Long-Term Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Risk-Needs Assessment and Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Reforms in Juvenile Probation: The Long-Term RNR-Impact Study, Louisiana and Pennsylvania, 2008-2017 (ICPSR 37974)
Version Date: Jul 13, 2023 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Gina Vincent, University of Massachusetts Medical School
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37974.v1
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
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.
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
Restrictions View help for Restrictions
Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reason for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.
Distributor(s) View help for Distributor(s)
Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection
Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose
This was an experimental study of the impact of the implementation of risk-needs-assessment (RNA) and risk-need-responsitivity-related (RNR) case management in 5 juvenile probation offices in 2 states. It examined 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 implementation after 7-years between probation offices that were effective versus ineffective in their 1st year of implementation. This study built on existing data from the Risk/Needs Assessment in Juvenile Probation: Implementation Study (RNAJP) (Vincent et al., 2012) of the changes in case processing effectuated by implementing an RNA instrument with RNR in 6 juvenile probation offices in 2 states. The current study (the Long-Term RNR Impact Study) gathered data from a new cohort of youth from 5 of the original probation offices. The intention of this Long-Term RNR-Impact Study was to extend the RNAJP study by gathering an additional wave of data to examine the 7-year sustainability of the impacts of implementation of a risk-needs assessment instrument (RNA) and risk-need responsitivity-based (RNR) practices.
Study Design View help for Study Design
The RNAJP study involved researcher-engaged, comprehensive implementation of the following policies and procedures in 6 juvenile probation offices: a) administration of a valid RNA by probation officers (POs) to every youth referred to the court or every youth adjudicated (depending on the site); b) making disposition, placement, and diversion recommendations in accordance with youths' risk levels; c) giving low risk youth fewer services and high risk youth more; d) designing case plans that addressed only youth's criminogenic needs and essential responsivity factors; and e) supervising low risk youth less and high risk youth more. Researchers trained POs in the RNA, the RNR approach, and in their new office policies (which were based on RNR principles) in the beginning of the study and again in a 6-month booster training. The study tracked outcomes for up to 1 year for 2 cohorts; a pre-implementation cohort of youth processed in the jurisdiction the year prior to implementation of the RNA and RNR process, and a post-implementation cohort of youth processed in the jurisdiction during the year following implementation of the RNA and RNR Sites with good adherence to their RNA administration procedures and RNR practices had significant changes in at least 3 of 4 of the system-response outcomes studied. These sites were considered effective implementers. There were 2 sites that had poor adherence to the RNA administration procedures and RNR practices. These sites had few to no changes in their outcomes (ineffective implementers). The current study extended the RNAJP study for another 7 years. RNAJP was a quasi-experimental, pre-post study of the changes in case processing occurring after implementing an RNA and RNR in 6 juvenile probation offices in 2 states.
Sample View help for Sample
The final youth sample included the propensity-score matched pre- and 1st-year post-implementation cohorts (pre-implementation and 1st year cohorts) gathered for the RNAJP study (Vincent et al., 2016) along with a new cohort of youth obtained seven years later (7-year cohort). The 7th year cohort was generated by obtaining all continuous youth cases who should have received a risk-needs assessment according to the current probation offices' policies (i.e., all youth referred to the court or all youth adjudicated, depending on the site) starting January 1st, 2017 onward, until a sufficient number of cases were obtained.
For Louisiana Site 1, the pre-implementation cohort was randomly selected adjudications from April to October 2008. The 1st Year Post-Implementation cohort was all consecutive adjudications for 6 months. The 7th year post-implementation cohort was all consecutive adjudications for 13 months.
For Louisiana Site 2, the pre-implementation cohort was all consecutive adjudications in 2008. The 1st Year Post-Implementation cohort was all consecutive adjudications for 11 months. The 7th year post-implementation cohort was all consecutive adjudications for 10 months.
For Pennsylvania Site 1, the pre-implementation cohort was randomly selected referrals from April to October 2008. The 1st Year Post-Implementation cohort was all consecutive referrals for 6 months. The 7th year post-implementation cohort was all consecutive referrals for 8 months.
For Pennsylvania Site 2, the pre-implementation cohort was all consecutive referrals in 2008. The 1st Year Post-Implementation cohort was all consecutive referrals for 9 months. The 7th year post-implementation cohort was all consecutive referrals for 11 months.
For Pennsylvania Site 3, the pre-implementation cohort was all consecutive adjudications for 6 months in the control unit. The 1st Year Post-Implementation cohort was all consecutive adjudications for 6 months in the implementation unit. The 7th year post-implementation cohort was all consecutive adjudications for 8 months in the implementation unit.
Time Method View help for Time Method
Universe View help for Universe
Probation offices in the United States.
Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation
Data Source View help for Data Source
Vincent, G. M., Guy, L. S., Perrault, R. T., and Gershenson, B. (2016). Risk assessment matters, but only when implemented well: A multisite study in juvenile probation. Law and Human Behavior, 40(6), 683-696. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000214
Vincent, G.M., Paiva-Salisbury, M.L., Cook, N.E., Guy, L.S., and Perrault, R.T. (2012). Impact of risk/needs assessment on juvenile probation officers' decision making. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 18(4), 549 - 576. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027186
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection
Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales
Structured Assessment of Violent Risk in Youth (SAVRY), Borum et al. (2006)
Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI), Hoge and Andrews (2006)
HideOriginal Release Date View help for Original Release Date
2023-07-13
Version History View help for Version History
2023-07-13 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:
- Performed consistency checks.
- Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
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.
One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.
This dataset is maintained and distributed by the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD), the criminal justice archive within ICPSR. NACJD is primarily sponsored by three agencies within the U.S. Department of Justice: the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.