Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New

• A classification matrix that recommends sanctions and
service interventions appropriate to the youth’s risk
level and most serious adjudicated offense
• A needs assessment instrument that recommends
services that will reduce the likelihood of a youth’s
reoffending by reducing risk factors linked to recidivism
In addition, Missouri has developed a set of standards—
Performance Standards for the Administration of
Juvenile Justice—that help balance individual rights and
treatment needs with public protection (Office of State
Courts Administrator, 2000). These standards establish
a common framework within which juvenile justice
personnel can understand and assess the work of juvenile
and family courts and enhance the courts’ performance.
They are “premised on the notion that court performance
should be driven by core values of equity, integrity,
fairness, and justice” (Office of State Courts Administrator,
2000, p. 2). The standards also include contact guidelines
for high, medium, and low levels of supervision based on
the placement of offenders in the classification matrix.
Lastly, Missouri conducted a workload study to determine
whether juvenile court staff was meeting intake and
supervision performance standards (Johnson and Wagner,
2001). Overall, court staff met expected standards in 93
percent of the cases tracked.
Figure 8 shows Missouri’s Risk and Offense Case
Classification Matrix, developed by the state’s Office
of State Courts Administrator. The complete Missouri
Juvenile Offender Classification System includes the
following tools:
••
An empirically validated risk assessment for estimating
a youthful offender’s relative likelihood of future
delinquency
••
The classification matrix (Figure 8), which links the level
of risk with offense severity to recommend graduated
sanctions
••
A needs assessment for identifying the underlying
psychosocial needs of youth
••
A method for assessing juvenile offender adjustment
to supervision, which incorporates a supervision
reassessment form and a set of Web-based reports on
the risk and need characteristics of youthful offenders
(links are provided to each of these formal decisionmaking
tools and written reports on system functions at
the Missouri Office of State Courts Administrator: http://
www.courts.mo.gov/page.jsp?id=233)
In more recent reforms, Missouri’s Division of Youth
Services now serves youth offenders who cannot be
maintained in community settings in small, dormitorystyle
rehabilitation facilities close to their homes. In
those facilities the focus is on (1) individualized and
group treatments with a clear treatment model, (2)
supervision, not correctional coercion, (3) skill building, (4)
family partnership and involvement during confinement,
and (5) aftercare. Only 9 percent of youth discharged from
the Division of Youth Services were sentenced to adult
prison within three years of release, and just 15 percent
were reincarcerated within two years of release (Annie E.
Casey Foundation, 2010).
46 Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice