Reducing the Risk of Recidivism Among Juvenile Offenders Intervention Manual

Factors Influencing Recidivism among Juvenile Offenders

Approved by:

Spring 2021

Table of Contents

Title Page…………………………………………………………………………. 1

Table of Contents………………………………………………………………… 2

Abstract ………………………………………………………………………...... 3

Chapter One: Introduction………………………………………………………... 4

Statement of the Problem............................................................................. 4

Justification of the Research……………………………………………… 6

Purpose of the Research…………………………………………………... 7

Chapter Two: Literature Review…………………………………………………. 8

Variables Influencing the Risk of Recidivism …………………….……... 8

Unemployment and Recidivism………………………………………….. 10

Gaps in Research…………………………………………………………. 12

Chapter Three: Theoretical Framework…………………………………………... 13

Social Learning Theory…………………………………………………… 13

Application in Research………………………………………………....... 13

Justification for Selected Theory ………………………………………… 15

Chapter Four: Methodology……………………………………………………… 16

Project Deliverable……………………………………………………….. 16

Rationale for Selected Deliverable……………………………………….. 16

Sample Population………………………………………………………... 17

Stakeholder Recruitment…………………………………………………. 18

Methods of Obtaining Stakeholder Input……………………………….... 18

Additional Information…………………………………………………… 19

Chapter Five: Conclusion………………………………………………………… 20

Results …………………………………………………………………… 20

Relevance to Research Questions ……………………………………….. 21

Strengths and Limitations of Deliverable ……………………………….. 22

Implications for Social Work Practice…………………………………… 23

References………………………………………………………………………... 24  

Appendices………………………………………………………………………. 27

Appendix A – Church Leaders Interview Guide ………………………... 27

Appendix B – Social Workers Interview Guide………………………… 28

Appendix C – Juvenile Detention Center Staff Interview Guide……….. 29

Appendix D – Intervention Manual using TIDieR checklist …………… 30

Abstract

The American Civil Liberties Union reports that nearly 60,000 youth under the age of 18 are incarcerated in the United States every day. Statistics indicate that 44 % of offenders are rearrested within the first year of their release, with juveniles making up 55 % of these rearrests. Incarceration negatively impacts the future of juveniles by interrupting their social systems. For this reason, it is prudent to bring more awareness to the issue by educating the public about factors that lead to incarceration and, by extension, recidivism, among juvenile offenders. The proposed study seeks to determine the factors that exacerbate recidivism risk among juvenile offenders and, consequently, develop an intervention manual to reduce this risk. The staff at the Durham County Youth Home (a juvenile detention center), church leaders from three local churches (New Hope, Grace Church of Durham, and World Overcomers Christian Church), and social workers from three local support organizations (Bull City Youth Support Group, the Boys and Girls Club of Durham, and the North Carolina Central University on-campus counseling Center and Men's Achievement Center) provided input and feedback on the factors influencing recidivism. From the stakeholders' feedback, an intervention manual for a 6-month residential after-care program for juvenile delinquents was developed to foster positive behavioral change and minimize the risk of recidivism.

Chapter One: Introduction

The American Civil Liberties Union reports that nearly 60,000 youth under the age of 18 are incarcerated in the United States every day. However, what is even more alarming, is the number of juveniles re-offending and re-incarcerated within five years of their release. It is estimated that approximately 44 % of offenders are rearrested within the first year of their release, with juveniles making up 55 % of these rearrests (Alper, Durose & Markman, 2018). The high recidivism rates of juvenile offenders highlight the need to bring more awareness to the issue.

Studies have already shown that incarceration dramatically impacts juveniles' future by interrupting their social systems and disrupting their opportunities to receive an education (Chetty & Hendren, 2017; Mallett, 2013). At the macro-level, incarceration burdens the economy. Mukku and colleagues (2012) also found that averting incarceration would reduce the government's expenses by $17 billion annually, mainly for non-violent-related crimes. For these reasons, this study reinforces the need to educate the public about factors that lead to incarceration and, by extension, recidivism among juvenile offenders and develop an intervention manual to minimize this risk.

