Juvenile Probation Officers Research Articles

Using Implementation Outcomes to Inform Implementation of Suicide Risk Screening with Juvenile Legal-Involved Youth: Considerations for Task-Shifting Suicide Screening to Juvenile Legal Staff

ABSTRACT Youth in the juvenile legal system (JLS) are at increased risk for suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Examine the acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness of imbedding suicide screening and intervention in the JLS. The current study involved formative semi-structured interviews with key JLS stakeholders (n = 37) from two states, one in the Northeast and one in the Midwest, to determine whether suicide screening and intervention could be integrated into the role of juvenile probation officers. Stakeholders discussed perspectives on the acceptability (perceived JLS staff comfort with suicide screening and a brief intervention), feasibility (improving comfort of staff, youth, and families), and appropriateness (perceived impact on youth and families). Qualitative data suggested acceptability of suicide screening was mitigated by staff comfort and perceived support of available clinical resources. Feasibility of improving staff comfort to conduct suicide screening and a brief intervention revolved around logistical, training, and supervisory support. Barriers to the appropriateness of suicide screening and intervention with youth in the JLS suggest concerns about how youth’s distrust of the JLS and mental health stigma might impact engagement in suicide screening and intervention efforts. We conclude with implementation strategy considerations to enhance successful suicide screening and intervention by JLS staff.

Juvenile probation officers’ lived experiences of collaboration with clinical mental health counselors: An interpretive phenomenological analysis

Juvenile probation officers’ lived experiences of collaboration with clinical mental health counselors: An interpretive phenomenological analysis

Exploring the Impact of Rehabilitation and Custody Orientations on Workplace Experiences of Juvenile Probation and Detention Officers

Prior research has suggested that juvenile justice staff’s support for rehabilitation is important for the success of their juvenile clients. The purpose of this article was to assess how rehabilitation and punishment orientations impacted burnout, secondary trauma, job stress, and job satisfaction among juvenile probation and detention officers. Results indicated that having more of a rehabilitation orientation did not demonstrate direct effects on the workplace outcomes included in this study. However, staff who indicated more of a punishment orientation were less likely to report emotional exhaustion and personal accomplishment, as well as less job stress, but were more likely to report feelings of depersonalization.

Juvenile probation officers and discretionary decision-making: the effects of legal, physical, and social factors

Although sentencing recommendations should be based on legal factors, research shows that some juvenile probation officers (JPOs) also consider extra-legal factors. Indeed, research shows that stereotypes about certain demographics (e.g., young Black males) increase the perception of dangerousness and, in turn, result in harsher sentencing recommendations. The purpose of the current study was to identify the legal (seriousness of offense, prior offenses, and record), physical (race, gender, and age), and social factors (socioeconomic status, completeness of the juvenile’s family/family arrangement, presence of co-offenders) that the JPO considered the most important when making their sentencing recommendations. Data for the study came from a sample of juvenile probation officers in nine states. Participants were asked questions about sanctioning, disposition, and sentencing. The findings show that while the majority of JPOs rated legal factors (e.g., seriousness of offense) as the most important when making sentencing recommendations, a substantial proportion of the sample rated physical factors (e.g., race) as the most important factor considered when making sentencing recommendations. Implications and future directions for research are discussed.

How probation practices vary across rural, suburban, and urban contexts

ABSTRACT Research on criminal justice in rural areas is historically infrequent in the United States, and even though it has become more frequent recently, there has been even less work focused on rural juvenile justice. The purpose of this article is to compare juvenile probation practices in rural counties to those in suburban and/or urban counties. Overall, the implementation of programmes and policies is primarily based on the needs of larger counties. This article presents findings from 16 in-depth interviews with juvenile probation officers throughout Pennsylvania. Various struggles were identified by probation officers in smaller counties, such as travel time to facilities and limited resources. In contrast, many probation officers in larger counties discussed the additional resources they have been able to offer to juveniles. These findings have implications for theory, juvenile probation officer practices, programmes and policies in rural communities, and highlight the need for future research in this area.

Work Ideologies of Juvenile Probation Officers: The Effects of Individual Characteristics

Probation is the oldest and most widely used community-based corrections program. Research on probation primarily focuses on the experiences of justice-involved juveniles and the supervision of juveniles in the probation system. Much less is understood about the impact probation officers' perceptions have on job performance and what factors influence those perceptions. The current study aimed to examine the relationship between individual characteristics (e.g., age, gender, race, level of education, tenure, political party affiliation, and jurisdiction) and juvenile probation officers' perceptions about their work ideology. Data for the study came from a sample of juvenile probation officers in nine states. Participants were asked questions about sanctioning, disposition, and role orientation. The study's findings show that few individual characteristics are significantly associated with attitudes/perceptions about work ideology. Probation officers’ race was the only predictor significantly associated with several outcomes. Implications and future directions for research are discussed.

