youngest sample.

Assessments were conducted semiannually and then annually using multiple informants (i.e., boys, parents, teachers) between 1987 and 2010. The youngest sample was assessed from ages 6-19 and again at ages 25 and 28. The middle sample was assessed from ages 9-13 and again at age 23. The oldest sample was assessed from ages 13-25, with an additional assessment at age 35. Information has been collected on a broad range of risk and protective factors across multiple domains (e.g., individual, family, peer, school, neighborhood). Measures of conduct problems, substance use/abuse, criminal behavior, mental health problems have been collected.

This collection contains data and syntax files for peers constructs. The datasets include constructs on community involvement, gang membership, peers' conventional activities, friends as a bad influence, peer delinquency, peer rejection, proportion of offenses committed alone, and victimization.

The peers constructs were created by using the PYS raw data. The raw data are available at ICPSR in the following studies: Pittsburgh Youth Study Youngest Sample (1987 - 2001) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania], Pittsburgh Youth Study Middle Sample (1987 - 1991) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania] , and Pittsburgh Youth Study Oldest Sample (1987 - 2000) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania].

The Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) is part of the larger "Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency" initiated by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in 1986. PYS aims to document the development of antisocial and delinquent behavior from childhood to early adulthood, the risk factors that impinge on that development, and help seeking and service provision of boys' behavior problems. The study also focuses on boys' development of alcohol and drug use, and internalizing problems.

PYS consists of three samples of boys who were in the first, fourth, and seventh grades in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania public schools during the 1987-1988 academic year (called the youngest, middle, and oldest sample, respectively). Using a screening risk score that measured each boy's antisocial behavior, boys identified at the top 30 percent within each grade sample on the screening risk measure (n=~250), as well as an equal number of boys randomly selected from the remainder (n=~250), were selected for follow-up. Consequently, the final sample for the study consisted of 1,517 total students selected for follow-up. 506 of these students were in the oldest sample, 508 were in the middle sample, and 503 were in the youngest sample.

Assessments were conducted semiannually and then annually using multiple informants (i.e., boys, parents, teachers) between 1987 and 2010. The youngest sample was assessed from ages 6-19 and again at ages 25 and 28. The middle sample was assessed from ages 9-13 and again at age 23. The oldest sample was assessed from ages 13-25, with an additional assessment at age 35. Information has been collected on a broad range of risk and protective factors across multiple domains (e.g., individual, family, peer, school, neighborhood). Measures of conduct problems, substance use/abuse, criminal behavior, mental health problems have been collected.

This collection contains data and syntax files for externalizing constructs. The datasets include constructs on the frequency and level of criminal and delinquent activities, including aggression, untrustworthy and manipulative behaviors, cruelty to animals and people, hyperactivity, impulsivity, attention problems, truancy, suspension from school, running away, and prevalence and frequency for lack of guilt.

The externalizing constructs were created by using the PYS raw data. The raw data are available at ICPSR in the following studies: Pittsburgh Youth Study Youngest Sample (1987 - 2001) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania], Pittsburgh Youth Study Middle Sample (1987 - 1991) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania] , and Pittsburgh Youth Study Oldest Sample (1987 - 2000) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania].

The Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) is part of the larger "Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency" initiated by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in 1986. PYS aims to document the development of antisocial and delinquent behavior from childhood to early adulthood, the risk factors that impinge on that development, and help seeking and service provision of boys' behavior problems. The study also focuses on boys' development of alcohol and drug use, and internalizing problems.

PYS consists of three samples of boys who were in the first, fourth, and seventh grades in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania public schools during the 1987-1988 academic year (called the youngest, middle, and oldest sample, respectively). Using a screening risk score that measured each boy's antisocial behavior, boys identified at the top 30 percent within each grade sample on the screening risk measure (n=~250), as well as an equal number of boys randomly selected from the remainder (n=~250), were selected for follow-up. Consequently, the final sample for the study consisted of 1,517 total students selected for follow-up. 506 of these students were in the oldest sample, 508 were in the middle sample, and 503 were in the youngest sample.