Statement of the Problem

Recidivism presents a unique challenge for administrators and policymakers in the criminal justice system. In essence, very high recidivism rates signify the system's inability to rehabilitate and reintegrate offenders into their communities adequately. Worryingly, national recidivism rates in the US remain significantly high. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) data released in 2018 showed that 5 in 6 (representing 83 percent) of offenders released in 2005 across 30 states had been rearrested at least once between then and 2014 (Alper et al., 2018). Approximately 44 % of offenders are rearrested before the end of their first year after release (Alper et al., 2018). About 44 % of offenders are rearrested before the end of their first year after release (Alper et al., 2018). According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), juveniles make up approximately 55 % of offenders who are rearrested within their first year of release (OJJDP, 2017).

National data on juvenile recidivism does not exist as juvenile justice is handled at the state level. All the same, state data points to a worrying trend. A 2018 report from the State of Indiana, for instance, puts juvenile recidivism at a rate of 33.3 % for offenders released in 2015 (Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC), 2018). Of the 688 juveniles released in 2015, 229 had been rearrested at least once by 2017. Also, 145 were rearrested as juveniles and 84 as adults (IDOC, 2018). Similarly, 2015 data from the State of California indicates a juvenile recidivism rate of 50.5 % in 2014-15, up from 49.1 % in 2013-14 (California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), 2015). The highest juvenile recidivism rates have been reported in New Jersey. Other states' data from 2010-11 indicates that 81 % of juvenile offenders had been rearrested at least once within three years of their release, with 71 % of these arrests resulting in a new conviction/adjudication (New Jersey Department of Corrections, 2016).

Incarceration dramatically impacts juveniles' future. First, it removes them from the safety and protection of their communities, and interrupts their social systems (friendships, church). It also disrupts their opportunities to receive an education, and possibly exposes them to additional violence (Gilman, Hill & Hawkins, 2015). Re-incarceration has a much more significant impact on the individual as it minimizes the chances of ever making it out of the criminal justice system.

A rich body of literature analyzes the factors that exacerbate the risk of reoffending among previously incarcerated individuals. However, most existing studies adopt a general approach to recidivism without focusing, specifically on juveniles. Findings obtained from adult offender populations may not be generalizable to juvenile offenders as adults and juveniles behave differently towards societal influences. Further, most existing studies study the factors that influence recidivism outside the criminal justice system and ignore the elements within the criminal justice system (experiences during the period of incarceration) that increase the risk of recidivism.

The proposed study seeks to address these knowledge gaps by analyzing the factors that exacerbate recidivism risk among juveniles. It also focuses on identifying exacerbating factors that increase recidivism risk during the period when one is incarcerated. It would be prudent to determine whether the factors that influence the risk of juvenile recidivism are the same factors that influence this risk for older offenders.

Justification for the Study

Several recommendations have been advanced to enhance the rehabilitation of incarcerated juvenile offenders and minimize recidivism risk. For instance, Elrod and Ryder (2020) propose the idea of restorative government and community collaborations through churches, Boys and Girls Clubs, and other community organizations to address the justice component. Other studies, such as Gilman et al. (2015), have proposed expanding residential placement programs as an alternative to incarceration for juvenile offenders. Under residential placement programs, youth are placed in residential homes with families or facilities that have specialized training. Residential placement programs are considered more effective than incarceration in minimizing future reoffending risk as they employ a community-oriented approach (Brown & Smith (2018). However, opponents of the residential programs say that they only increase aggression and violence among the youth since they are not physically secure and often involve placement of liked-mind youth with similar behaviors and under-trained and poorly paid staff members (Brown & Smith, 2018). Moreover, critics argue that residential programs may not uphold strict disciplinary measures like juvenile incarceration facilities, which may defeat their overall purpose. Amidst the ongoing debate on what may work or may not minimize recidivism among delinquent juveniles, it is crucial to educate the public and policymakers on the factors that influence the risk of recidivism among juvenile offenders. Understanding the factors that influence juvenile recidivism is the first step towards developing effective programs to minimize the same.

