Search results

Showing 1 – 15 of 15 results.

Curated

Restricted

Assessing Mental Health Problems Among Serious Delinquents Committed to the California Youth Authority, 1997-1999 (ICPSR 4337)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-16

Geographic coverage: United States, California

Time period: 1997-10-01--1999-06-30

This study was conducted to explore the usefulness of the instruments used in the California Youth Authority's (CYA) Treatment Needs Assessment (TNA) battery. A total of 836 wards who completed screening questionnaires were followed to determine whether they were subsequently placed in mental health programs, were prescribed medications used to treat serious mental health problems, and/or were identified by staff as requiring these services. Data for this study were collected from hard-copy files maintained in CYA ward institutions and the CYA central office. Specific variables include the scale scores of the four instruments used in the TNA, demographic variables of the ward, treatment received by the ward, and ward behavior.

Curated

Restricted

Assessing the Effectiveness of Four Juvenile Justice Interventions on Adult Criminal Justice and Child Welfare Outcomes, Ohio, 2004-2008 (ICPSR 36130)

Released/updated on: 2018-03-21

Geographic coverage: Ohio

Time period: 2004-01-01--2008-12-31

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 compared the adult criminal justice and child welfare system outcomes of four pathways through the juvenile justice system - Traditional Probation, Intensive Probation, Specialty Court Docket (Crossroads Program), and commitment to state youth correction services (Department of Youth Services). The study compared the effectiveness of a continuum of services and supervision in improving public safety, including re-arrest and re-incarceration, and in improving outcomes in engagement with child welfare as parents, including child welfare complaints and dispositions.

The core research question is: "what is the relative effectiveness of four different juvenile justice interventions on improving public safety and child welfare outcomes?" The study population is all youths (n=2581) who entered the juvenile court from 2004-2008. It then included 7-10 years of follow-up in the adult justice and child welfare systems for all youths. The four interventions are on a continuum of intensity of services and supervision with Traditional Probation having the fewest services followed by Intensive Probation, Crossroads, and Division of Youth Services commitment.

The study's deposits include 14 SPSS data files:

arrest_final.sav
CW_Custody_Adult_final.sav
CW_Custody_child_final.sav
CW_Intakes_Adult_final.sav
CW_Intakes_child_final.sav
CW_Placements_adult_final.sav
CW_Placements_child_final.sav
General_final.sav
Jail_final.sav
JC_charges_final.sav
JC_detention_final.sav
JC_disposition_final.sav
JC_Gal_final.sav
prison_final.sav

Curated

Conditions of Confinement in Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facilities: [United States], 1991 (ICPSR 6216)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1991-01-01--1991-12-31

This study was conducted for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to (1) collect and analyze data on conditions of confinement in public and private juvenile facilities, (2) determine the extent to which conditions were consistent with those required by nationally recognized standards for juvenile confinement facilities, (3) suggest explanations for variations in conformance to standards among facilities, and (4) assist OJJDP in formulating recommendations for improving conditions of confinement. In challenging the premise that high levels of conformance to nationally recognized standards result in improved conditions of confinement, this study examined client outcomes. Areas of concern for juvenile facilities usually center on living space, health care, security, and control of suicidal behavior. Key incident measures provided in this data collection include injuries, escapes, acts of suicidal behavior, incidents requiring emergency health care, and isolation incidents. Part 1, Mail Survey Data, collected information from facility administrators. Part 2, Site Visit Data, consists of questions answered by the juvenile inmates as well as by the independent observers who administered the on-site surveys. Additional variables in Part 2 that are not present in Part 1 include subjective measures such as the quality of the food, medical care, and recreation facilities, and whether various facility programs were effective. The study covered all 984 public and private juvenile detention centers, reception centers, training schools, and ranches, camps, and farms in the United States. Three types of facilities were excluded: (1) youth halfway houses, shelters, and group homes, (2) police lockups, adult jails, and prisons that held juveniles tried and convicted as adults, and (3) psychiatric and drug treatment programs.

Curated

Restricted

Evaluation of Florida's Avon Park Youth Academy and STREET Smart Program, 2002-2008 (ICPSR 37111)

Released/updated on: 2018-09-07

Geographic coverage: United States, Florida

Time period: 2002-01-01--2008-12-31

The Evaluation of Florida's Avon Park Youth Academy and STREET Smart Program, 2002-2008 contains data gathered on youth involved in programs which aim to increase educational outcomes, increase labor force participation, and reduce recidivism.