Domains of the YLS: Do Some Matter More than Others?

Data were obtained in Pennsylvania to examine referrals to juvenile courts in the Commonwealth for the 2021-2022 school year that include any felony, misdemeanor or summary offenses that occurred on school property. This study looked at the referrals to see if any of the individual domains of the Youth Level of Service Case Management Inventory 2.0 (YLS/CMI) had more of an effect on how the case was disposed of, which was defined as dismissed or handled informally, or formally adjudicated, in juvenile court. The research found that while the overall YLS risk score influenced juvenile court outcomes, only five of the eight individual domains of the YLS had a significant effect on how a case was processed in juvenile court, which calls into question how closely juvenile probation officers are following the instrument in their practice.

The feasibility and utility of trauma screening for children involved in the juvenile justice system.

Childhood exposure to potentially traumatic events and adversity is highly prevalent and linked to adverse outcomes. Many children suffering from symptoms related to traumatic stress are not identified or do not receive appropriate trauma-focused treatment, including evidence-based treatments. Trauma screening is a promising strategy to improve identification, but many child-serving staff members have concerns about asking youth and caregivers about trauma. This study aimed to describe staff perceptions about the feasibility, utility, and potential for distress associated with trauma screening. Between 2014 and 2019, the Child Trauma Screen was used in 1,272 trauma screenings completed by juvenile probation officers or mental health clinicians as part of routine practice with youth in the juvenile justice system. Further, 1,190 caregiver reports about youth trauma were completed for youth in the juvenile justice system. Staff completed a brief postscreening survey about the feasibility and utility of the screening and the perceived level of child or caregiver distress. Across staff roles, trauma screening was deemed to be feasible and worthwhile to practice, with very few staff members reporting that children or caregivers appeared very uncomfortable as a result of screening, although some differences in feasibility and utility by staff role did occur. Trauma screening measures appear to be useful and practical in juvenile justice settings when appropriate support is provided, including when administered by nonclinical staff. Nonclinical staff may benefit from additional training, consultation, or support with trauma screening.

Juvenile probation officer perception of contingency management to target caregiver engagement and training outcomes

Few community-based substance use treatment programs are available or skilled in treating justice-involved youth, highlighting the need to equip juvenile probation officers with the skills to deliver evidence-based substance use treatment. Contingency management (CM) is evidence-based for treating substance use and shows promise for juvenile probation officers’ successful uptake (positive opinions and trainability). However, research has not examined whether probation officers’ positive beliefs and trainability generalize to target behaviors beyond those displayed by youth, but that nevertheless affect youth outcomes. This study examined probation officers’ perceptions of using CM to engage caregivers and assessed probation officers’ CM knowledge and CM delivery after training in a protocol-specific CM program for caregivers of substance-using youth on probation. Results showed probation officers were ambivalent about CM for caregivers. Results also showed that age, training format and how competency is assessed may be essential to consider. Implications for the dissemination of CM and future research are discussed.

Assessing Readiness for Change of Juvenile Probation Policies and Practices: A Factor Analysis of the Probation Officer Attitudes, Beliefs, and Behavior (POABB) Scale.

As juvenile probation undergoes nationwide reform to better align with research on adolescent development, it is critical to understand probation officers' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about corresponding changes to supervisory practices within juvenile probation departments. The Probation Officer Attitudes, Beliefs, and Behaviors (POABB) Scale was designed for use with juvenile probation officers (JPOs) undergoing training in a specific evidence-based supervision strategy (i.e., Graduated Response) to assess staff's knowledge and beliefs about Graduated Response's practices and intended supervisory behaviors. To provide foundational empirical support for the novel scale, the current study examined the factor structure of this self-report measure using POABB data from 351 juvenile probation staff across three mid-Atlantic states. An exploratory factor analysis revealed that a five-factor structure within the POABB provided the best fit and, overall, the POABB had good internal reliability (ɑ = 0.84). Importantly, the five-factor structure suggests a key difference between knowledge of Graduated Response components and attitudes toward using those components in everyday practice. Results suggest that use of the POABB can provide probation departments with information about specific attitudes and overall willingness to implement specific supervision practices as well as offer targeted areas for additional training to support developmentally appropriate probation transformations.