Purpose of the Research The current study seeks to analyze the factors that influence recidivism among juvenile offenders and develop an intervention manual to reduce this risk. The findings will provide crucial insights for policymakers on the specific factors that drive juvenile recidivism and hence, the rehabilitation programs that would be most appropriate for this group of offenders. The research questions guiding the study are stated below:

RQ1: What factors exacerbate the risk of recidivism among juvenile offenders?

RQ2: What intervention would be most effective in rehabilitating juvenile offenders and minimizing their risk of recidivism?

Chapter Two: Literature Review

This study seeks to identify and analyze the structural factors that influence recidivism among juvenile offenders. In line with the study’s objective, this chapter reviews the literature on the factors exacerbating recidivism risk among former inmates. It is divided into three sections. The first section reviews the literature on the effect of quality-of-life variables influencing the risk of recidivism among former inmates. The second section reviews the literature on the role of unemployment in fueling recidivism among former inmates. The final section focuses on identifying the knowledge gaps evident in the reviewed literature and how the proposed study will address the same.

Variables Influencing the Risk of Recidivism

Recidivism is defined as the act of returning to prison within three years of one’s release (Chetty & Hendren, 2017). Multiple studies have been conducted to identify factors that exacerbate the risk of recidivism among former inmates. There is contention across the literature that an individual’s quality of life upon release influences their likelihood of repeat offending in young adulthood (Mallett, 2013). Pereira and Maia (2017) conducted a study to analyze the relationship between an individual’s criminal history and reoffending rate among Portuguese prisoners. The researchers concluded that an individual’s quality of life was a significant influencer of criminal thinking among former inmates. Those surrounded by low-quality-of-life indicators ran higher risks of recidivism.

These findings were replicated by another study by Barett and Karsiyannis (2015), who analyzed the effect of demographic elements, particularly race, on recidivism rates among juveniles in South Carolina. Like Pereira and Maia (2017), the study found a significant likelihood of recidivism in young adults with a history of juvenile delinquency as well as African Americans. This case showed police presence, crime, and poverty to be significant factors. Although both studies adopt the same approach, Barett and Karsiyannis (2015) analyze the effect of demographic variables in predicting recidivism risk, which Perreira and Maia (2017) ignore.

A different study by Grunwald et al. (2010) also reported a strong association between quality-of-life indicators, specifically neighborhood characteristics, and the risk of recidivism. Like Barett and Karsiyannis (2015), Grunwald et al. (2010) found a positive correlation between neighborhood disorganization, childhood poverty, drug use, mental illness, socioeconomic status, and negative family dynamics and the risk of reoffending upon release from incarceration. However, unlike Barett and Karsiyannis (2015), Grunwald et al. (2010) found no significant relationship between police presence and recidivism risk.

Grunwald et al. (2010) introduced environmental factors in influencing criminal behavior, a finding replicated in another study by Mulder et al. (2010). They established that based on the social control theory, child neglect, family breakdown, and high neighborhood crime rates significantly impact juveniles' chances of repeating an offense upon release from incarceration. Ryan et al. (2013) also analyzed parental attachment (child neglect) on recidivism risk based on statewide data of youth involved in the childcare system. The study findings showed a significant positive correlation between the risk of repeat offense and child neglect, mainly being in foster care. Based on this evidence, future research might focus on early interventions for children in foster care and supportive services for parents who have been accused of parental neglect or abuse. However, the study by Ryan et al. (2013) introduced the vital aspect of time, establishing that approximately 61% of the convicted youths who recidivated did so within 18 months of their initial arrest. Studies focused on the time between release and re-arrest among juvenile offenders are limited, making this a consideration for future research. However, this finding presents an intriguing perspective as it established that the time between recidivism is relatively short; youth are released and immediately re-offend and re-incarcerated. This could be linked to Mulder et al. (2010) finding that the environment in which a juvenile is placed directly upon their release from incarceration has a significant impact on their recidivism risk.

