The purpose of the study was to expand understanding of the long-term consequences of juvenile delinquency by describing the prevalence and frequency of two adult outcomes -- arrest and the perpetration of abuse and neglect -- within a gender-diverse sample of known offenders. The researchers also sought to better inform the development and provision of services targeted to delinquent youth in residential care by exploring whether characteristics assessed at intake into care predict adult offending risk. The research team tracked a large sample of delinquent boys and girls released from juvenile correctional facilities/programs in New York State in the early 1990s and used state administrative databases to document their involvement with criminal justice and child protective services in young adulthood. Sample youth were initially drawn from a research database originally created to examine short-term criminal recidivism rates and associated risk factors among known juvenile delinquents (Frederick, 1999). As part of that study, a comprehensive list of adjudicated delinquents discharged from the custody of the New York State (NYS) Division of Youth between January 1, 1991, and December 31, 1994, was generated. The research team selected a stratified, random subsample of 999 youths with case reviews and tracked them forward through time from age 16 to age 28. The Administrative/Case File Review Data (Part 1) contain information on the experiences prior to being admitted into state custody of 999 youths. Specifically, Part 1 includes early risk factors taken from items coded during the initial recidivism study conducted by Frederick (1999). Part 1 also includes information on a youth's childhood experiences with child welfare services collected by the research team as part of this study. Information on a youth's prior receipt of child welfare services was obtained by extracting records from the NYS Child Care Review Service system (CCRS). The Child Protective Services Reports Data (Part 2) contain information on the sampled subjects' involvement with Child Protective Services (CPS) as young adults (ages 16-28). CPS data were collected by conducting person-based searches of CONNECTIONS, the NYS Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System. For Part 2, adult perpetration of child maltreatment outcome data were collected on a total of 1,543 child protective services (CPS) reports. The Criminal History Data (Part 3) contain information on the sampled subjects' early adult involvement (ages 16-28) with the NYS adult criminal justice system. The research team documented adult crime and perpetration of child abuse and neglect via searches of two independent state administrative databases: (1) the NYS Offender-Based Transaction Statistics Computerized Criminal History (OBTS/CCH) database, which records all New York state-based arrests of individuals age 16 or older from point of arrest through disposition and sentencing; (2) the Department of Correctional Services (DOCS) database, which tracks all New York State prison admissions and discharges. For Part 3, data were collected on a total of 6,627 adult arrest events. Part 1 contains 30 variables detailing information on the study participants, including demographic variables and variables related to offense history, individual functioning, child maltreatment, receipt of child welfare services, and family environment. Part 2 includes 22 variables derived from child protective services (CPS) reports linked to a study participant, including variables relating to the participant's perpetration of child maltreatment, type of alleged maltreatment, investigation outcome, and outcome variables reflecting participants' involvement in various types of maltreatment allegations. Finally, Part 3 of the study contains 147 variables derived from specific adult arrest events associated with the participants, including arrest-specific variables, case outcome variables, and criminal history

This longitudinal study of juvenile offenders traces the criminal histories of a sample of juveniles, including those who were "dropouts" (juvenile offenders who did not go on to become adult criminal offenders) and those who continued to be arrested, ranging from those with only one subsequent arrest to "persisters" (juveniles who did become career criminal offenders). The data are intended to address the following questions: (1) Are serious juvenile offenders more likely than nonserious juvenile offenders to become adult offenders? (2) Are offenders who begin at a younger age more likely to have more serious criminal careers than those who begin when they are older? (3) As a criminal career progresses, will the offender become more skilled at one type of offense and commit that type of crime more frequently, while decreasing the frequency of other types of crimes? (4) As a criminal career continues, will the offender commit progressively more serious offenses? (5) How well can it be predicted who will become a high-rate offender? Part 1 of this study, Juvenile Case File, contains data on a subsample of 14- and 15-year-olds who were brought to Probation Intake in the New York City Family Court for delinquency offenses. Included are variables for the date and type of arrest, disposition and sentence of the offender, and sex and race of the offender, as well as questions concerning the offender's home environment and highest school grade completed. Part 2, Arrest and Incarceration Event File, includes information on prior delinquency arrests, including the date of arrest, the charge and severity, and the disposition and sentence, as well as similar information on subsequent offenses that occurred up to six years after the original delinquency offense. Included for each incarceration is the status of the offender (juvenile or adult), the date of admission to a facility, and the length of time incarcerated.

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.

This study was undertaken to evaluate the New York City Department of Probation's initiative to place clients in specialized Substance Abuse Verification and Enforcement (SAVE) units for treatment and management. The main analytical strategy of this study was to determine whether clients who were appropriately matched to outpatient drug treatment were less likely to recidivate after treatment in this modality. The focus of the research was not so much on developing powerful prediction models, but rather on determining whether outpatient drug treatment was appropriate and effective for certain types of probationers. The evaluation research involved an in-depth analysis of a sample of 1,860 probationers who were sentenced between September 1991-September 1992 and referred to contracting outpatient drug treatment programs one or more times as of December 31, 1993. The following types of data were collected: (1) the New York City Department of Probation's demographic and drug use information, obtained during the presentence investigation and at intake to probation, (2) the Department of Probation's Central Placement Unit (CPU) database records for each referral made through the CPU, as well as monthly progress reports filled out by the treatment programs on each probationer admitted to drug treatment, (3) the New York State Department of Criminal Justice Statistics' data on criminal histories, and (4) probation officers' reports on whether clients were referred to treatment, the kind of treatment modality to which they were referred, and the dates of admission and discharge. Demographic and socioeconomic variables include age at first arrest and sentencing, gender, race or ethnicity, marital status, family composition, educational attainment, and employment status. Other variables include drug use history (e.g., age at which drugs were first used, if the client's family members used drugs, if the client was actively using heroin, cocaine, or alcohol at time of intake into treatment), criminal history (e.g., age at first arrest, number of arrests, types of crimes, prior convictions, and prior probation and jail sentences), and drug treatment history (e.g., number and types of prior times in drug treatment, months since last treatment program, number of admissions to a CPU program, and number of AIDS education programs attended).

