NCJ Number
114820
Date Published
1986
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This project examined the extent to which preadjudicatory home detention (PHD) is being used by Ohio courts and to what effect and conducted a more detailed analysis of an exemplary program in Cuyahoga County.
Abstract
Data sources included a mail survey of juvenile/probate judges in all 88 Counties, a case study, and a literature review. Responses from 28 Counties indicate that judges decided whether to use PHD on the basis of offense seriousness, prior offending, home environment, and staff recommendations (especially probation officers). Most respondents seldom or never used written agreements to specify conditions or restrictions of PHD, but sanctions for violations were imposed. Parents or guardians and probation staff were most frequently relied upon for supervision. Caseload size of PHD monitors ranged from 2 to 25. Of 2,708 juveniles released on PHD, 2,470 successfully complied with conditions and appeared for adjudication. The average cost of PHD was $14.94 per day, compared to $28.07 and $42.57 per day for secure and nonsecure detention. The State's largest PHD program is an integral part of the Cuyahoga Juvenile Court. It has a director, a senior worker, six caseworkers, and a secretary. Referrals for status offenders and alleged or adjudicated delinquents may be made at intake or when the youth appears for the adjudicatory hearing. A behavioral contract is signed by youth, parents, and the project supervisor after the youth has been assigned to PHD. Caseworker responsibilities include ensuring the youth's appearance without any new arrests or infractions and providing constructive alternative activities for each youth. Supervision is through unscheduled, face-to-face contacts with the youth and parents and contacts with school and employers. Between 1983 and 1985, pre- and post-adjudicatory success rates never fell below 93 percent. Exemplary programs in Kentucky and California are described. 2 notes and 9 references.