Unemployment and Recidivism

Studies contend that most offenders have difficulty obtaining employment upon release from incarceration, which increases their risk of reoffending (Ramakers et al., 2017; Nally et al., 2014). However, researchers have differed on the question of whether post-incarceration employment reduces the risk of recidivism. A study by Tripodi, Kim, and Bender (2009), exploring the relationship between employment and recidivism for parolees, found that post-incarceration employment did not significantly decrease the likelihood of recidivism but only increased the time before re-incarceration. Thus, parolees who secure employment as spend more time crime-free in the community before ultimately returning to prison (Tripodi et al., 2009). More recent studies have found a positive association between unemployment and the risk of recidivism in sharp contrast. In their five-year follow-up study geared at exploring the relationship between post-release employment and recidivism, Nally et al. (2014) found a negative association between post-release employment and recidivism, although employment rates varied with the nature of the crime for which one was incarcerated. The study findings place drug and sex offenders at the highest risk of post-incarceration unemployment and non-violent offenders at the lowest risk (Nally et al., 2014). However, the findings conflict with Bhuller et al.’s (2016) findings, however, which showed a significant association between post-incarceration employment and recidivism; but found no significant association between the nature of crime and employment rate. However, both studies found evidence of a negative association between incarceration and employment. Regarding the possible reasons why former inmates run lower risks of obtaining employment upon release, researchers contend that unemployment among ex-convicts is mainly due to a lack of skills, selection issues, and social barriers. According to Bhuller et al. (2016), selection has the most significant influence on unemployment, with most employers unwilling to hire former inmates for fear of ruining the company’s reputation (Bhuller et al., 2016). However, other studies have shown that the risk of recidivism depends on securing employment and the job's nature. For instance, in their longitudinal study examining recidivism rates among Dutch prisoners, Ramakers et al. (2017) found that former inmates were less likely to be employed in jobs with higher occupational levels (stable jobs). The researchers contend with Bhuller et al. (2016) that most ex-prisoners lack the skills required for such jobs and must opt for less stable employment due to their time in prison. However, the two studies differ concerning the impact of skills in the unemployment debate. Bhuller et al. (2016) found that selection, and not lack of skills, was the primary reason why ex-prisoners find it challenging to obtain employment. Bhuller et al. (2016) and Ramakers et al. (2017) contend that post-incarceration unemployment increases recidivism risk. However, according to Ramakers et al. (2017), the risk of recidivism is not just influenced by unemployment alone but also by employment nature. Study findings have shown that jobs with higher occupational levels (stable jobs) are associated with lower recidivism risks than less stable jobs (Ramakers et al., 2017). This finding was replicated in Schnepel (2018), who found that employment in manufacturing and construction industries helped reduce recidivism, while other types of jobs characterized by low wages did not affect recidivism. More research is needed to analyze the role of job stability in influencing recidivism accurately. However, these findings point to the need to enhance offenders' opportunities to obtain stable job opportunities upon release to minimize recidivism risk. Thus, while there is consensus across studies that post-incarceration unemployment increases recidivism risk, studies give conflicting results on why ex-prisoners find it challenging to secure employment and how the nature of crime influences post-incarceration unemployment. However, there is contention in the literature that the nature of post-incarceration employment also influences the risk of recidivism.

Gaps in Research

There is consensus across the literature that juvenile delinquency is associated with a high risk of future reoffending. There is a rich literature on recidivism, including the factors that exacerbate its occurrence and control it. Studies have shown a negative correlation between quality-of-life indicators and the risk of recidivism. Further, there is evidence of a significant relationship between the nature of the offense for which one was incarcerated and the risk of recidivism, with offenders involved in violent crime reporting higher reoffending rates. Notably, however, most of these studies adopt a general approach without specifically focusing on juveniles.

