Family Group Conferencing

OVERVIEW

Family group conferencing is a form of restorative justice designed as an alternative (and complement) to traditional court practices that focus on punishment.  Targeted at youth and adult offenders who have committed a variety of crimes, ranging from petty theft to assault and attempted murder, these conferences aim to decrease the chances of re-offending.  Conferences are constructed around bringing the offender and victim together, along with a trained facilitator and supporters of both individuals, to engage in a discussion about the incident that occurred and the harm that was brought upon the victim and all supporters.  Along with determining how the offender can make amends for their actions, conferences help build a more personal sense of accountability and community, thus hopefully reducing the likelihood of re-offending.  A random assignment evaluation of the program with first-time adolescent offenders found that, over the 24-month follow-up period, a larger percentage of the family conferencing group were not re-arrested, compared with the control group, but this difference was not statistically significant.  Regression analyses also found that there was no overall statistically significant relationship between group assignment and time until re-offending; however, the treatment group was significantly less likely to re-offend during weeks 13-26 and had a 23 percent lower number of re-arrests. 

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM

Target Population: Juvenile and young adult offenders

The intervention is a restorative justice practice that occurs after the offender has admitted to responsibility for his or her actions.  Both the offender and the victim, along with supporters (e.g., family members) of both parties involved, are brought together to engage in a discussion, moderated by a trained facilitator.  Through the conference, the victim is able to ask questions of the offender and describe the harm they experienced.  Similarly, supporters of both sides may explain how the offender’s actions have affected them.  All participants must then come to a reparation agreement, thereby determining how the offender will compensate the victim.    

EVALUATION(S) OF PROGRAM

Evaluated population: A total of 782 youth offenders in Indianapolis were selected for participation in this study.  In order to be eligible for participation, offenders were required to be 14 years of age or younger, be first-time offenders, admit to committing the offense that resulted in their arrest, and have committed battery, shoplifting, criminal mischief, theft, or disorderly conduct.  There was a higher proportion of non-white participants in the control group (64%) than in the treatment group (57%), although this difference was not significant.  However, the difference in average age between the treatment (12.49) and control (12.71) groups was significantly different.  On all other background characteristics, such as gender (both groups had higher proportions of males than females), arresting agency, and initial arrest type, the groups were comparable.  Age, gender, race, and offense type were controlled on multivariate analyses.        

Approach:  Qualifying offenders were randomly assigned to either the intervention (Family Group Conferencing, N=400) or the control group (N=382).  The treatment lasted less than one hour, with follow-up actions to fulfill the reparation agreement.  Participants assigned to the control group were placed into court-ordered diversion programs other than FGC, by an intake officer.  While these programs varied, the majority of these youth participated in one of four programs (Teen Court, Shoplifting program, Community Service, or Victim-Offender Mediation).

To measure the effectiveness of the intervention, time until re-offending was the primary outcome of interest.  Over the course of a 24-month follow-up period beginning on the day of their qualifying initial arrest, participants were checked-on weekly to determine the number of participants that were at risk of re-offending at the beginning of the week, the number who had re-offended that week, and the number whose follow-up period came to an end that week.  This information was used to determine the risk of re-offending for each week (another outcome of interest).

Results: While a larger proportion of the intervention group (52 percent) compared with the control group (46 percent) did not re-offend at all during the 24-month follow-up period, this difference was not statistically significant when controls for age, gender, race, and offense type were included.  However, analyses did find a statistically significant difference at weeks 13-26, though not during weeks 27-52.  Also, the number of re-arrests was found to be 23 percent lower for the treatment group.  Regression analyses also demonstrated that there was no significant relationship between group assignment and the risk of re-offending.

SOURCES FOR MORE INFORMATION

References

McGarrell, E.F. & Hipple, N.K. (2007). Family group conferencing and re-offending among first-time juvenile offenders: The Indianapolis experiment. Justice Quarterly, 24(2), 221-246

KEYWORDS: Adolescents, Youth, Young Adults, Males and Females (Co-ed), Juvenile Offenders, Community-Based, Parent or Family Component, Delinquency

Program information last updated 9/6/11

© Child Trends 2003