INTENSIVE SUPERVISION PROGRAM IN DETROIT, MICHIGAN

 

OVERVIEW

The Intensive Supervision Program in Detroit, Michigan is for juvenile offenders who are eligible for commitment to the Department of Social Services but who are free of psychiatric disturbances, have a potential home in the community, and had not been charged with a very violent offense. These adolescents are normally placed in special schools or private institutions. In this study, the adolescents were randomly assigned to one of four groups (three in-home treatment groups, each with intensive probation, and a treatment-as-usual group). For official data, after two years, the significant results were mixed: mean number of charges (higher in the program group, negative), mean number of criminal charges (higher in the program group, negative), mean charge seriousness, mean number of months incarcerated, and mean number of months at large. Self-report delinquency was not significantly different.

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM

Target Population: juvenile offenders who are eligible for commitment to the Department of Social Services

 

This evaluation groups three in-home programs with intensive probation services, small caseloads (6-10 per caseworker), and frequent contact between the caseworker and the juvenile (although it varied across programs – 2.49 contacts per month, 1.83 per month, and 0.70 per month).

 

Cost information: The average per-diem costs of out-of-home placement (like the control group) was $79.56 in 1983 and $104.20 by 1986. The per-diem costs of the in-home programs (like the treatment groups) was $26. The authors estimated the costs of commitment had the young men in the sample been placed in an institution or special school to be about $11.6 million from 1983 to 1986. They estimated the cost of the program to be about $2.7 million from 1983 to 1986.

 

EVALUATION OF PROGRAM

 

Barton, W.H. and Butts, J.A. (1990). Viable options: Intensive supervision programs for juvenile delinquents. Crime & Delinquency, 36(2): 238-256.

 

Evaluated population: Male juvenile offenders (N=511) were eligible for this study, and they had no very violent offenses, no documented history of psychiatric disturbance, and a potential home in the community. Their history made them eligible for commitment to the Department of Social Services. Of the adolescents in the study, 68.7 percent were black, and 67.2 percent were from single-parent households. Of the adolescents, 58.3 percent came from a house in which no adult was employed. The average age was 15.4 years old. Two-thirds were under age 16, and 68.9 percent had been on probation before. The study population had an average of 3.2 prior charges.

 

Approach: The three treatment programs did not differ from one another in terms of outcomes and were analyzed together as one treatment group versus the control group. The treatment group males remained in-home while the control group males were given out-of-home placements. The authors collected data from six sources: (1) youth reports, (2) parent reports, (3) juvenile court records, (4) adult court records, (5) case files, and (6) program staff reports. They collected demographics, official offenses, most recent offense, prior offenses, and recidivism from juvenile court records. Only findings for official charges and self-report delinquency are presented and discussed.

 

Results: The positive impacts for the official data were the following: mean number of charges, mean number of criminal charges, mean charge seriousness, mean number of months incarcerated, and mean number of months at large (i.e. months not locked up) across the two-year follow-up period. The negative impact found was mean number of charges and mean number of criminal charges. Both were higher in the program group than the control group.

 

Self report delinquency did not significantly differ between the program group and the control group, except in the case of violent crime. Program juveniles committed fewer violent crimes than the control group. The self-report differences found reflect the greater time spent in the community by the treatment groups and the greater number of status offenses. Furthermore, a cost-benefit analysis estimated $8.9 million in savings over the three years the program took place.

 

SOURCES FOR MORE INFORMATION

 

References

 

Barton, W.H. and Butts, J.A. (1990). Viable options: Intensive supervision programs for juvenile delinquents. Crime & Delinquency, 36(2): 238-256.

 

Program categorized in this guide according to the following:

 

Evaluated participant ages: 15

 

Program components: Community-based

 

Measured outcomes: Behavioral problems

 

KEYWORDS: Adolescence (12-17), Community-based, Juvenile Offenders, White or Caucasian, Black or African American, Delinquency, Male-specific, Cost.

 

 

 

		© Child Trends 2004