Hopes for healing: An exploratory study of trauma-informed care training and the juvenile justice system

The topic of traumatic stress among justice-involved youth has gained national attention. Studies have shown a multitude of factors contributing to youth experiencing trauma or victimization. Reports indicate that about 34% of children in the United States experience at least one traumatic event in their lives. Studies have shown that between 75% and 93% of youth in the juvenile justice system have suffered traumatic victimization of one form or another. In 2013, Texas passed legislation mandating all juvenile probation and juvenile supervision personnel to complete trauma-informed care training. A web-based Qualtrics survey, consisting of 28 items, was sent to Texas juvenile probation departments (JPD) with the goal to survey juvenile probation officers and other personnel, resulting in 108 responses. The study addressed (1) the type of trauma-care training received; (2) the implementation of trauma-focused practices and policies; and (3) the promotion of a physically and psychologically safe environment for justice-involved youth. The findings indicate that most of the respondents completed trauma-informed care training and met the state requirement. Although the training provided knowledge and understanding of youth trauma, not all juvenile probation officers referred youth to trauma-specific services, indicating a need for specific trauma-informed policies and practices with regular monitoring to ensure that youth received these rehabilitative services.

촉법소년 상한연령 하향 인식에의 영향요인 - 소년사법 실무전문가들을 중심으로 -

Opinions on lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility below 14 are divided, even among juvenile justice experts. Analyzing survey results from four working-level juvenile justice expert groups - school police officers, juvenile investigators, juvenile probation officers, and teachers in juvenile training schools, this study aims to explore their perceptions on changing the age of criminal responsibility and influencing factors on them. Of the 278 working-level experts on juvenile justice who participated in the survey, 225 (80.9%) agreed to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility: The effect of the perceptions on maturity of youth, unity between laws regarding age, social and international trends in juvenile delinquency and juvenile justice to the positions of juvenile justice experts on lowering the age of criminal responsibility are not statistically significant, including personal characteristics of the experts - such as age, working area, length of work period. The statistically significant factors affecting perceptions of the experts on lowering the age of criminal responsibility, on the other hand, are gender and role in the juvenile justice system, the interpretation on the purpose clause of juvenile law, and consent to the claim that juvenile delinquency is getting more serious. The analysis results implies that the underlying reason why most working-level juvenile justice experts agrees to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility is that strengthening punishment for juvenile delinquents rather than strengthening protection is needed, which is fully contrary to the purpose clause of Korean Juvenile Law.

Juvenile Probation Officers' Perceptions of Sanctions and Incentives as Compliance Strategies.

In juvenile probation, noncompliance with probation conditions is a common occurrence. To deal with this, juvenile probation officers (JPOs) may use different strategies, such as sanctions and incentives. This study uses survey and focus group data from 19 JPOs to evaluate their perceptions of the effectiveness of sanctions and incentives in reducing youth noncompliance, specifically in the form of substance use. Results show that there are two distinct groups of JPOs: those who believe sanctions are an effective deterrent strategy and those who do not. Perceptually and demographically these two groups contain significant differences. Notably, both groups have similar views of social incentives, but JPOs who believe sanctions are ineffective are significantly more likely to have positive views of tangible incentives. This study has implications for how the field of juvenile probation can target JPO perceptions to move toward incentive-based strategies rather than sanction-based strategies for reducing youth substance use.

In the Best Interests of the Child? Distinctions Between the Professional Orientations of Juvenile and Adult Probation and Parole Officers

Despite fundamental distinctions between the ideals of juvenile and criminal justice, little research has sought to establish the extent to which juvenile probation and parole officers’ orientations differ from those of their adult counterparts. Further, of the few studies that have explored this area of study, none have examined the role that organizational context may play in predicting professional orientation. Thus, this study aims to fill the gap in the literature by utilizing a sample of probation and parole officers drawn from three different types of agencies: juvenile-only supervision, adult-only supervision, and combined supervision. The results show that the system within which officers work is associated with professional orientation. Distinctions, however, are not as large or consistent as would be expected from strict adherence to the traditional ideals of the juvenile justice system versus the criminal justice system. The implications of these findings are discussed.

JUVENILE PROBATION OFFICER PERCEPTIONS OF PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN JUVENILE PROBATION AND WITH CONTINGENCY MANAGEMENT.

Probation is a common sanction for youth substance users, and as such, juvenile probation officers (JPOs) shoulder much of the burden for treatment and rehabilitation. To improve youth outcomes and alleviate some of the burden, JPOs may seek parental involvement in the probation and substance use desistance processes. Using focus group data, we analyzed JPO perceptions of the role parents play in contingency management (CM)-an incentive system designed to produce and reward decreased substance use-and whether they perceived any value in CM. We found that most JPOs perceived parental involvement as critical to the success of both substance use treatment and CM for youth. Our findings also suggest JPOs found parental involvement in CM valuable given that CM was employed on nonstudy clients and future clients. This has implications for the practicality and sustainability of CM as a youth probation intervention.

