The implementation of an intensive aftercare program for serious juvenile offenders

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 332-359

  Goodstein, Lynne ^b   Sontheimer, Henry ^a  

^a Pennsylvania Commn Crime D   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0040453755     PISSN: 00938548     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0093854897024003002     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Altschuler, D. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (1991). Intensive aftercare for the high-risk juvenile parolee: Issues and approaches in reintegration and community supervision. In T. L. Armstrong (Ed.), Intensive interventions with high-risk youths: Promising approaches in juvenile probation and parole (pp. 45-84). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
2. Altschuler, D. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (1994a). Intensive aftercare for high-risk juveniles: A community care model, program summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
3. Altschuler, D. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (1994b). Intensive aftercare for high-risk juveniles: Policies and procedures, program summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
4. Armstrong, T. L. (1988). National survey of juvenile intensive probation supervision, Parts I and II. Criminal Justice Abstracts, 2, 342-348, 497-523.
5. Armstrong, T. L. (1991). Intensive interventions with high-risk youths: Promising intensive interventions in juvenile probation and parole. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
6. Baird, S. C. (1983). Report on intensive supervision programs in probation and parole. Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections.
7. Baird, S. C., & Wagner, D. (1990). Evaluation of the Florida Community Control Program. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
8. Barton, W. H., & Butts, J. A. (1990). Viable options: Intensive supervision programs for juvenile delinquents. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 238-256.
9. Barton, W. H., & Butts, J. A. (1991). Intensive supervision alternatives for adjudicated juveniles. In T. L. Armstrong (Ed.), Intensive interventions with high-risk youths: Promising approaches in juvenile probation and parole (pp. 317-340). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
10. Bennis, W. G., Benne, K. D., & Corey, K. (1976). The planning of change. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
11. Burkhart, W. R. (1986). Intensive probation supervision: An agenda for research and evaluation. Federal Probation, 50, 75-77.
12. Byrne, J. M. (1990). The future of intensive probation: Supervision and the new intermediate sanctions. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 6-41.
13. Byme, J., Lurigio, A., & Baird, C. S. (1989). The effectiveness of intensive supervision in probation. Research in Corrections, 2, 1-75.
14. Clear, T. R. (1991). Probation supervision: Theory and rationale. In T. L. Armstrong (Ed.), Intensive interventions with high-risk youths (pp. 29-44). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
15. Clear, T. R., Flynn, S., & Shapiro, C. (1987). Intensive supervision in probation: A comparison of three projects. In B. McCarthy (Ed.), Intermediate punishments: Intensive supervision, home confinement, and electronic surveillance (pp. 31-50). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
16. Cullen, F. T., & Gilbert, K. E. (1982). Reaffirming rehabilitation. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
17. Erwin, B. (1990). Old and new tools for the modern probation officer. Crime and Delinquency 36, 61-74.
18. Erwin, B. S., & Bennett, L. A. (1987). New dimensions in probation: Georgia's experience with intensive probation supervision (IPS). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
19. Fagan, J. A. (1990). Treatment and reintegration of violent juvenile offenders: Experimental results. Justice Quarterly, 7, 233-264.
20. Fagan, J. A., & Reinarman, C. (1991). The social context of intensive supervision: Organizational and ecological influences on community treatment of violent adolescents. In T. L. Armstrong (Ed.), Intensive interventions with high-risk youths: Promising approaches in juvenile probation and parole (pp. 341-394). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
21. Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1995). Crime in the United States 1994. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
22. Feinberg, N. (1991). Juvenile intensive supervision: A longitudinal evaluation of program effectiveness. In T. L. Armstrong (Ed.), Intensive interventions with high-risk youths: Promising approaches in juvenile probation and parole (pp. 423-447). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
23. Gendreau, P., & Ross, R. (1987). Revivification of rehabilitation: Evidence from the 1980s. Justice Quarterly, 4, 349-407.
24. Goodstein, L., & Hepburn, J. R. (1985). Determinate sentencing and imprisonment: A failure of reform. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
25. Greenwood, P. W. (1986). Promising approaches for the rehabilitation or prevention of chronic juvenile offenders. In P. W. Greenwood (Ed.), Intervention strategies for chronic offenders (pp. 207-233). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
26. Greenwood, P. W., Deschenes, E. P., & Adams, J. (1993). Chronic juvenile offenders: Final results from the Skillman aftercare experiment. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
27. Juvenile Court Judges' Commission. (1988). Guidelines governing Philadelphia County intensive aftercare. Harrisburg, PA: Author.
28. Krisberg, B. O., Schwanz, I. M., Litsky, P., & Austin, J. (1986). The watershed of juvenile justice reform. Crime and Delinquency, 32, 5-38.
29. McGarrell, E. F. (1991). Differential effects of juvenile justice reform on the incarceration rates of the states. Crime and Delinquency, 37, 262-280.
30. Morash, M. (1982). Implementing criminal justice policies. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
31. Neithercutt, J., & Gottfredson, D. M. (1973). Caseload size variation and difference in probation/parole performance. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Juvenile Justice.
32. Pearson, F. S. (1985). New Jersey's intensive supervision program: A progress report. Crime and Delinquency, 31, 393-410.
33. Pearson, F. S. (1987). Research on New Jersey's intensive supervision program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
34. Pearson, F., & Harper, A. G. (1990). Contingent intermediate sentences: New Jersey's intensive supervision program. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 75-86.
35. Petersilia, J. (1987). Expanding options for criminal sentencing. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
36. Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (1990). Comparing intensive and regular supervision for high-risk probationers: Early results from an experiment in California. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 87-111.
37. Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (1993). Evaluating intensive supervision probation/parole: Results of a nationwide experiment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
38. Sontheimer, H., & Goodstein, L. (1993). An evaluation of juvenile intensive aftercare probation: Aftercare vs. system response effects. Justice Quarterly, 10, 197-228.
39. Sontheimer, H., Goodstein, L., & Kovacevic, M. (1990). Philadelphia intensive aftercare probation evaluation project. Shippensburg, PA: Center for Juvenile Justice Training and Research.
40. Tracy, P. E., Wolfgang, M. E., & Figlio, R. M. (1985). Delinquency in two birth cohorts: Executive summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
41. Twain, D. (1983). Creating change in social settings. New York: Praeger.
42. Wiebush, R. G., & Hamparian, D. M. (1991). Variations in "doing" juvenile intensive supervision: Programmatic issues in four Ohio jurisdictions. In T. L. Armstrong (Ed.), Intensive interventions with high-risk youths: Promising approaches in juvenile probation and parole (pp. 153-188). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.