Avon Park Youth Academy (APYA) is a secure custody residential facility that provides specialized, remedial education and intensive vocational training to moderate risk youth committed to the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). The STREET Smart program (SS) was the reentry component of the program, which provided community support and educational and vocational services to APYA participants on a voluntary basis after their release to the community. In the last several years, APYA/SS has received national and international recognition as a "Promising Program" for juvenile offenders. Both the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) determined that a rigorous evaluation was required to assess whether APYA/SS could progress from a "Promising Program" to an "Evidence-based Practice."

To conduct this evaluation, the National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD) designed and conducted a field trial that randomly assigned youth committed to DJJ to the APYA/SS program or a control group. This experimental design permitted a rigorous test of the hypothesis that compared to the control group, APYA/SS participants would demonstrate more positive educational achievement, increased labor force participation, and reduced recidivism outcomes after community release.

The 360 youth assigned to the experimental control group stayed at APYA for an average of 9.7 months from 2002-2005. Of these, 301 youth completed participation in the SS program by March 2006. The youth were observed for a three-year period after their community release dates. This included an interview following release from incarceration to collect data on educational achievements, employment, and justice system program experiences. All subjects had reached the 36-month follow-up threshold as of May 2008.

Curated

Firearms, Violence, and Youth in California, Illinois, Louisiana, and New Jersey, 1991 (ICPSR 6484)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States, Illinois, Louisiana, California, New Jersey

Time period: 1991-01-01--1991-04-30

Violence committed by and against juveniles was the focus of this study. Two groups were examined: incarcerated (criminally active) juveniles and students in inner-city high schools, since these youths are popularly considered to engage in and experience violence (especially gun-related violence), to belong to urban street gangs, and to participate in the drug trafficking thought to lead to excessive gun violence. Self-administered questionnaires were completed by 835 male inmates in six correctional facilities and 1,663 male and female students from ten inner-city high schools in California, Illinois, Louisiana, and New Jersey. Data collection took place during January through April of 1991. To maximize response rates, inducements of five dollars were offered to the inmates, Spanish-language versions of the questionnaire were provided to inmates who preferred them, and personal interviews were conducted with inmates whose reading skills were less than sufficient to complete the questionnaire on their own. In four schools, principals permitted the inducements to be offered to students to participate in the study. As with the inmate survey, a Spanish-language version of the questionnaire was provided to students who preferred it. The questionnaires covered roughly the same core topics for both inmates and students. Items included questions on sociodemographic characteristics, school experiences, gun ownership, gun use for several types of firearms, gun acquisition patterns, gun-carrying habits, use of other weapons, gang membership and gang activities, self-reported criminal histories, victimization patterns, drug use, alcohol use, and attitudes concerning guns, crime, and violence. In both questionnaires, the majority of the items covered firearms knowledge, acquisition, and use. The remaining items in the inmate survey primarily covered criminal behavior and, secondarily, victimization histories. In the student survey, these priorities were reversed.

Curated

Restricted

Impact of Institutional Placement on the Recidivism of Delinquent Youth in New York City, 2000-2003 (ICPSR 20347)

Released/updated on: 2009-08-10

Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)

Time period: 2000-04-01--2003-06-30

The primary research goal of this study was to explore the effects of juvenile incarceration on future recidivism using social and legal history data about adjudicated juvenile delinquents in New York City. The secondary research goal of this study was to explore family court decision-making and the nature of family court processing. Study subjects were chosen by examining Family Court calendars in all five New York City boroughs for each day in April, May, and June of 2000, which identified every youth who received a disposition during this period. Research staff located case files for each subject in probation department file rooms in the five family courts, using personal and numeric identifiers taken from court calendars. Using a standardized data collection instrument that was developed by the research team, coded information was derived for 698 total cases by examining documents in each subject's probation case file. Coded data from probation case files offered a baseline portrait of this sample of delinquent youth. In order to measure recidivism, the principal investigator linked baseline records, using personal and numeric identifiers, to arrest and incarceration information provided by other city and state agencies. In this dataset, each record is essentially a snapshot of a particular youth at the time of his or her disposition. Variables about the sampled youth include: demographic profile, case processing, legal history, characteristics of present and past family environments, school performance indicators, community and peer relationships, history of alcohol and drug use, mental health history, and history of victimization.