The Role of Education on Workplace Outcomes among Juvenile Justice Personnel

Prior research on workplace outcomes among both institutional and community corrections staff has typically included education as a control variable, but few studies have specifically focused on the role education may play in determining job-related experiences of staff members. The current study addresses this gap in the literature by examining the impact educational attainment and perceptions of the adequacy of educational training have on several workplace outcomes (i.e., burnout, secondary trauma, job stress, job satisfaction, work family conflict, and job orientation). Based on survey data collected from nearly 300 juvenile probation and detention officers working in the Midwest, results from the OLS regression analysis indicated that having a college degree had significant effects on job satisfaction and job orientation (i.e., punishment, rehabilitation), while perception of educational training adequacy predicted depersonalization, personal accomplishment, job stress, and rehabilitation orientation. Both methodological and workplace implications of these results are discussed.

Misunderstanding and Sensemaking among Juvenile Probation Officers Working with Evidence-Based Practices

ABSTRACT Evidence-based practices and programs (EBPs) have been adopted in juvenile probation agencies nationwide to maximize the number of successful probation cases. However, various pragmatic studies have found that JPOs are not yielding the expected benefits when compared to efficacy studies. Using focus group and survey data, the current study sought to increase our understanding of the gap between pragmatic and efficacy studies in juvenile probation settings by examining JPOs’ perceptions and utilization of EBPs. The findings suggest that JPOs are misunderstanding how to use EBPs in daily practice, leaving them with negative perceptions of EBPs. Implications for improving JPO understanding and use of EBPs are discussed.

What matters most? Comparing the impact of individual, job, and organizational factors on job stress and job satisfaction among juvenile justice personnel

ABSTRACT The purpose of the present study was to examine if job stress and job satisfaction differed for juvenile detention officers compared to juvenile probation officers. Specifically, we assessed if there were different determinants (e.g., gender, education, supervisor/co-worker support, perceptions of dangerousness, and several role-related variables) of job stress compared to job satisfaction, and then we established which group of variables (i.e., individual, job, or organizational) had a greater overall impact on these outcomes. Using data collected from nearly 300 juvenile probation and detention officers across the Midwest, the ordinary least squares regression analysis found that job stress and job satisfaction did not vary by job position, but there were different predictors for each outcome. Role conflict and role overload had significant effects on job stress, while perceived dangerousness, role overload, input into decision-making, and lack of opportunities were significant determinants of job satisfaction. Additionally, job perceptions had the strongest relative impact on job stress, while organizational factors were the most influential for job satisfaction.

Shifting perceptions of a risk/need assessment tool: exploring practitioners’ adjustments to reform

This paper examines how frontline juvenile probation officers’ (POs’) perceptions of a risk/need assessment (RNA) evolved over the years following its introduction, and what subjective experiences shaped their adaptation. It does this by analyzing 86 qualitative interviews with POs conducted in five Pennsylvania counties several years after the introduction of the RNA. While line POs often experienced initial resistance to the RNA, views had tended to soften since, and they held a predominantly positive view of the tool at the time of the study. However, patterns of support and their change over time varied, with some line POs continuing to express resistant attitudes. Resistance to the tool during the period appeared anchored in concerns about workload, change, challenges to PO judgment, the tool’s legitimacy, and the tool’s purpose. Line POs’ acceptance of the RNA appeared related to its fit with their preexisting orientations, their recognition of the tool’s value through practice, a process of habituation, experiences of training, as well as pressure for compliance from managers and supervisors. Findings inform theory and guidance to future RNA implementation efforts.

Juvenile Probation Supervision Contacts in a Reforming State: Rise of the Street-Level Expert?

We examined juvenile probation officers’ use of evidence-based principles in routine supervision contacts in five counties of a reforming state, focusing on relationship quality, attention to criminogenic needs, and the use of structuring activities. We did this using ethnographic observations of 112 routine supervision contacts, supplemented by qualitative interviews and a practitioner survey. Analysis showed officers typically applied some evidence-based principles in supervision meetings, though encounters varied in their focus on rehabilitation, and whether rehabilitative work used specialized techniques. Variations were shaped by client circumstances and meeting contexts. They also reflected officers’ affinity for specialized approaches, with evidence suggesting the existence of a group of “experts” within the officer population committed to using specialized techniques. The presence of experts was related, in part, to offices’ leadership, organizational practices, and history with evidence-based reforms. Findings offer cautious optimism about the prospects for mainstreaming these evidence-based principles within community corrections agencies.