Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act
Aug 18, 2017
California's Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act provides funds for counties to offer evidence-based programs for high-need juvenile probationers and at-risk youths. This report evaluates the program on statewide and county measures. It also compares system costs for program youths in the six months before and after entering a program.
Fiscal Year 2016–2017 Report
|PDF file||1.6 MB||
Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.
California's Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act was designed to provide a stable funding source for juvenile programs that have proven effective in curbing crime among at-risk and young offenders. It provides funds to counties to add evidence-based programs and services for juvenile probationers identified with higher needs for special services than needs identified for routine probationers, at-risk youths who have not entered the probation system but who live or attend school in areas of high crime or who have other factors that potentially predispose them to criminal activities, and youths in juvenile halls. The California state legislature requires the Board of State and Community Corrections to submit annual reports evaluating the program on six outcome measures: (1) successful completion of probation, (2) arrests, (3) probation violations, (4) incarcerations, (5) successful completion of restitution, and (6) successful completion of community service. Each county can also measure supplemental outcomes. The report also compares juvenile justice system costs for program youths in the six months before they entered a program and in the six months after entering the program. Differences in outcomes between program participants and comparison-group youths are relatively small, but they are consistent enough that they appear to be real differences rather than statistical anomalies. County-developed supplemental outcomes tend to be more favorable than state-mandated big six outcomes, although samples tend to be considerably smaller than for big six outcomes.
Background and Methodology
Current JJCPA Programs and FY 2016–2017 Outcome Measures
Estimated Juvenile Justice Costs for JJCPA Participants
Summary and Conclusions
Comparison Groups and Reference Periods for JJCPA Programs
The Probation Department's Ranking of the Big Six Outcome Measures
Community-Based Organizations That Contracted to Provide Services for JJCPA Programs in FY 2016–2017
Board of State and Community Corrections–Mandated and Supplemental Outcomes for Individual JJCPA Programs, FY 2016–2017
Board of State and Community Corrections–Mandated Outcomes, by Gender
Board of State and Community Corrections–Mandated Outcomes, by Cluster
The Probation Department's Form for Measuring Family Relations
The Probation Department's Form for Assessing Probationer Strengths and Risks
The Probation Department's Form for Assessing Goal-Setting and Life Planning for At-Risk Youths
The research described in this report was conducted by the Justice Policy Program within RAND Justice, Infrastructure, and Environment.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.