This data collection focuses on status offenders--those juveniles who commit acts (such as running away, habitual truancy, and possession of alcohol) that are forbidden to minors but not to adults. The purpose of this study was to connect legislative intent, service delivery systems, and youth responses in order to provide guidelines for future status offender legislation and practice. In the selection of sampling sites, three categories of intervention philosophy were represented: (1) deterrence, which recommends sanctions and control through the juvenile justice system, (2) treatment, which recommends emotional adjustment strategies through the community mental health system, and (3) normalization, which recommends little or no professional response. Respondents from youth service agencies in seven cities in the United States were asked about service delivery system characteristics (such as types of referral sources, how often they were used, and length of client service period), organizational characteristics (such as public versus private auspices, sources of funding, and educational level of staff), and youth characteristics (such as family situation, school status, and educational attainment of principal adults in the home). Demographic variables for status offenders included gender, race, age, and type of residence. Interviews with youths were also conducted and included a self-concept scale, by which youths could categorize themselves as delinquent, disturbed, and/or conforming. The units of analysis for this study are the individual and the youth service agency.

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).

This study was a secondary analysis of Survey of Youth in Residential Placement (SYRP) 2003 [United States] ICPSR 34304. In recent years, considerable empirical and theoretical attention has been given to the overlap between gang membership and victimization. Gang-involved youth are significantly more likely to experience both violent and nonviolent victimization than are their non-gang peers. Much of what is known about the gang-victimization link, however, comes from studies of youth in the community. In this study, we explore the relationship between gang affiliation and victimization in a nationally representative sample of youth in residential placement.

These data were collected to measure the degree to which subjective deterrence and rational choice are effective in reducing drug-use recidivism rates. Baseline interviews were conducted with participants upon entering a drug rehabilitation program in New Jersey. Under the terms of this program, which was an alternative to prison, any incident of drug use occurring during the rehabilitation period would result in the participant's returning to prison. Follow-up interviews were conducted when the participant either had a drug/alcohol use relapse or successfully completed a year in the program without a drug-use incident. Baseline interviews included questions about criminal and drug-use history, as well as initial reactions to the drug rehabilitation program. Follow-up interviews probed for participants' feelings about the drug rehabilitation program experience. Further questions concerned participants' failure or success at staying away from drugs or alcohol.

The purpose of the study was to examine criminal behavior and criminal justice system involvement among youth making the transition from out-of-home care to independent adulthood. The study collected data from two sources: (1) survey data from the Midwest Study of the Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth (Midwest Study), and (2) official arrest data. The Midwest Study was a longitudinal panel study that was part of a collaborative effort of the state public child welfare agencies in Illinois, Iowa, and Wisconsin, Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago, and the University of Washington. The participating states funded and/or operated the full range of services supported by the Chafee Foster Care Independence Program. The Midwest Study survey data were collected directly from the youth in the sample every two years over three waves, between May 2002 and January 2007. A total of 732 respondents participated in at least one of the in-person interviews over the three waves. This data collection includes some variables that were directly measured from the original Midwest Study survey instrument and other variables that were computed or derived from variables in the original data for purposes of the current study. To supplement the survey data, the research team accessed official arrest data from each state for this study. Researchers obtained data on all criminal arrests that occurred between the respondents' Wave 1 interview and August 31, 2007, a date by which all of the study participants were at least 21 years old. The study contains a total of 85 variables including indicator variables, demographic and background variables, delinquency and crime variables, out-of-home care experiences variables, and social bonds variables.

This study addressed the question of whether alternative correctional programs were more effective than traditional training schools in reducing recidivism among juvenile offenders. Alternative programs were defined as halfway homes, group homes, foster homes, ranches, camping programs, and specialized vocational programs, while training schools were defined as secure, restrictive custody programs in institutional settings. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of alternative program placements versus training school for a 12-year period on 266 juvenile delinquents remanded to youth facilities in a southwestern state in 1983. Subjects chosen for the study were 298 youth who had been committed by a county court to a statewide juvenile corrections program between January 1, 1983, and July 1, 1983. The sample was representative of the youth commission's population of juvenile offenders in terms of age, race, and sex. All were first time commitments, and the original commitment offense for a majority of the youth was a nonviolent property crime, such as burglary or theft. From this original sample, 32 juveniles were eliminated from the study because they were not adequately exposed to either an institutional or alternative program. The final sample consisted of 266 juvenile offenders, of which 164 were placed in institutions and 102 were placed in alternative programs. Youth were not randomly assigned to programs. Juveniles with particular characteristics were automatically assigned to certain types of programs. All violent offenders were placed in institutions. The study was designed to include a lengthy follow-up period, a focus on subject by program interaction effects, and the use of survival analysis to examine the timing of recidivism as well as its incidence. Recidivism was defined as the first arrest or parole revocation that took place within the follow-up period. The follow-up period was approximately 12 years, from the parole assignment until September 1, 1995. Data were collected primarily from the administrative records of the state youth commission. The commission also obtained additional follow-up data from the state Department of Public Safety and the state Department of Corrections. Additionally, family background data were collected from each youth's parole officer in response to a survey conducted specifically for this study in September 1994. Demographic variables include commitment age, race, and sex. Psychosocial variables include family environment and IQ. Other independent variables include program placement status, delinquency risk scales, and program adjustment measures. The dependent variable is recidivism, measured as both a discrete variable indicating whether an arrest occurred and time until first arrest offense after parole.