Shifting probation culture and advancing juvenile probation reform through a community-based, participatory action research-informed training.

Many jurisdictions are currently transforming their juvenile probation systems to reflect research-informed, developmentally based case management approaches. Training, developed through a community-based, participatory action research (CBPAR) framework and guided by a community-academic partnership, may promote probation staff's readiness for such change. This paper examined whether such training could serve as an effective method to impact organizational culture by exploring shifts in probation staff's knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about graduated response - a structured juvenile probation case management system that aligns with research on adolescent development and youth behavior change. Data came from 559 juvenile probation staff trained in graduated response theory and practice between 2016 and 2019. Results demonstrated that at the end of a 1-day, CBPAR-grounded training program, participating staff reported significantly more buy-in to graduated response, greater knowledge of this new system, and attitudes more strongly in favor of graduated response and intended behaviors. Study findings revealed important shifts indicative of readiness for change within juvenile probation departments. Additional implementation strategies are needed to extend training gains and overcome organizational- and system-level barriers to change.

Incarceration and pandemic-related restrictions during COVID-19: An empathic understanding of two worlds.

This paper explores parallels between experiences of confinement due to pandemic-related restrictions and confinement as a result of legal incarceration. We compare experiences of social isolation, lack of choice, and reduced access to resources while also acknowledging the existence of significant differences between the two situations. We describe the ways in which experiences of confinement as part of COVID-19 regulations can provide the general public with insight into difficulties associated with incarceration and the negative effect it can have on psychological health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Applying the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges' Resolution to Juvenile Probation Reform.

In 2017, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) passed a resolution advocating for empirically supported juvenile probation reform nationwide. Here, we review the adolescent development and behavioral decision-making research underlying the principles enumerated in the NCJFCJ resolution and describe several of its critical elements. Then, to provide guidance to jurisdictions seeking to revise local policy and practice, we suggest a series of steps that would help juvenile justice professionals translate NCJFCJ resolution principles into innovative probation reform. Finally, we describe how two jurisdictions-Pierce County, Washington and Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania-have engaged in ongoing juvenile probation reform efforts to provide real-world models of how this translational work can be carried out successfully.

Impact of community-based provider reports on juvenile probation officers' recommendations: Effects of positive and negative framing on decision making.

This study examined whether varying the presentation of information about a youth's compliance with probation requirements in community provider reports influenced juvenile probation officers' (JPOs) perceptions and court recommendations. This study used an experimental design to explore the impact of report framing (positive, neutral, negative) and youth risk level (low, high) on JPOs' decision making. Pennsylvania-based JPOs (N = 209) participated in an anonymous, online study. Participants read one of six community provider reports about a hypothetical probationer and answered five questions about impressions of the youth and their recommendations to the court. JPOs who read negatively framed information rated compliance and effort significantly lower than those who read positively or neutrally framed information. JPOs who read negatively framed information reported lower likelihood of recommending positive court responses and greater likelihood of recommending negative court responses, particularly when considering probation revocation for youth identified as high risk. JPOs rated compliance significantly higher for youth identified as low risk than for youth identified as high risk. Mediation analyses revealed that JPOs' perceptions of youth significantly mediated the pathway between report framing and court recommendations, but did not mediate the pathway from youth risk level to JPOs' recommendations. Findings suggest that JPOs differentially interpret identical behaviors depending on the framing of information. Given that negatively framed information evoked significantly more unfavorable impressions and punitive recommendations, practitioners should consider how youths' progress on probation is communicated among court personnel, particularly as ongoing juvenile probation reform efforts seek to promote consistent treatment across youth. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The Sequential Intercept Model and Juvenile Justice: Review and Prospectus.

Behavioral health needs in justice-involved adolescents are an increasing concern, as it has been estimated that two-thirds of youths in the juvenile justice system now meet the criteria for one or more psychological disorders. This article describes the application of the Sequential Intercept Model (SIM), developed to describe five "points of interception" from standard prosecution into rehabilitation-oriented alternatives for adults (Munetz & Griffin, 2006), to juvenile justice. The five SIM intercepts are: (1) first contact with law enforcement or emergency services; (2) initial hearings and detention following arrest; (3) jails and courts (including problem-solving courts); (4) re-entry from jails, prisons and forensic hospitals; and (5) community corrections and community support, including probation and parole. Modifying the SIM for application with justice-involved adolescents, this article describes three examples of interventions at different intercepts: Intercept 1 (the Philadelphia Police School Diversion Program), Intercept 3 (problem-solving courts for juveniles), and Intercept 5 (juvenile probation). Relevant research evidence for each example is reviewed, and the further application of this model to juveniles is described. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.