Curated

Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facility Census, 1971 (ICPSR 7637)

Released/updated on: 2008-02-06

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1970-07-01--1971-06-30

The purpose of this census was to provide information on juvenile detention centers throughout the United States. The data include information on type of facility, level of government administering the facility, resident population by sex, by age range, by detention status, and by offense, admissions and discharges, average length of stay, staffing and expenditures, age and capacity of facility, and programs and services available.

Curated

Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facility Census, 1977 (ICPSR 7758)

Released/updated on: 2008-03-26

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1977-01-01--1977-12-31

The 1977 Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facility Census, is the fifth in a series of surveys of state and local public residential facilities in the juvenile justice system. There is one record for each juvenile detention facility that had a population of at least 50 percent juveniles. Each record is classified into one of six categories: detention centers or shelters, reception or diagnostic centers, training schools, ranches, forestry camps and farms, and halfway houses and group homes. Data include state, county, and city identification, level of government responsible for the facility, type of agency, agency identification, resident population by sex, age range, detention status, and offense, admissions and departures of population, average length of stay, staffing and expenditures, age and capacity of the facility, and programs and services available.

Curated

Restricted

National Survey of Youth in Custody, 2008-2009 (ICPSR 33942)

Released/updated on: 2013-04-04

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2008-01-01--2009-12-31

The National Survey of Youth in Custody (NSYC) is part of the BJS National Prison Rape Statistics Program to gather mandated data on the incidence of prevalence of sexual assault in juvenile facilities under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108-79). The Act requires a 10 percent sample of juvenile facilities to be listed by incidence of sexual assault. Data are collected directly from youth in a private setting using audio computer-assisted self interview (ACASI) technology with a touch-screen laptop and an audio feed to maximize inmate confidentiality and minimize literacy issues. The first year of collection includes nearly 200 juvenile facilities, with an estimated 10,000 completed interviews with youth.

The NSYC utilized two questionnaires, based on the age of the respondent. The Older Youth questionnaire was administered to youths ages 15 and older, and the Younger Youth questionnaire was administered to those 14 and younger. The survey was divided into five sections. Section A collected background information, such as details of admission to facility and demographics including education, height, weight, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and history of any forced sexual contact. Section B, Facility Perceptions and Victimization, included respondents' opinions of the facility and staff, any incidence of gang activity, and any injuries that had occurred. Section C, Sexual Activity Within Facility, captured the types of sexual contact that occurred and the circumstances of sexual contact. Section D, Description of Events with Youth, and Section E, Description of Events with Staff Member, focused on when and where the contact occurred, the race and gender of the other youths or staff members, if threats or coersion were involved, and outcomes, included whether or not the sexual contact was reported.

Other variables include debriefing questions about respondents' experiences completing the survey, interviewer observations, created variables to summarize victimization reports (due to the complicated routing in Section C), weight and stratification data, and administrative data about the facilities.

Curated

Restricted

National Survey of Youth in Custody, 2012 (ICPSR 35039)

Released/updated on: 2015-10-23

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2012-01-01--2012-12-31

The National Survey of Youth in Custody (NSYC) is part of the BJS National Prison Rape Statistics Program to gather mandated data on the incidence of prevalence of sexual assault in juvenile facilities under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108-79). The Act requires a 10 percent sample of juvenile facilities to be listed by incidence of sexual assault. Data are collected directly from youth in a private setting using audio computer-assisted self interview (ACASI) technology with a touch-screen laptop and an audio feed to maximize inmate confidentiality and minimize literacy issues. The NSYC-2 was administered to 8,707 youth in 326 state operated and locally or privately operated juvenile facilities within the United States.

The NSYC-2 utilized two questionnaires, based on the age of the respondent. The Older Youth questionnaire was administered to youths ages 15 and up, and the Younger Youth questionnaire was administered to those 14 and younger. The survey was divided into five sections. Section A collected background information, such as details of admission to facility and demographics including education, height, weight, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and history of any forced sexual contact. Section B, Facility Perceptions and Victimization, included respondents' opinions of the facility and staff, any incidence of gang activity, and any injuries that had occurred. Section C, Sexual Activity Within Facility, captured the types of sexual contact that occurred and the circumstances of sexual contact. Section D, Description of Event(s) with Youth, and Section E, Description of Event(s) with Staff, focused on when and where the contact occurred, the race and gender of the other youths or staff members, if threats or coercion were involved, and outcomes, including whether or not the sexual contact was reported.

