Mentoring System Involved Youth

A Summary of Best Practices in School Reentry for Incarcerated Youth Returning Home. (2004). Charlottesville: JustChildren, Legal Aid Justice Center.
At the request of the commonwealth of Virginia Board of Education, JustChildren has conducted research on best practices in school reenrollment for young people leaving juvenile facilities and returning to their home schools. This report summarizes JustChildren’s initial research. School reenrollment for young people returning home from locked juvenile facilities is a problem throughout the United States. Although efforts to study and fix this problem are relatively recent, there nonetheless exist a number of studies, program, laws, and regulations that point the way toward a set of “best practices.” Based on our research, we have identified four characteristics of best practice in school reenrollment for young people returning home from juvenile prisons: 1) Inter-Agency and Community Cooperation – clear roles and responsibilities; 2) Youth and Family Involvement; 3) Speedy Placement; and 4) Appropriate Placement.

Altschuler, D. M. & Brash, R. (2004). Adolescent and Teenage Offenders Confronting the Challenges and Opportunities of Reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2(1), 72-87.
This article examines the challenges of reentry for teenage and youthful offenders. It discusses (a) reentry within a broader “reintegration” paradigm; (b) the mission and purpose of institutional and community corrections, as well as the tensions between them; (c) the intersection of chronological age and legal status; (d) the intersection of chronological age and stages of development; (e) risk and protective factors; and (f) the seven specific domains of reentry; family and living arrangement, peer groups, mental and physical health, education, vocational training and employment, substance abuse, and leisure and vocational interests. Particular attention is given to the need for reentry policies to be developmentally appropriate and age-specific. Finally, the article closes by discussing the implications for reentry policy.

Beale Spencer, M., & Jones-Walker, C. (2004). Interventions and Services Offered to Former Juvenile Offenders Reentering Their Communities: An Analysis of Program Effectiveness, Youth Violence and Juvenile Offenders, 2(1), 66-97.
The authors review youth reentry and reintegration programming services findings and describe what works and what does not. Then, as an explanatory strategy for formation and the influences of race/ethnicity and class, they consider (a) a systems theoretical stance that acknowledges youths’ perspectives; (b) human development themes that do not emphasize psychopathology; and, (c) the settings where reentry and reintegration programming occur. The authors conclude by recommending strategies from improving assessments of programming and services.

Brown, D., DeJesus, E., Maxwell, S., & Brown, D. Barriers and promising approaches to workforce and youth development for young offenders. National Youth Employment Coalition, Youth Development and Research Fund, Justice Policy Institute.
http://www.aecf.org/publications/pdfs/workforce.exec.summ.pdf
This study identifies programs and policy initiatives that blend workforce and youth development approaches for aiding juvenile offenders. The study consisted of three parts: 1) an identification of barriers to reform and review the literature to the nexus of youth employment/development and juvenile justice; 2) an examination of fifteen exemplary youth employment/development programs explicitly serving juvenile offenders; and 3) a survey and synthesis of innovative state and local policy initiatives that promote effective programming.

Gies, S. V. (2003). Aftercare services. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Aftercare can be defined as re-integrative services that prepare out-of-home placed juveniles for reentry into the community by establishing the necessary collaborative arrangements with the community to ensure the delivery of prescribed services and supervision (Altschuler and Armstrong, 2001). The term “aftercare,” however, is something of a misnomer—the process does not begin only after an offender is released. Instead, a comprehensive aftercare process typically begins after sentencing and continues through incarceration and an offender’s release into the community. Effective aftercare requires a seamless set of systems across formal and informal social control networks. It also requires a continuum of community services to prevent the recurrence of antisocial behavior, and it can involve public-private partnerships to expand the overall capacity of youth services.

Griffen, P. (2005). Juvenile court-controlled reentry: Three practice models. NCJJ, OJJDP.
This bulletin examines three jurisdictions in which local juvenile courts and their probation departments directly oversee the return of juveniles from residential placements –Allegheny County (Pittsburgh), Pennsylvania; Marion County (Indianapolis), Indiana; and rural West Virginia counties participating in the state’s Division of Juvenile Services Reentry Court Program. In the process, it explores some of the potential advantages of court-controlled reentry over traditional practice models, which shedding light on the practical challenges that must be overcome by juvenile courts seeking greater involvement in the juvenile reentry effort.