Assessments were conducted semiannually and then annually using multiple informants (i.e., boys, parents, teachers) between 1987 and 2010. The youngest sample was assessed from ages 6-19 and again at ages 25 and 28. The middle sample was assessed from ages 9-13 and again at age 23. The oldest sample was assessed from ages 13-25, with an additional assessment at age 35. Information has been collected on a broad range of risk and protective factors across multiple domains (e.g., individual, family, peer, school, neighborhood). Measures of conduct problems, substance use/abuse, criminal behavior, mental health problems have been collected.

This collection contains data and syntax files for delinquency constructs. The datasets include constructs on the frequency and level of criminal and delinquent activities, including theft, violence, weapons used, delinquency, drug-selling, white collar crime, as well as police contacts and past incarceration. Additionally, the collection includes data on delinquency risk (high vs. low) and the associated weight.

The delinquency constructs were created by using the PYS raw data. The raw data are available at ICPSR in the following studies: Pittsburgh Youth Study Youngest Sample (1987 - 2001) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania], Pittsburgh Youth Study Middle Sample (1987 - 1991) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania] , and Pittsburgh Youth Study Oldest Sample (1987 - 2000) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania].

The Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS) is part of the larger "Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency" initiated by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in 1986. PYS aims to document the development of antisocial and delinquent behavior from childhood to early adulthood, the risk factors that impinge on that development, and help seeking and service provision of boys' behavior problems. The study also focuses on boys' development of alcohol and drug use, and internalizing problems.

PYS consists of three samples of boys who were in the first, fourth, and seventh grades in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania public schools during the 1987-1988 academic year (called the youngest, middle, and oldest sample, respectively). Using a screening risk score that measured each boy's antisocial behavior, boys identified at the top 30 percent within each grade sample on the screening risk measure (n=~250), as well as an equal number of boys randomly selected from the remainder (n=~250), were selected for follow-up. Consequently, the final sample for the study consisted of 1,517 total students selected for follow-up. 506 of these students were in the oldest sample, 508 were in the middle sample, and 503 were in the youngest sample.

Assessments were conducted semiannually and then annually using multiple informants (i.e., boys, parents, teachers) between 1987 and 2010. The youngest sample was assessed from ages 6-19 and again at ages 25 and 28. The middle sample was assessed from ages 9-13 and again at age 23. The oldest sample was assessed from ages 13-25, with an additional assessment at age 35. Information has been collected on a broad range of risk and protective factors across multiple domains (e.g., individual, family, peer, school, neighborhood). Measures of conduct problems, substance use/abuse, criminal behavior, mental health problems have been collected.

This collection contains data and syntax files for parental psychopathology constructs. The datasets include constructs on the frequency and level of criminal and delinquent activities, substance use by people in the home, parental stress, as well as police contacts and past incarceration.

The parental psychopathology constructs were created by using the PYS raw data. The raw data are available at ICPSR in the following studies: Pittsburgh Youth Study Youngest Sample (1987 - 2001) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania], Pittsburgh Youth Study Middle Sample (1987 - 1991) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania] , and Pittsburgh Youth Study Oldest Sample (1987 - 2000) [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania].

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons.

In 2016, the JRFC was divided into seven sections:

1. General facility information
2. Mental health services
3. Educational services
4. Substance abuse services
5. Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date
6. Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date
7. Space shared with other facilities

Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study includes data that was used to investigate the effect of legislative and judicial factors on system responses to sex trafficking of minors (STM) in metropolitan and non-metropolitan communities. To accomplish this, researchers evaluated the effectiveness of the immunity, protection, and rehabilitative elements of a state safe harbor law. This project was undertaken as a response to a growing push to pass state safe harbor laws to align governmental and community responses to the reframing of the issue of sex trafficking of minors that was ushered in with the passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA).