Further, most existing studies focus on exacerbating recidivism influences outside the criminal justice system, with little focus on the factors that influence recidivism during incarceration. The proposed study seeks to address these gaps by examining these research questions: What factors exacerbate the risk of recidivism among juvenile offenders? What interventions would help to reduce the risk of recidivism among juvenile offenders? The ultimate aim is to develop an intervention manual to minimize recidivism risk based on the identified aggravating factors.

Chapter Three: Theoretical Framework

The development of the intervention manual is guided by the precepts of Albert Bandura's social learning theory. The theory suggests that individuals learn by observing others' actions and the negative/positive consequences associated with the same (Hunter-Reel, 2013). The theory is based on two fundamental assumptions. The first is that humans are naturally social. They learn through social interactions such as reciprocal teaching, apprenticeships, and collaborations (Hunter-Reel, 2013). The theory also assumes that human beings have significant control over their actions and environments and can, therefore, adequately control their ability to learn (Hunter-Reel, 2013). The proposed study will use the social learning theory precepts to develop an intervention manual showing how juvenile intervention programs need to be structured to enhance learning among juveniles, reduce criminal inclinations, and minimize their risk of reoffending.

The Theory’s Application in Research

Several studies have employed the social learning theory within the context of offender rehabilitation in correction facilities. In one study, Sundnt et al. (2014) sought to determine the extent to which prison chaplain rehabilitation programs employed precepts of the social learning theory. The study is based on Andrews and Kiessling's findings, which showed that correctional counseling interventions rooted in the social learning theory are associated with lower offender recidivism rates (Sundnt et al., 2014). The study sought to evaluate the extent to which prison chaplains employ rehabilitation techniques rooted in the social learning theory in their interactions with offenders. Prison chaplains were sampled and interviewed on how they used education, changed values through religion, taught vocational skills, or helped with emotional problems. The researchers also sought to identify how frequently chaplains offered support therapy, group counseling, client-centered counseling, and behavioral methods. The study concluded that most prison chaplains who employ rehabilitation interventions rooted in social learning theory assumptions face lower reoffending risks than those who do not emphasize the same (Sundnt et al., 2014). Other studies such as that by Phipps et al. (2001) have adopted a different approach, using offenders as participants to determine the effect of selected rehabilitation interventions on crime outcomes. The study assumed that programs rooted in the social learning theory are likely to significantly affect offenders’ crime outcomes (Phipps et al., 2001). The study found that programs that promote effective interaction between offenders are more effective than those that limit interactions. For instance, regarding drug-involved offenders, the study found that drug treatment programs in the community were more effective than adult drug courts, in-prison therapeutic communities with/without aftercare, and cognitive-behavioral therapy in reducing offender criminal outcomes upon release (Phipps et al., 2001). Therapeutic community programs were also more effective than jail diversion programs (post and pre-booking programs) to reduce criminal outcomes among offenders with mental illness (Phipps et al., 2001).

For sex offenders, the study established that faith-based programs were the most effective in reducing criminal outcomes (Phipps et al., 2001). Interventions such as psychotherapy, cognitive-behavioral treatment, and behavioral treatment were less effective for this offender group (Phipps et al., 2001). Finally, a comparison of intermediate sanctions found treatment-oriented approaches to be more effective than surveillance-based approaches, regular supervision, boot camps, and electronic monitoring (Phipps et al., 2001 Though it does not directly cite the social learning theory, the study findings indicate greater efficacy for interventions that promote learning and enhance interactions (Phipps et al., 2001). Another study by Davis et al. (2013) sought to determine whether correctional education significantly affected recidivism's risk upon release. The study found that correctional education programs reduced the risk of re-arrest within three years of release by 12.9 percentage points (Davis et al., 2013). Further, the researchers found that these programs' impact depends on the type of instruction method used. The study found a significant effect for instructional techniques that promote learning through interaction with instructors and college instructors external to the correctional facility (Davis et al., 2013). The researchers explain their findings using the social learning theory, pointing out that since the theory argues that learning occurs by observing and learning from others' experiences, offenders develop an admiration for the freedom that people outside the facility enjoy and the knowledge they possess. This admiration reduces their inclination to recidivate (Davis et al., 2013).