Mears, D. P., & Travis, J. (2004). Youth Development and Reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2(1), 3-20.
The transition of young people ages 24 and younger from juvenile and adult correctional settings back into schools, families, communities, and society at large—a process termed youth reentry—is one of the critical justice policy issues currently confronting the united States, yet research addressing this topic is limited. We therefore know little about the unique challenges; including the role of youth development, involved in youth reentry or how best to effectively assist this population to become contributing members of society. For this reason, the Urban Institute convened a roundtable of researchers, practitioners, policy makers, and community leaders to inform national discussions about youth reentry. In this introduction to the special issue, we summarize the findings and issues raised at the meeting, presenting highlights from the paper presentations and discussions. We then identify some of the promising research and policy directions that emerged from the meeting.

Roy-Stevens, C. (2004). Overcoming Barriers to School Reentry. OJJDP Fact Sheet.
In order for a successful reentry into the community to occur, it is imperative that youth leaving custody return to school. By building partnerships between the justice and education systems, the Center for Alternative Sentencing and Employment Services (CASES) has developed a model for overcoming barriers to school reentry. This fact sheet illustrates this model by presenting three organizations that are working with CASES to help court-involved youth continue their education and reenter their communities.

Steinberg, L., Chung, H. L., & Little, M. Reentry of Young Offenders from the Justice System: A Developmental Perspective. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2(1), 21-38.
This article presents a developmental perspective on the reentry of young offenders into the community. The authors begin with a discussion of the psychosocial tasks of late adolescence. Next, they discuss contextual influences on the successful negotiation of these psychosocial tasks. Third, they examine whether and to what extent the contexts to which young offenders are exposed in the justice system are likely to facilitate normative youthful offenders is disrupted, or “arrested,” by their experiences within the justice system. Interventions designed to facilitate the successful reentry of young offenders into the community must be informed by what we know about healthy psychosocial development in late adolescence.

Sullivan, M. L. (2004). Youth perspectives on the experience of reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2(1), 56-71.
This article outlines the reentry process of youth who are released from secure confinement experience and describes some contextual factors affecting that experience. Using interviews with young people released from prison, several dimensions are discussed including prior criminal involvement and lifestyles, education, mental health, continuity and change in social relationships, and reentry into different kinds of communities. Specific descriptions of several youth, some with extensive criminal records and some without, are used to highlight the conclusion that traditional methods of determining the success of youth reentry are limited and may obscure important variation in whether and how certain factors, such as criminal records, lead to certain outcomes, such as crime. A discussion of workable approaches to youth reentry is offered, highlighting the need for increased community involvement and aftercare.

Todis, B., Bullis, M., Waintrup, M., Schultz, R., & D’Ambrosio, R. (2001). Overcoming the Odds: Qualitative Examination of Resilience Among Formerly Iincarcerated Adolescents, Exceptional Children, 68(1), 119-139.
Adolescents who have been incarcerated are at extreme risk for poor adult outcomes. However, some former youth offenders become successful, happy adults, presenting a profile of strength and coping known as resilience. This article describes the results of a 5-year qualitative examination of resilience among a group of adolescents transitioning from youth correctional facilities back into their communities. Topics discussed include pre-delinquent histories, experiences in the correctional system, and post-corrections transition. Currently about half of the respondents are successful—employed, going to school, or raising children. Others are less stable and may be at risk of being rearrested. Internal and situational factors accounting for these differences are discussed. Implications for practices include restructuring post-corrections transition services and improving school-based supports to at-risk youth.

Vocational/job training. OJJDP Model Programs Guide. http://www.dsgonline.com/mpg2.5/vocational_job_reentry.htm
Providing youths with employment opportunities is a common strategy to discourage future delinquency and incarcerations. This section concentrates on early intervention strategies that are designed as prevention programs either to divert youths from entering the juvenile justice system or prevent youths from continuing their involvement within the system (Frey, 1999). These types of programs include the following: Summer work and subsidized employment, short-term training with job placement, and long-term intensive residential programs.

Youth Justice Board. (2005). Stopping the revolving door: Giving Communities and Youth the Tools to Overcome Recidivism. Stopping the Revolving Door.
This report presents the recommendations of the Youth Justice Board on juvenile reentry in New York City. The report discusses the status of the current system and methods that can be used to change and improve it, including early planning, individual treatment, and coordination. It also focuses on critical areas that must be addressed. They are: motivating young people to succeed, helping young people get into and stay in school, strengthening the relationships between family and youth, and improving the reentry process.