Crimmigration and Crossover Youth

Differences in risk and protective factors between crossover and non-crossover youth in juvenile justice

Crossover youth are involved in both child welfare and juvenile justice systems. The Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) promotes collaboration between these systems to inform decision making between the two agencies and better serve these youth. Yet, few outcome evaluations of the CYPM exist, especially those that assess outcomes beyond recidivism, such as case dispositions, case closure, or placement or living situations. This study examined whether the CYPM ( n = 210) decreased recidivism and increased system/case responses and positive outcomes among youth within 9–18 months after the youth’s initial arrest relative to a comparison group of crossover youth ( n = 425) who were arrested 1 year before the CYPM was implemented. Overall, the findings suggest that the CYPM in the jurisdiction under study dismisses or diverts crossover youth more often, closes delinquency cases more often, and leads to more home placements than was previously done in the jurisdiction, but it does not significantly reduce recidivism.

Crossover youth and gender: What are the challenges of girls involved in both the foster care and juvenile justice systems?

Social workers are critical to promoting racial and social justice. "Crossover youth," a term used to describe youths who have contact with both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, are an especially vulnerable but often overlooked population with whom social workers engage. A disproportionate number of crossover youth are African American. Empirical research on crossover youth is growing, but such scholarship rarely engages with a human rights and social justice perspective. African American children and youths have a distinct place within the history and current context of the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. These systems have historically excluded them or treated them differently; now, African American youths are overrepresented in each of them, and evidence suggests they are more likely to cross over. The purpose of this article is to describe the historical and current context of crossover youth, with a particular focus on African American youths, to provide the foundation for a discussion of what social workers can do to promote racial and social justice for crossover youth, including specific implications for practice and policy, as well as broader implications for human and civil rights.

Recently, researchers and policy makers have begun focusing on crossover youth, the population of children and adolescents involved with both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. Emerging evidence suggests that crossover youth possess unique characteristics, but a better understanding of the dynamic needs of this population will assist treatment providers and policy makers in responding to their needs. This study sought to identify and compare the mental health and substance use characteristics of crossover youth and of delinquent-only youth. The study examined archival data from 419 youth committed to New Jersey's Juvenile Justice Commission during 2011 and 2012. It was predicted that crossover youth would demonstrate more severe mental health and substance use symptoms and features than delinquent-only youth. Results revealed that youth with an open case in the child welfare system demonstrated greater needs in some mental health domains, and trauma also played a significant role in levels of mental health. The findings from this study contribute to the empirical foundation for the development and use of treatments and policies that can best serve this population. This information can inform the child-serving systems (e.g., juvenile justice, child welfare) that care and provide services for this population so that they may be able to better adapt to the unique needs of these youth.

Five key learnings from a court-based crossover youth program

How do people become the responsibility of one state institution over another? Prevailing theory suggests that marginalized groups are funneled toward increasingly coercive control over the life course, yet more coercive institutions may not always assume responsibility for people sent their way. This article uses the unique case of crossover youth—children at the junction of child welfare and juvenile justice systems—to illustrate how state institutions negotiate and contest responsibility for marginalized groups. To explain this process, I advance a conceptual framework of institutional offloading, which contends that institutional actors seek to offload responsibility for eligible tasks or clients they perceive to unduly strain the resources at their disposal and expose them to blame. Drawing on ethnographic data from a California juvenile court and interviews with court actors, the analysis demonstrates how actors from Social Services, on one side, and Probation, on the other, attempt to offload responsibility for crossover youth. In this process, institutional actors construct and contest crossover youths’ status as dependent or delinquent. The findings highlight the importance of analyzing governance decisions as interlocking state processes and illuminate mechanisms by which the pipeline to prison for marginalized groups may be perpetuated and potentially disrupted.

Addressing the needs crossover youth: What key professionals are saying

Research suggests that many juveniles in residential facilities report high rates of early childhood trauma. Past research demonstrates that knowledge of trauma history, specifically whether a youth has been abused or neglected, may provide court practitioners with necessary information concerning recidivism risk, treatment needs, and treatment responsivity. Little is known about the validity of general risk assessment tools for youth involved in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems (i.e., crossover youth) and their unique risk patterns. Therefore, this study examined the validity of the Ohio Youth Assessment System-Disposition Tool (OYAS-DIS) for crossover youth. Results revealed that although crossover youth were more likely to have higher risk scores overall compared to general delinquent youth, the total score of the OYAS-DIS was equally predictive of recidivism for both males and females regardless of child welfare status.