Justification for Selected Theory Although the social learning theory was selected as the guiding theory for this study, the relevance of other theories such as the social bonds and social disorganization theories cannot be underestimated. In essence, the social bond theory's elimination resulted from the assumption that human beings are naturally self-interested and do not require any external motivation to commit a crime. By its very nature, the proposed study seeks to minimize the risk of community influences, which are external stimuli. As such, the assumption that external stimuli do not influence criminal behavior may not suffice in the context of the proposed study. The social disorganization theory emphasizes changes in ecological structures such as racial composition. These factors are, however, beyond the scope of this study.

Chapter Four: Methodology

This study seeks to identify the factors that influence recidivism among juvenile offenders and, consequently, inform the development of an intervention manual to minimize this risk effectively. This chapter discusses the project deliverable, sample participants, recruitment of participants, and methods used to obtain input and feedback from participants. Project Deliverable The project seeks to develop an intervention manual containing specific activities to minimize recidivism risk among juvenile offenders. To obtain relevant input, the researcher interviewed juvenile detention center staff, local church leaders, and social workers from local support organizations. They conveniently selected three local support organizations: Bull City Youth Group, the Boys and Girls Club of Durham, and the North Carolina Central University Counseling Center.

Rationale for the Selected Deliverable An intervention is a combination of strategies designed to bring about a specific change (Salkind, 2010). An intervention manual goes further to show how the identified strategies are to be implemented when they are to be implemented, who is responsible, and what are the expected outcomes (Salkind, 2010). An intervention manual was deemed the most appropriate deliverable because the study's goal is to identify the factors that influence recidivism among juvenile offenders and develop an intervention for juveniles' effective rehabilitation based on the specified factors. The study hypothesizes that interventions rooted in the social learning theory will be more effective in rehabilitating juvenile offenders and minimizing their inclination to re-offend.

Sample Population The researcher identified and sought input and feedback for the intervention manual from sampled stakeholders dealing with youth and juvenile offenders in Durham. The identified stakeholders included staff from the Durham County Youth Home (a juvenile detention center), youth leaders from three local churches (New Hope, Grace Church of Durham, and World Overcomers Christian Church), and social workers from three local support organizations (Bull City Youth Support Group, the Boys and Girls Club of Durham, and the North Carolina Central University on-campus counseling and Achievement Center). Juvenile detention center staff were selected to offer feedback on the manual because they interact directly with incarcerated juveniles and have witnessed firsthand the rehabilitation strategies that work with such offenders and those that are less effective. Local church leaders are actively involved with juvenile delinquents and were considered a good source of information on spiritual interventions that would effectively rehabilitate such offenders. Finally, local support organizations help to provide an enabling environment for previously incarcerated juveniles. They partner with government agencies, non-governmental organizations, donor agencies, and the private sector. They play a crucial role in linking such juveniles with job opportunities, psychological support services, and skills training opportunities. The social workers in these organizations interact firsthand with such juveniles from the time they are released from incarceration. They were considered an invaluable source of information on both aggravating and relieving factors for juvenile reoffending and rehabilitation strategies that work best with this group of individuals.

Stakeholder Recruitment

The researcher made physical visits to the Durham County Youth Home, the three local churches, and the three local support organizations. They met the director at Durham County Youth Home, the lead youth pastor from the three local churches. The three support organizations' directors to explain the study objectives and expected benefits and request their permission to obtain input from themselves or selected employees within their organizations.

Afterwards, the physical visit was followed up with an email, requesting a response, indicating their acceptance of the study. Once consent is granted, the leaders/coordinators facilitated identifying potential juvenile detention staff and social workers who would participate in the study and sent an email with their contact details via email to the researcher. Finally, the researcher sent the potential respondents a consent form via email. They indicated that they consented to participate in the study and indicated their preferred engagement mode (telephone or face-to-face).

