Transition to Adulthood: Delaying Adult Recidivism Among Juvenile Probationers through Adolescent and Family Case Management

Justice-involved juveniles are at high risk for recidivism as juveniles (James et al., 2013) and in adulthood (Loeber et al., 2013). Although case management has generally been shown to reduce recidivism of juveniles (Lipsey, 2009), issues and questions remain. Failing to make a mature transition to adulthood, increases recidivism risk for older adolescents (Loeber et al., 2013). Inconsistent attention to the support needs of probationers’ family systems is a concern (Lane et al., 2005) Risk-level is known to be important (Loeber et al., 2013).  This study reports on the efficacy of a case management intervention for older and mostly high-risk juvenile probationers. Services began when the clients were juveniles, continued into early-adulthood and attempted to increase the self-sufficiency of the clients and their familial support systems. It was hypothesized that the treatment group would have lower rates of adult recidivism and recidivate less quickly than the comparison group.

This quasi-experimental study drew participants from two zip codes with high rates of juvenile recidivism and limited supportive networks in a large metropolitan area in the U.S. Southwest.  The treatment group (n=27) was a convenience sample of youth referred to the program by probation officers between 2011 and 2012. The comparison group (n=127) was a stratified random sample of juvenile probationers from the same area and time. Both groups were heavily male, ethnically diverse and comprised mostly of high-risk probationers. The groups were not significantly different on these measures, but the treatment group was older (M=17.32 vs. 16.80). The juvenile probation department provided background data. Recidivism was defined as the filing of a new felony charge within the state and was measured at one- two- and three-year periods that began on the 18^th birthday of each individual. Recidivism data were retrieved from court websites.  Chi-square tests evaluated if the groups differed on recidivism rates at each year. Time-to-recidivism was examined using the Kaplan-Meier method.  Treating the non-recidivists as right-censored cases, the survival curves of the groups were plotted; the Tarone-Ware test evaluated if the curves differed significantly.

Significant differences in recidivism rate were not found. The treatment group had a lower rate of recidivism at year-one (11% vs. 22%, X²(1)=1.66, p=.198), but higher rates at years two (30% vs. 27%, X²(1)=0.09, p=.762) and three (44% vs. 32%, X²(1)=1.46, p=.227). Although the first hypothesis was not supported, there was a significant delay in recidivism for the treatment group. The curves demonstrated a higher survival probability for the treatment group. This difference was statistically significant (X²(1)=4.59, p=.032). Finally, median days-to-recidivism was lower in the treatment group (252) than in the comparison group (562).

The study is important to social work’s Smart Demarcation Initiative. It supported the hypothesis that a case management intervention bridging the transition to adulthood would significantly delay time-to-recidivism. It offers support for programs that are rooted in developmental stages and family systems for juveniles at high risk of adult recidivism. Implications for future research, policy and practice will be explored.