This article explores the perceptions of family policing (child welfare) and juvenile legal (juvenile justice) systems professionals on Black crossover youth in out-of-home placements and explores how interventions in these systems intersect and align with carceral practices. Through the lens of anti-carceral theory, the article pulls together the interplay of anti-Black racism, carceral logic, and carceral expansion in how professionals view system realities of Black crossover youth forcibly separated from their families. Interviews with twelve child welfare, juvenile legal, and court professionals were conducted to understand their perceptions of factors leading to the crossover trajectory, out-of-home placement and other service interventions for crossover youth, and racial disproportionality of Black adolescents. The study describes how professionals acknowledge, justify, or ignore the presence of surveillance, policing, and punishment, embedded in practices intended to service traumatized youth that instead perpetuate systemic racism. Findings uncovered that while professionals acknowledge the overrepresentation of crossover youth across all decision points in family separation and juvenile legal systems, views of individual, and family pathology were noted as causes which underpin carceral thought and social control. Perceptions were akin to a need for continued policing structures that target Black youth. Recommendations for dismantling practices reflecting anti-Black racism and carcerality are offered.

Youth Dually-Involved in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems: Varying definitions and their associations with trauma exposure, posttraumatic stress, & offending

Understanding racial disproportionality affecting African American Youth who cross over from the child welfare to the juvenile justice system: Communication, power, race and social class

Crossover youth, those involved in both the child welfare and youth justice systems, are more likely to receive detention and harsher sentences than youth with no child welfare involvement. In Ontario, the Crossover Youth Project (COYP) was formed to ameliorate these systemic issues. To evaluate the success of a Toronto pilot site, a convergent parallel mixed methods study was completed. A total of 19 stakeholders, mostly from youth justice and child welfare, were interviewed at the closure of the pilot and 15 nine months later. Interviews were analyzed qualitatively using thematic analysis and interpreted alongside quantitative data from questionnaires. Themes indicate that stakeholders’ knowledge of crossover youth and skills in advocacy increased, as well as their ability to collaborate. While their learning was maintained at follow-up, their ability to collaborate was impaired by loss of the case coordinator who was essential to facilitating conferences. Results can inform future interventions.

A portion of a Canada wide project, The Alberta Incidence Study investigates various risk factors and prevalence rates of child maltreatment cases in Alberta (MacLaurin et al., 2013). The information collected provides an understanding of children involved in the children’s services population in Alberta. “Crossover Youth” have become a subpopulation of attention in recent years within child maltreatment research. “Crossover Youth” are defined as maltreated youth within children’s services who also engage in delinquency (Herz, et al., 2010). Crossover youth have also been associated to areas of academic difficulties, including learning difficulties and academic performance (Herz et al., 2010). Academic difficulties are defined as children identified with learning disabilities, special needs, or behaviour problems, which are usually identified in the school system. The Alberta Incidence Study Data was utilized to help predict crossover youth or academic difficulties in three categories; Child factors, Caregiver factors and Environmental factors. Results indicate that among maltreated youth, caregivers with any risk factor (5.67 times) and history of foster care (2.37 times) made crossover status more likely. Youth who struggled with alcohol abuse (5.79 times) and intellectual/developmental disabilities (4.83 times) were also more at risk. Youth with indications of poverty were also more likely to crossover (1.93 times). Youth who had caregivers with a history of foster care (5.01 times), or any caregiver risk factor (2.77 times) made academic difficulties more likely. Physical disabilities (55.81 times) and intellectual/developmental disabilities (38 times) increased the chance of academic difficulties. Households who often faced challenges with money for basic necessities increased the likelihood of academic difficulties status (2.29 times). Persons working in this population are recommended to view each risk factor as potentially important for crossover risk and academic difficulties. School psychologists are provided recommendations for diagnosis and risk reduction when working with maltreated children in terms of trauma. Suggestions for future research are discussed.

Youth who are victims of maltreatment and engage in delinquency are at a greater risk of adverse emotional and behavioral outcomes compared to those in the general population (Herz and Dierkhising in 2018; Herz et al. in 2019; Stouthamer-Loeber et al. in 2001). “Crossover youth” is a common, collective term for youth who experience maltreatment and engage in delinquency. Current studies suggest girls and African American youth are more likely to experience crossover between the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. Yet, there is little existing scholarship, especially conceptual articles, specific to consideration of both race and gender regarding crossover youth. Critical Race Theory (CRT) and intersectionality are utilized to analyze and better understand the overrepresentation of African American girls who cross over from the child welfare to the juvenile justice system. This article concludes with implications for social work action strategies, for micro and macro social work, including policy and research, to better address the unique needs of this population. Race and racism, and how these overlap with experiences as girls and young women, are central and cannot be disentangled and need to be included as social work pays more attention to addressing the needs of this especially vulnerable sub-population of crossover youth.