Methods of Obtaining Input and Feedback

The researcher engaged stakeholders through telephone and face-to-face interviews. They developed different interview guides for social workers, local church leaders, and detention center staff. The church leaders' interview guide (included as Appendix A in the appendices) sought to determine what age groups of youth mostly attend church services, the extent of youth's resilience or acceptance of spirituality, and the relationship between spirituality and recidivism. It also sought information on whether or not previously incarcerated youth who seek their assistance give indications of progress with religious interventions and the specific techniques that the church uses to reduce criminal tendencies among the youth.

The social workers’ interview guide (Appendix B) sought to determine the age at which most youths become delinquent, the state of the youth who become delinquent, and the support accorded to delinquent and previously incarcerated youth to help bring about behavioral change. The guide also sought to obtain input on how well previously incarcerated youth can reintegrate into society and the strategies used to rehabilitate delinquent youth. The interview guide for staff in detention facilities (Appendix C) sought to determine the age group and crimes committed by the youth held at the facility, the most common crimes committed by juveniles, and the services and placements used in rehabilitating juvenile offenders. It sought to obtain input on the most effective mix of rehabilitation strategies for juvenile offenders, how soon juveniles in their facilities re-offended upon release, and the classes of juveniles that were more likely to re-offend.

Additional Sources of Information

The template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR), advanced by Alvarez et al. (2016), served as the primary guideline in designing the intervention manual. The template offers comprehensive guidance on how manual therapy interventions must be designed and reported (Alvarez et al., 2016). TIDieR is a checklist of 12 items and specific guidelines developed by an international group of medical experts (Alvarez et al., 2016). The checklist outlines the procedures to systematically report the rationale (item 'why') behind the use of an intervention and the materials and procedures required for the intervention (items' what,' 'where,' 'how,' 'when,' 'how much, and 'how well') (Alvarez et al., 2016). The TIDieR is mainly used in clinical trials (Alvarez et al., 2016). However, according to the authors, it could still 'be considered a substantial support for describing any intervention within any study design' (Alvarez et al., 2016, p. 86). The TIDieR was adopted to serve as the guideline and checklist for the proposed intervention manual.

Chapter 5: Conclusion

Results The study sought to identify the factors that influence recidivism among juvenile offenders and, consequently, develop an intervention manual to minimize this risk effectively. Three common themes emerged regarding the factors influencing recidivism among juvenile offenders' criminal history, age of onset of criminality (first arrest, referral, or adjudication), and community characteristics. The respondents did not give any information on aggravating factors within the criminal justice system. Youth who was first convicted at a younger age were more likely to recidivate than those who were first convicted at an older age. The general feeling among the interviewed juvenile detention staff is that youth who were first convicted before the age of 15 reoffended at higher rates than those first convicted at ages 16 or older. A common argument is that the earlier in life one is arrested, the more contact they have with the criminal justice system, and the more connections they can build with other offenders. A positive association was also reported between one’s criminal history and their risk of recidivism. Youth with rich criminal records were more likely to have been first convicted at a younger age and were more likely to recidivate than those with no prior criminal records.

Under community characteristics, respondents identified several risk factors: absence of community-based facilities, family criminality, and high rates of crime or substance abuse. Youth were more likely to recidivate if they lacked access to community-based facilities and support. Their parents or guardians were involved in criminal activity. The community had higher rates of criminality, and the community had higher rates of substance abuse. The general feeling from the interviewed stakeholders' input is that youth are more likely to engage in crime if exposed to or interact with a criminal.

