Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New

2. Intervention and Graduated
Sanctions Tier
The intervention and graduated sanctions component of
the Comprehensive Strategy consists of the last four levels
of the overall CS framework in which treatment programs
are combined with levels of supervision or control
appropriate to the nature of juveniles’ offenses and their
risk for reoffending.
For chronic offenders, who account for a
disproportionately large amount of delinquency, their
offending careers develop over time. Thus a continuum
of programs aimed at different points along the life
course has a much better chance of succeeding than a
single intervention. Because certain risk factors operate
at particular times in individuals’ lives, a developmental
perspective is necessary for constructing a full continuum
of delinquency prevention and intervention programs. Early
on, for example, programs may be needed that address
family risk factors. In adolescence, peer influences are
predominant, and the most appropriate programs may be
those that buffer the effects of exposure to delinquent peer
influences and the spread of delinquency and violence in
adolescence. On the other hand, interventions that counter
individual risk factors (e.g., mental health problems) and
community risk factors (e.g., high-crime neighborhoods)
may be needed all along the life course.
The collective effect of a well-constructed
spectrum of programs is likely to be much
greater than the impact of a single program,
as illustrated in a RAND cost-benefit study
of juvenile delinquency prevention and
treatment programs.
By developing a continuum of integrated programs and
sanctions, juvenile justice systems can match offenders’
risk levels and treatment needs to appropriate services
and supervision at any point of development of offender
careers. The collective effect of a well-constructed
spectrum of programs is likely to be much greater than
the impact of a single program, as illustrated in a RAND
cost-benefit study of juvenile delinquency prevention
and treatment programs (Greenwood et al., 1996). The
RAND researchers found that, if implemented statewide, a
combination of four delinquency prevention and offender
treatment programs could achieve the same level of
serious crime reduction as California’s “three strikes”
law, which mandated imprisonment for the third strike.
The researchers projected that these four programs would
cost less than $1 billion per year to implement throughout
California, compared with about $5.5 billion per year for
“three strikes.” Thus, at less than one-fifth the cost, the
four programs could prevent more serious crimes than
imprisonment would. As the RAND researchers noted,
“Based on current best estimates of program costs and
benefits, investments in some interventions for highrisk
youth may be several times more cost-effective in
reducing serious crime than mandatory sentences for
repeat offenders” (Greenwood et al., 1996, p. 40).
More generally, the intervention and graduated sanctions
tier of the CS calls for a proactive and balanced approach
that integrates long-term delinquency prevention and
short-term behavior supervision and control. This portion
of the CS is based on the following core principles (Wilson
and Howell, 1993):
• Immediate and effective intervention when delinquent
behavior occurs to prevent delinquent offenders from
becoming chronic offenders or committing progressively
more serious and violent crimes. Initial intervention
efforts, under an umbrella of system authorities (police,
intake, and probation), should be centered in the family
and other core societal institutions. Juvenile justice
system authorities should ensure that an appropriate
response occurs and act quickly and firmly if the
need for formal system adjudication and sanctions is
demonstrated.
• Identification and control of the small group of serious,
violent, and chronic juvenile offenders who have
committed felony offenses or failed to respond to
nonsecure community-based rehabilitation services
offered by the juvenile justice system. Measures to
address delinquent offenders who are a threat to
community safety may include placement in secure
community-based facilities, training schools, and
other secure juvenile facilities. Even the most violent
Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice
39