National Survey of Juvenile Community Supervision Agency Practices and Caregiver Involvement in Behavioral Health Treatment
This study sought to expand the sparse literature examining the extent to which family engagement interventions and the structural characteristics of juvenile community supervision agencies influence caregiver participation in youths’ behavioral health (i.e., mental health and substance use) treatment.
We analyzed data from a national survey of juvenile community supervision agencies, conducted as a part of a Juvenile Justice Translational Research on Interventions for Adolescents in the Legal System (JJTRIALS) Cooperative Agreement funded by NIH/NIDA.
Findings indicated agencies employ a variety of family engagement strategies, with passive strategies like services referrals and flexible schedules being more common than active strategies like provision of family therapy. Multivariate prediction of caregiver involvement in behavioral health care showed the most consistent effects for rural-urban location of the agency; rural agencies more successfully engaged families in their youth’s behavioral healthcare. Relatedly, the more family engagement services, the greater the involvement of families in behavioral health treatment. Agencies with a juvenile drug treatment court also showed greater involvement.
Our findings that juvenile justice agencies are using multiple techniques to engage families, and that there is a relationship between use of these techniques and actual family engagement, would benefit from replication over time and in other jurisdictions. Analysis of data from a second wave of the national survey, recently completed, is expected to test the reliability of our findings over time, as well as identify whether and what kind of changes occurred in the 2 years following the first survey.
KeywordsFamily engagement Juvenile drug treatment courts Community supervision
This study was funded under the JJ-TRIALS cooperative agreement, funded at the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The authors gratefully acknowledge the collaborative contributions of NIDA and support from the following grant awards: Chestnut Health Systems (U01DA03622), Columbia University (U01DA036226), Emory University (U01DA036233), Mississippi State University (U01DA036176), Temple University (U01DA036225), Texas Christian University (U01DA036224), University of Kentucky (U01DA036158). The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIDA, NIH, or the participating universities or juvenile justice systems.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Arya, N. (2013). Family comes first: a workbook to transform the justice system by partnering with families. Washington, DC: Campaign for Youth Justice.Google Scholar
- Bureau of Justice Assistance. (2003). Juvenile drug courts: strategies in practice monograph. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.Google Scholar
- Center for Juvenile Justice Reform. (2008). Juvenile justice professionals certificate program survey. Washington, DC: Georgetown University.Google Scholar
- Davies, H. J., & Davidson, H. A. (2001). Parental involvement practices of juvenile courts: report to the office of juvenile justice and delinquency prevention. Washington, DC: Center on Children and the Law.Google Scholar
- DeJames, J. (1980). Issues in rural juvenile justice. In J. Jankovic, R. K. Green & S. D. Cronk (Eds), Juvenile justice in rural America. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Press.Google Scholar
- Diamond, G., & Josephson, A. (2005). Family-based treatment research: a 10-year update. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 44(9), 872–887. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.chi.0000169010.96783.4e.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- diZerega, M., & Verdone, J. (2011). Setting an agenda for family-focused justice reform. New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
- Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Gatowski, S., Miller, N. B., Rubin, S. M., Thorne, W., & Barnes, E. W. (2016). OJJDP juvenile drug treatment court guidelines project: Juvenile drug treatment court listening sessions. Rockville, MD: National Criminal Justice Reference Service.Google Scholar
- Harris, B., Keator, K., Vincent-Roller, N., & Keefer, B. (2017). Engage, involve, empower: family engagement in juvenile drug treatment courts. Delmar, NY: National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice.Google Scholar
- Henggeler, S. W., Halliday-Boykins, C. A., Cunningham, P. B., Randall, J., Shapiro, S. B., & Chapman, J. E. (2006). Juvenile drug court: enhancing outcomes by integrating evidence-based treatments. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74(1), 42–54. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006x.74.1.42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Horvath, A. O., & Greenberg, L. S. (1994). The working alliance: theory, research and practice. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Linden, P., Cohen, S., Cohen, R., Bader, A., & Magnani, M. (2010). Developing accountability in the lives of youth: defining the operational features of juvenile treatment courts. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 125–170.Google Scholar
- Mericle, A. A., Belenko, S., Festinger, D., Fairfax-Columbo, J., & McCart, M. R. (2014). Staff perspectives on juvenile drug court operations: a multi-site qualitative study. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 25(5), 614–636. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403413486342.
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus user’s guide (1998–2012) (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- National Association of Drug Court Professionals. (1997). Defining drug courts: the key components in national association of drug court professionals. Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, Drug Courts Program Office.Google Scholar
- National Council on Crime and Delinquency. (2007). And justice for some: differential treatment of youth of color in the justice system. Oakland, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.Google Scholar
- Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2016). Juvenile drug treatment court guidelines. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. https://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/250368.pdf.
- Pennell, J., Shapiro, C., & Spigner, C. (2011). Safety, fairness, stability: repositioning juvenile justice and child welfare to engage families and communities. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Center for Juvenile Justice Reform.Google Scholar
- Prado, G., Pantin, H., Schwartz, S. J., Lupei, N. S., & Szapocznik, J. (2005). Predictors of engagement and retention into a parent-centered, ecodevelopmental HIV preventive intervention for Hispanic adolescents and their families. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 31(9), 874–890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Salvatore, C., Henderson, J. S., Hiller, M. L., White, E., & Samuelson, B. (2010). An observational study of team meetings and status hearings in a juvenile drug court. Drug Court Review, 7(1), 95–124.Google Scholar
- Shanahan, R., & diZerega, M. (2016). Identifying, engaging, and empowering families: a charge for juvenile justice agencies. Washington, DC: Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
- Stiffman, A. R., Pescosolido, B., & Cabassa, L. J. (2004). Building a model to understand youth service access: the gateway provider model. Mental Health Services Research, 6(4), 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:Mhsr.0000044745.09952.33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Szapocznik, J., Perez-Vidal, A., Brickman, A. L., Foote, F. H., Santisteban, D., Hervis, O., & Kurtines, W. M. (1988). Engaging adolescent drug abusers and their families in treatment: a strategic structural systems approach. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56(4), 552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Timmons-Mitchell, J., Bender, M. B., Kishna, M. A., & Mitchell, C. C. (2006). An independent effectiveness trial of multisystemic therapy with juvenile justice youth. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 35(2), 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3502_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- United States Census Bureau. (2012). Current population survey (CPS). https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps.html.
- Walker, S. C., Bishop, A. S., Pullmann, M. D., & Bauer, G. (2015). A research framework for understanding the practical impact of family involvement in the juvenile justice system: the juvenile justice family involvement model. American Journal of Community Psychology, 56(3-4), 408–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wilson, D., Olaghere, A., & Kimbrell, C. S. (2016). Developing juvenile drug court practices on process standards: a systematic review and qulitative synthesis. National Criminal Justice Reference Service. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/grants/250441.pdf.