Relevance to Research Questions

From the stakeholders' input on the factors influencing recidivism among juvenile offenders, one can deduce that community characteristics are the primary influencers of recidivism among juvenile offenders. Community characteristics determine the age at which individuals begin criminal behavior and their criminal history. The community characteristics provide platforms for curtailing or learning criminal tendencies, which then inform the risk of recidivism. The social learning theory emphasizes that human behavior is learned by observing and modeling others' attitudes, behaviors, and emotional reactions. According to the social learning theory, an individual's environment influences the social learning of their behaviors and attitudes. As such, negative community influences could be responsible for a juvenile's delinquent behavior and recidivism. If juveniles lack access to social control structures within the community, negative tendencies learned from peers, familial criminality, and social disorganization within the community can lead to delinquent behaviors. Thus, the most effective strategies for minimizing recidivism among juvenile delinquents provide some form of social control to reduce the risk of such juveniles learning and modeling negative tendencies from their environments.

There is little that an individual could do to address community characteristics such as high criminality, high substance abuse rates, and familial disorganization, which have been shown to influence delinquent behavior through social learning. (REWRITE - HARD TO READ) The intervention manual proposes the implementation of a 6-months residential program for juvenile delinquents. The intervention seeks to offer juvenile delinquents support to help them control the environment's negative influences and minimize their risk of learning delinquent tendencies. Thus, the proposed intervention serves as a form of control aimed at instilling positive behavior and minimizing juveniles' risk in disorganized communities recidivating due to interacting with people with negative influences every day. The intervention manual appears as appendix D in the appendices section.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Deliverable The proposed intervention manual's greatest strength is that it recognizes that the targeted youth are part of a larger community and cannot be taken away. However, through the intervention, juvenile delinquents can learn positive behaviors by interacting with role models and champions of behavioral change, and they can then model these behaviors in their lives. Further, the manual was developed using input from a broad base of stakeholders, including social workers, religious leaders, and juvenile detention staff. This helped to capture contextual factors more accurately

However, on the flip side, the researcher did not obtain input from delinquent juveniles, who are the primary beneficiaries of the intervention. The assumption was that juveniles may have little knowledge on what factors influence their criminal tendencies and the possible solutions. For this reason, the study chose to engage the adults who work and interact with these juveniles every day. Secondly, social workers, juvenile detention staff, and religious leaders do not represent the entire base of indirect stakeholders for this project. Due to resource limitations, other crucial stakeholders such as parents and school administrators were excluded from the study. Further, the study relied on qualitative data, which may not be easily verifiable. Future studies could replicate the study using quantitative techniques and measurable variables.

Relevance to Social Work Practice

The proposed study results provide crucial insights to social workers on the factors that aggravate recidivism risk among juvenile delinquents. This way, they know where to focus their efforts to ensure effective rehabilitation of such offenders. The developed intervention manual provides insights on how to structure effective rehabilitation programs for juvenile offenders based on the social learning theory. The study identified negative community characteristics as the primary influencers of recidivism among juvenile delinquents. Based on the social learning theory, therefore, the study concludes that the most effective interventions need to focus on instilling positive behavioral change to help juveniles navigate the risk factors in their environment.

References

Alper, M., & Durose, M.R. (2018, May 17). 2018 Update on Prisoner Recidivism: A 9-Year Follow-up Period (2005-2014). U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6266

Alvarez, G., Cerritelli, F., & Urrutia, G. (2016). Using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) as a Tool for Improving the Design and Reporting of Manual Therapy Interventions. Manual Therapy, 24(1), 85-89.

Barett, D. E., & Katsiyannis, A. (2015). Juvenile offending and crime in early adulthood: A large sample analysis. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25(4): 1086-97.

Bhuller, M., Dahl, G., Loken, K., & Mogstad, M. (2016). Incarceration, BGC Durham (2020). Youth Justice Department. Boys and Girls Club of Durham. Retrieved from https://www.bgcdurham.com/programs--2/youth-justice-department

Recidivism and Employment, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working paper 22648.

Boaz, A., Hanney, S., Borst, R., O’Shea, A. & Kok, M. (2018). How to engage stakeholders in research: Design principles to support improvement. Health Research Policy and Systems, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0337-6