Abstract
Recidivism is typically embraced as the sole or primary outcome measure of success for offender intervention programs. Focusing specifically on tertiary prevention approaches for juvenile offenders, this article firstly argues that there are significant limitations in using rates of recidivism as the primary outcome measure of program success. This article describes the Risk-Needs-Responsivity model and the Good Lives Model as examples of models which can be used to inform the selection of appropriate outcome measures for program evaluation. This article provides three examples of recent outcome evaluation studies which sought to determine the effectiveness of post-sentencing tertiary intervention programs for juvenile offenders using a broad range of indicators of success. Finally, this article suggests alternative outcome measures that might be usefully incorporated in future program design, as well as the monitoring and evaluation of existing programs.
Highlights
Within the ‘what works’ literature, recidivism is typically embraced as the sole or primary outcome measure of success for offender intervention programs
It is clearly appropriate to gauge achievements in areas relating to finances, accommodation and legal needs in the case of the Post-Release Support Program (PRSP)
These differences aside, many of the alternative outcomes gauged in the three evaluation studies reviewed in this article clearly relate to criminogenic risk factors
Summary
Within the ‘what works’ literature, recidivism is typically embraced as the sole or primary outcome measure of success for offender intervention programs. Focusing on tertiary prevention approaches for juvenile offenders, this article argues that there are significant limitations in using rates of recidivism as the primary outcome measure of program success. This article explores the importance generally of incorporating a comprehensive evaluative framework into program design. The limitations of relying upon recidivism as the sole or primary outcome measure in program evaluation are outlined. This article offers three examples of recent outcome evaluation studies which sought to determine the effectiveness of post-sentencing tertiary intervention programs for juvenile offenders using a broad range of indicators of success. The article suggests alternative outcome measures that might be usefully incorporated in future program design, as well as the monitoring and evaluation of existing programs
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