Curated

Partially restricted

Simple Crosstabs

National Survey of Youth in Custody, 2018 (ICPSR 38500)

Released/updated on: 2022-10-12

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2018-01-01--2018-12-31

The National Survey of Youth in Custody (NSYC) is part of the BJS National Prison Rape Statistics Program to gather mandated data on the incidence of prevalence of sexual assault in juvenile facilities under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA; P.L. 108-79). The Act requires a 10 percent sample of juvenile facilities to be listed by incidence of sexual assault. Data are collected directly from youth in a private setting using audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI) technology with a touch-screen laptop and an audio feed to maximize inmate confidentiality and minimize literacy issues. The NSYC-3 was administered to 6,910 youth in 332 state operated and locally or privately operated juvenile facilities within the United States. Youth were randomly assigned to either a sexual victimization questionnaire (90%) or an alternative questionnaire (10%).

Sexual victimization questionnaire: Youth selected for this questionnaire received one of two versions, based on their age. The Older Youth questionnaire was administered to youths ages 15 and up, and the Younger Youth questionnaire was administered to those 14 and younger. The survey was divided into six sections. Section A collected background information, such as details of admission to facility and demographics including education, height, weight, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and history of any forced sexual contact. Section B, Facility Perceptions and Victimization, included respondents' opinions of the facility and staff, any incidence of gang activity, and any injuries that had occurred. Section C, Sexual Activity Within Facility, captured the types of sexual contact that occurred and the circumstances of sexual contact. Section D, Description of Event(s) with Youth, and Section E, Description of Event(s) with Staff, focused on when and where the contact occurred, the race and gender of the other youths or staff members, if threats or coercion were involved, and outcomes, including whether or not the sexual contact was reported. Section F collected additional information about the youth, such as disability and mental health conditions, and the facility, including living conditions and use of restrictive housing.

Alternative questionnaire: A random selection of youth were assigned to an alternative questionnaire to "mask" which questions an individual might have been asked. In addition to Sections A, B, and F from the sexual victimization questionnaire, this questionnaire included sections on facility living conditions, mental health, grievance procedures, substance use, treatment programs, living arrangements, youth education and aspirations, communication with family, and post-release plans.

A Facility Questionnaire (FQ) collected in-depth information on each sampled facility via an online questionnaire. Topics included number of facility staff by race/ethnicity, job category, age, and length of service; staff turnover/vacant positions; personnel screening; staff training; number of youth, admissions, and discharges; rated capacity (i.e., number of beds), occupancy, and crowding; youth disabilities; grievance process; special housing; and youth education on PREA.

Other variables in the datasets include debriefing questions about respondents' experiences completing the survey, interviewer observations, created variables to summarize victimization reports (due to the complex routing in Section C), weight and stratification data, and administrative data about the facilities.

Curated

Restricted

National Survey of Youth in Custody Alternate, Supplemental Survey on Drug and Alcohol Use, [United States], 2008-2009, 2012 (ICPSR 37025)

Released/updated on: 2018-09-10

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2008-01-01--2009-12-31, 2012-01-01--2012-12-31

The National Survey of Youth in Custody Alternate (NSYC-A) is a supplement to NSYC that collected information on drug and alcohol use by youth in juvenile facilities. The survey was divided into six sections. Section A collected background information, such as age, gender, education level, and whether respondent had stayed overnight in a facility or had forced sexual contact prior to current incarceration. Section B, Facility Perceptions and Victimization, is not included in this dataset. Section C, Drug Use, included whether the respondent had ever used specific types of drugs, frequency of use in the past and immediately before being taken into custody, source of drugs, and symptoms of drug abuse and dependence. Section D, Alcohol Use, captured alcohol dependence and abuse symptoms. Section E, Treatment, focused on drug or alcohol treatment programs respondent had attended prior to being taken into custody. Section F, Family and Peer Background is not included in this dataset.

Other items include weights variables and derived variables regarding DSM IV drug dependence symptoms, alcohol and drug use/dependence/abuse status, outliers/illogical responses, and categorized demographic variables.

