View/Filter Resources

| NCCD and the Delores Barr Weaver Policy Center

A brief by NCCD and the Delores Barr Weaver Policy Center examines why girls arrested for domestic violence-related charges in Florida were not consistently assigned to domestic violence respite beds rather than secure detention. “Addressing Barriers to Using Respite Beds for Girls Charged With Domestic Violence” is the second brief by NCCD and the Delores Barr Weaver Policy Center—both supported by the Jessie Ball DuPont fund—about girls in secure detention in Florida. See the first brief here.

| NCCD and the Delores Barr Weaver Policy Center

NCCD has released a brief titled “Girls in Secure Detention in Florida” to provide insight on keeping girls who do not pose a public safety risk out of the juvenile justice system. With support from the Jessie Ball duPont Fund, NCCD partnered with the Delores Barr Weaver Policy Center in Jacksonville, Florida, to produce the brief--one of several publications released on September 25 with an emphasis on the need for prevention and early intervention services and strategies so girls do not become involved in Florida's juvenile justice system.

| NCCD

The latest report on this project describes evaluation activities of the past six months, analysis of 2018 parent/guardian survey results, and evaluation results to date. The goals of the Title IV-E Waiver Project are to determine whether allowing flexibility in the use of project funds helps California counties better achieve safety, permanency, and well-being for children involved in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems; and to reduce the number of children in foster care while maintaining child safety. NCCD’s study of the project began in late 2015 and is slated for completion in 2020. For a personal take on the study’s latest findings, read this blog post by Dr. Elizabeth Harris, NCCD senior researcher and principal investigator for the evaluation.

| NCCD

The Positive Youth Justice Initiative (PYJI) seeks to transform the juvenile justice system through a broad-based, multi-year effort grounded in the principles of positive youth development and focused on aligning policy and practice with young people’s developmental stages. In PYJI’s current phase, which began in early 2017, community-based organizations in 11 counties across California are receiving funding to advance positive juvenile justice, working in collaboration with local coalitions to develop and implement reform activities. NCCD’s interim evaluation report explores changes in funded partners’ local advocacy environment and community power to advocate for a healthy justice system, with a focus on activities and accomplishments from January to June 2018.

| Angie M. Wolf, PhD; Caroline Glesmann

NCCD has published a brief that draws on data from NCCD’s interviews with 114 gang-involved girls and young women in California, with a focus on interview participants’ social supports. The interviews were part of NCCD’s research into the individual, family, and community factors affecting girls’ experiences with and desistance from gangs and gang-related crime. The goals of NCCD’s study, conducted from 2012 to 2015, included identifying girls’ reasons for joining gangs, their experiences and activities related to gang involvement, and their motivations and strategies for transitioning away from gangs.

| Angie M. Wolf, PhD; Andrea Bogie; Estivaliz Castro; Caroline Glesmann; Aishatu Yusuf

This executive summary presents key findings from NCCD’s interviews with 114 gang-involved girls and young women in California from 2012 to 2015. The interviews were part of NCCD’s research into the individual, family, and community factors affecting girls’ experiences with and desistance from gangs and gang-related crime. The goals of NCCD’s study included identifying girls’ reasons for joining gangs, their experiences and activities related to gang involvement, and their motivations and strategies for transitioning away from gangs. The summary also provides recommendations for practitioners, policymakers, and others who are interested in improving outcomes for gang-involved girls.

| Chris Baird

This is the final brief in the six-part series titled A Question of Evidence, Part Two. In this brief, Chris Baird summarizes the major problems identified throughout the series regarding risk assessment models, then goes on to suggest four steps toward remedying those problems. 

| Chris Baird

This is the fifth brief in the six-part series titled A Question of Evidence, Part Two. In this brief, Chris Baird discusses the research behind structured professional judgment (SPJ) models, a less structured approach to risk assessment favored by the justice field. The brief also addresses concerns with the validity, reliability, equity, and utility of SPJ models.

| Chris Baird

This is the fourth brief in the six-part series titled A Question of Evidence, Part Two. In this brief, Chris Baird explores the research behind many current models, discusses methods commonly used to measure “predictive power,” and outlines what is required to measure the efficacy of various approaches to risk assessment.

| Chris Baird

This is the third brief in the six-part series titled A Question of Evidence, Part Two. In this brief, Chris Baird identifies flaws in the logic employed to support the use of criminogenic needs (or dynamic risk factors) in risk assessment. While assessing needs is a critical component of assessment, much of what is advocated combines the roles of group data and the actual treatment needs of the individual. This brief also discusses the appropriate role of needs assessment in case planning and service delivery.

| NCCD

This handout concisely explains the benefits of the Structured Decision Making® (SDM) system for each level of an agency: leadership, managers and supervisors, workers, and families. Take a look at the handout and feel free to use it to help communicate SDM® system basics.

| Chris Baird

This is the second brief in the six-part series titled A Question of Evidence, Part Two. In this brief, Chris Baird explores the origins of claims that each succeeding “generation” of assessment models in the justice field offers greater “predictive” capacity to its users. Baird goes on to discuss the promotional strategies that led to widespread acceptance of the “generations” terminology and associated claims.