NCJ Number
14702
Date Published
1973
Length
83 pages
Annotation
A REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF TREATING AND CONTROLLING DELINQUENTS.
Abstract
THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT PROBATION HAS BEEN RELATIVELY EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE IN HANDLING A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF JUVENILE DELINQUENTS, BUT INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON OTHER NON-INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMS FOR DELINQUENTS ONLY SUGGESTS THAT CERTAIN SELECTED DELINQUENTS CAN BENEFIT MORE FROM SUCH PROGRAMS THAN THEY CAN FROM CUSTODIAL INSTITUTIONS. POPULAR ASSUMPTIONS ARE NOT AN ADEQUATE GUIDE TO FUTURE POLICY FORMULATION. ONE SUCH ASSUMPTION, FOR INSTANCE, IS THAT NONINSTITUTIONAL CARE IS ALWAYS LESS COSTLY THAN INSTITUTIONAL CARE. WHILE THIS MAY BE TRUE FOR SOME ALTERNATIVES (E.G., PROBATION, SPECIALIZED FOSTER HOMES, AND CORRECTIONAL DAY CARE), THERE IS STRONG REASON TO BELIEVE THAT IT IS NOT TRUE FOR OTHERS (E.G., SPECIALIZED GROUP HOMES AND GROUP RESIDENCES). STATES AND LOCALITIES HAVE GENERALLY MADE CONSIDERABLE USE OF NONINSTITUTIONAL ALTERNATIVES FOR HANDLING THEIR JUVENILE DELINQUENTS BUT THEY HAVE BEEN VERY RELUCTANT TO COMPLETELY ELIMINATE CUSTODIAL INSTITUTIONS IN THIS CONTEXT. GIVEN THE PRESENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE, IT APPEARS THAT THEIR CAUTION IS JUSTIFIED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)