Curated

Process Evaluation of the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program at the Illinois Youth Center, St. Charles, 1999-2000 (ICPSR 3102)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, St. Charles, Illinois

Time period: 1999-01-01--2000-12-31

As part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Congress provided funding for the development of substance abuse treatment programs in state and local correctional facilities with the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for State Prisoners Formula Grant Program. To be eligible for this funding, programs were required to last between six and 12 months, be provided in residential treatment facilities set apart from the general correctional population, be directed at the inmate's substance abuse problems, and be intended to develop the inmate's cognitive, behavioral, social, vocational, and other skills to address substance abuse and related problems. The Illinois Youth Center (IYC) in St. Charles started an RSAT program on September 30, 1999. The primary emphasis of this process evaluation was to describe why and how the St. Charles RSAT program was designed, implemented, and operated. To a lesser degree, attention was also directed toward examining the effects of program participation on offender pre-release behavior. This was considered to be a primary indicator of program impact. This project sought to answer the following research questions: (1) Did the program fit within the institutional environment? (2) Was the program operating as a therapeutic community? (3) Were the appropriate offenders selected for program participation? and (4) Were any short-term impacts evident within the youth? This study followed a process evaluation design with a focus on determining how a product or outcome was produced, rather than on assessing the product or outcome itself. Information in this data collection was collected from youth participants and youth files. Subjects consisted of the 44 youths who began the RSAT program in 1999 (the treatment group), as well as a matched sample of non-program participants (the comparison group). The comparison group was used to contrast institutional behavior of youths not in the treatment program and to establish a non-treatment cohort for an expected follow-up impact study. Part 1 contains data from two surveys of program youth only, and Parts 2-4 contained data on both program youth and the comparison group. Part 2 data were gathered from a review of the youths' master files at the correctional facility. Part 3 data were obtained from behavior action tickets (BATs), which were an institution-wide semi-formal mechanism to recognize positive and negative youth behavior. Part 4 data were collected from institutional disciplinary reports (IDRs). Part 1 surveyed youth about what they hoped to achieve in the RSAT program, whether they thought the program would help them, how well they understood the program, how they assessed their own substance abuse problems, what they liked and disliked about the program, their opinions about program staff, and their recommendations for changing the program. Demographic variables in Part 2 include age, race, and education level. Other variables record reading test scores, math test scores, IQ scores, location of parents, number of siblings, drug use and frequency, criminal history, types of prior substance abuse treatments, family history of drug use, suicidal ideations, and personality test scores. Part 3 contains monthly counts of positive and negative behavior action tickets. Part 4 contains information about the number and types of guilty institutional disciplinary reports, the severity of the offenses, and the number and types of punishments received.

Curated

Survey of Youths in Custody, 1987: [United States] (ICPSR 8992)

Released/updated on: 1995-03-31

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1987-01-01--1987-12-31

This data collection, the first survey of youths confined to long-term, state-operated institutions, was undertaken to complement existing Children in Custody censuses. It also serves as a companion to the Surveys of State Prisons, allowing comparisons between adult and juvenile populations. The survey provides detailed information on the characteristics of youths held primarily in secure settings within the juvenile justice system. The data contain information on criminal histories, family situations, drug and alcohol use, and peer group activities. For youths committed for violent acts, data are available on the victims of their crimes and on weapon use.

Curated

Youth Under 18 Years Old in Adult Prisons in the United States, 1997 (ICPSR 2813)

Released/updated on: 2000-04-18

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1997-01-01--1997-12-31

This survey of departments of corrections in the United States was undertaken to provide correctional staff with design, implementation, and management strategies to meet the needs of prisoners under the age of 18. The study examined what happens when individuals under age 18 are placed in adult correctional facilities, and explored the ways in which departments of corrections are attempting to deal with the growing population of youthful inmates. The following three objectives were the focus of this study: (1) to describe the number of incarcerated youths (at time of admission) being held in the nation's prison system, (2) to examine the different methods being used to house inmates under 18 years old, and (3) to explore different management approaches used with youthful inmates in terms of the size of the prison system and the area of the country in which they were located. For this study, respondents in 51 departments of corrections (50 states and the District of Columbia) were contacted by telephone regarding survey questions that were mailed prior to the phone interviews. The survey contained five questions concerning current practices for handling offenders under the age of 18 who had been placed in adult correctional institutions. Data were collected on the method used to house underaged inmates and the size of each system's population of inmates under 18 years old. Subsequently, the method and size data were combined to form categories describing four management approaches for dealing with offenders under the age of 18 in adult prisons: (1) separated/big, (2) separated/little, (3) integrated/big, and (4) integrated/little. Demographic variables include the population size and region (Northeast, South, Midwest, or West) of each jurisdiction, as well as the number and proportion of offenders under 18 years old within each state. Also present in the file is the location and name of the facility with the largest under-18 population in each jurisdiction.