Data/Merit House - Deinstitutionalization Project, December 1979

• NCJ Number: 74905
• Author(s): M M Barry
• Date Published: 1979
• Length: 31 pages
• Grant Number(s): 2527-004-1/77; 2731-033-2/78; 3112-034-3/79
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice
• Corporate Author: Louisville/Jefferson Cty
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The accomplishments of two Jefferson County, Kentucky, group homes for status offenders are evaluated.

Abstract

The Data House for males and the Merit House for females were initiated in August 1977 in a deinstitutionalization project. The overall goal was to reduce the number of status offenders by 75 percent in an existing program intended for these offenders. Other objectives included the provision of written treatment plans, a minimum of three counseling sessions per week, a minimum of one family counseling contact per month, necessary transportation for participants, and educational opportunities or work experience. Participants were expected to be status offenders aged 12 to 17 with intelligence quotients of 60 or higher and at least low levels of maturity. However, only 34.4 percent of the 32 males and 75.8 percent of the 33 females who were committed to the project through August 1979 were referred for status offenses, and 2 males were 11-years old. For the most part, the project's objectives were met, although documentation was often missing or incomplete. Furthermore, 51.7 percent of the 29 males and 26.7 percent of the 30 females who had left the homes by October 1979 had completed the program successfully. A followup study revealed that no further referrals occurred for 37.5 percent of the males and 32 percent of the females. In comparison, 37.5 percent of the males and 40 percent of the females who were institutionalized for status offenses experienced no further referrals. The per diem costs for participants in the homes proved to be slightly lower than those for institutionalized youths. Suggested improvements center on revised objectives calling for documentation of 95 percent of the referrals, a 90-percent completion rate, no new charges for 80 percent of the youth while they are in the program, 80 percent compliance with American Correctional Association standards, a maximum 10-percent AWOL (absence without leave) rate, and a recidivism level equal to or better than that achieved by the traditional group homes. Data tables are provided.