This collection includes 4 SPSS files, 3 Excel data files, and 2 SPSS Syntax files:

1. Child-Welfare-Human-Trafficking-Reports-2013-2017-data.xlsx
2. Judicial-Interview-De-identified-Quantitative-Data-for-NACJD_REV_Oct2018.sav (n=82; 36 variables)
3. Judicial-online-survey-data-for-NACJD_REV_Dec2018.sav (n=55; 77 variables)
4. Juvenile-Justice-Screening-for-HT-2015-MU-MU-0009.xlsx
5. Post-implementation-survey-data-for-NACJD_REV_Dec2018.sav (n=365; 1029 variables)
6. Pre-implementation-survey-data-for-NACJD_REV_Dec2018.sav (n=323; 159 variables)
7. Recode-syntax-for-pre-implementation-survey-for-NACJD.sps
8. Statewide-juvenile-court-charges-2015-MU-MU-0009-to-NACJD.xlsx
9. Syntax-for-post-implementation-survey-data-to-NACJD.sps

Qualitative data from judicial interviews and agency open-ended responses to Post-Implementation of the Safe Harbor Law Survey are not available as part of this collection.

The objective of this study was to systematically review and statistically synthesize all available research that, at a minimum, compared participants in a restorative justice program to participants processed in a more traditional way using meta-analytic methods. Ideally, these studies would include research designs with random assignment to condition groups, as this provides the most credible evidence of program effectiveness.

The systematic search identified 99 publications, both published and unpublished, reporting on the results of 84 evaluations nested within 60 unique research projects or studies. Results were extracted from these studies, related to delinquency, non-delinquency, and victim outcomes for the youth and victims participating in these programs.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This project utilized data originally collected for the project Breaking Schools' Rules (Fabelo et al., 2011), a joint project of the Public Policy Research Institute at Texas A and M University and the Council of State Governments Justice Center on which the Principal Investigator, Miner Marchbanks was a lead data analyst and co-author. Research was conducted at the Education Research Centers of the University of Texas, Austin, and Texas A and M University utilizing individual-level data from the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS), a data system of the Texas Education Agency (TEA), and CASEWORKER, a data management system of the Texas Probation Commission (now the Texas Juvenile Justice Department). The link between these records was conducted by TEA and is described in greater detail in Fabelo et al.

Through secondary analyses of these data, researchers attempted to measure the institutional and individual mechanisms that disproportionately pull and push students of color into the "school-to-prison pipeline." The project explores the predictors of school discipline contact and the resulting consequences of encountering this discipline. The project then moves to an examination of the determinants of progressing through the various decision points in a juvenile justice case. Additionally, the project explores the relationship between school strictness and various educational and juvenile justice outcomes. The "school-to-prison pipeline" (Wald and Losen, 2003) describes an "increasingly punitive and isolating" path through the education system for African American and other at-risk students.

The study collection includes 1 Stata (.do) syntax file (master_final.do) that was used by the researcher(s) in secondary analyses.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study examined differences in youth's mental health and substance abuse needs in seven different racial/ethnic groups of justice-involved youth. Using de-identified data from the Survey of Youth in Residential Placement (SYRP), it was assessed whether differences in mental health and substance abuse needs and services existed in a racially/ethnically diverse sample of youth in custody. Data came from a nationally representative sample of 7,073 youth in residential placements across 36 states, representing five program types. An examination of the extent to which there were racial/ethnic disparities in the delivery of services in relation to need was also conducted. This examination included assessing the differences in substance-related problems, availability of substance services, and receipt of substance-specific counseling.

One SAS data file (syrp2017.sas7bdat) is included as part of this collection and has 138 variables for 7073 cases, with demographic variables on youth age, sex, race and ethnicity. Also included as part of the data collection are two SAS Program (syntax) files for use in secondary analysis of youth mental health and substance use.