Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act fiscal year 2011-2012 report

California⁰́₉s Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act was designed to provide a stable funding source for juvenile programs that have been 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 probat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fain, Terry J., Turner, Susan (Author), Greathouse, Sarah Michal (Author)
Corporate Author: Los Angeles County (Calif.) Probation Department
Format: eBook
Language:English
Published: Santa Monica, CA RAND 2013, 2013
Subjects:
Online Access:
Collection: JSTOR Open Access Books - Collection details see MPG.ReNa
LEADER 03587nam a2200337 u 4500
001 EB001843065
003 EBX01000000000000001007054
005 00000000000000.0
007 tu|||||||||||||||||||||
008 180730 r ||| eng
050 4 |a HV9106.L67 
100 1 |a Fain, Terry J. 
245 0 0 |a Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act  |h Elektronische Ressource  |b fiscal year 2011-2012 report  |c Terry Fain, Susan Turner, Sarah Michal Greathouse 
260 |a Santa Monica, CA  |b RAND  |c 2013, 2013 
300 |a 159 pages 
505 0 |a Background and Methodology -- Current JJCPA Programs and FY 2011-2012 Outcome Measures -- Juvenile Justice Costs for JJCPA Participants -- Summary and Conclusions -- Appendix A: Community Providers of JJCPA Program Services -- Appendix B: Comparison Groups and Reference Periods for JJCPA Programs -- Appendix C: Probation's Ranking of the Big Six Outcome Measures -- Appendix D: Community-Based Organizations That Contracted to Provide Services for JJCPA Programs in FY 2011-2012 -- Appendix E: Board of State and Community Corrections-Mandated and Supplemental Outcomes for Individual JJCPA Programs, FY 2011-2012 -- Appendix F: Board of State and Community Corrections-Mandated Outcomes, by Gender -- Appendix G: Board of State and Community Corrections-Mandated Outcomes, by Cluster 
505 0 |a Includes bibliographical references 
651 4 |a California / Los Angeles / fast 
651 4 |a California / Los Angeles County / fast 
700 1 |a Turner, Susan  |e [author] 
700 1 |a Greathouse, Sarah Michal  |e [author] 
710 2 |a Los Angeles County (Calif.)  |b Probation Department 
041 0 7 |a eng  |2 ISO 639-2 
989 |b ZDB-39-JOA  |a JSTOR Open Access Books 
500 |a "RAND Corporation.". - "This research was prepared for the Los Angeles County Probation Department and conducted in the Safety and Justice Program within RAND Justice, Infrastructure, and Environment.". - Title from title screen (viewed July 31, 2013) 
024 8 |a RAND/RR-268-LACPD 
776 |z 0833083716 
776 |z 9780833083715 
856 4 0 |u https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt5hhtqf  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
082 0 |a 364.360974796 
520 |a California⁰́₉s Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act was designed to provide a stable funding source for juvenile programs that have been 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 those identified for routine probationers, at-risk youth 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 youth in juvenile halls and camps. The Board of State and Community Corrections is required to submit annual reports to the California state legislature measuring the program⁰́₉s success for 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. For the six state-mandated outcomes, differences between program participants and comparison-group youth are mostly positive, though relatively small. County-developed supplemental outcomes, which measure performance of program participants at program entry and again at a later time, tend to be more favorable