Law Enforcement Referral of At-Risk Youth: the SHIELD Program

U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

John J. Wilson, Acting Administrator November 2000

Law Enforcement From the Administrator Referral of At-Risk Youth: Police officers play a crucial role in the juvenile justice system, one that The SHIELD Program extends beyond enforcing the law. The police officer on the beat has first-hand knowledge of the community and its youth—knowledge that can prove a valuable asset in efforts Phelan A. Wyrick to prevent delinquency. The demand for effective approaches to of the SHIELD program grew out of the Initiated in 1996, with funding from the prevent juvenile delinquency and sub- recognition that law enforcement officers Bureau of Justice Assistance, the sequent adult criminal behavior is growing frequently encounter youth who are ex- Westminster, CA, police department’s across the Nation. The Office of Juvenile posed to conditions that predispose them Strategic Home Intervention and Early Justice and Delinquency Prevention to later delinquency and adult criminal Leadership Development (SHIELD) (OJJDP) actively supports the develop- behavior. Furthermore, the status and po- program takes advantage of contacts ment, evaluation, replication, and dissemi- sition of police and sheriff’s departments made by law enforcement officers to nation of information about promising and allow them to serve as unifying elements identify youth at risk of delinquency effective approaches to delinquency pre- in communitywide efforts to prevent and refer them to appropriate vention. The City of Westminster Police delinquency. community services. Department in Orange County, CA, has developed an innovative strategy for enhanc- Not only are officers familiar with the youth in their communities, they are ing the prevention of delinquency by im- Identifying Youth At proving the use of existing community increasingly knowledgeable about Risk of Delinquency risk and protective factors related to resources. This Bulletin provides an over- Seasoned law enforcement officers in de- view of Westminster’s Strategic Home In- delinquency. This Bulletin describes how partments around the country have come the SHIELD program mobilizes these tervention and Early Leadership Develop- to recognize early warning signs for later ment (SHIELD) program. SHIELD uses assets to identify youth at risk of delinquency. Responding to calls, officers involvement in violent behavior, sub- contacts that law enforcement officers enter homes where youth have been ex- make in the normal course of their duties stance abuse, and gang activity and to posed to domestic violence, drug and al- address their needs through a multi- to identify at-risk youth and connect them cohol abuse, gang activity, neglect, and with community resources. By improving disciplinary team approach involving other criminal behavior. Officers see representatives from the community, coordination among law enforcement, so- youth who have been exposed to crime schools, and service agencies. cial services, community service provid- and violence on the streets, in their ers, and the school system, the SHIELD schools, and among their peers. Many I trust that this Bulletin—targeted to law program facilitates early identification and experienced officers know delinquent enforcement, policymakers, community treatment of at-risk youth who might oth- youth whose first encounters with law organizations, and others concerned erwise be overlooked. enforcement were as victims of crime or about juvenile justice issues—will assist other communities in their programming The SHIELD program was initiated in as family members of someone who was 1996 and funded through the California arrested. Officers frequently recognize to shield youth from delinquency. Governor’s Office of Criminal Justice Plan- that such victimization experiences and John J. Wilson ning with Byrne Block Grant funds from exposure to criminal and delinquent fam- Acting Administrator the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of ily members are related to later offending. Justice Assistance. The logic and design Current research on the risk factors that become involved in violent behavior, sub- distinguish youth who are more likely to stance abuse, and gang activities. At-risk become involved in delinquency from youth are identified as those who are those who are less likely to do so con- exposed to family risk factors such as firms and expands on what some law en- domestic violence and other criminal forcement officers already know. Risk fac- activities in the home. Second, SHIELD tors can be defined as conditions in the provides youth with services that are tai- environment or in the individual that pre- lored to meet their individual needs by dict an increased likelihood of developing using a multidisciplinary team of repre- delinquent behavior (Brewer et al., 1995). sentatives from the community, schools, Risk factors for delinquency and violence and service agencies. The primary mecha- are generally described in five categories: nism that supports these goals is the community, individual, peer group, school youth referral process. related, and family (Brewer et al., 1995; Hawkins et al., 1998). Community risk fac- To illustrate how the SHIELD program rep- resents a change in traditional law en- tors include poverty, physical deteriora- tion, availability of drugs, and high crime forcement activities, consider the following scenario: rates. Individual risk factors include childhood hyperactivity, aggressiveness, and A 911 emergency operator answers a risk taking. Peer group risk factors in- call from a woman in panic. The caller clude association with a peer group that factors related to social bonding (e.g., states that her husband has just has favorable attitudes toward delin- beaten her and is still in the house. A quency and gang membership. School- supportive relationships with family members or other adults), and healthy patrol car is dispatched to the scene. related risk factors include early and per- Officers find a bruised and shaken sistent antisocial behavior and academic beliefs and clear standards of behavior (e.g., norms that oppose crime and vio- woman waiting in her front yard with failure. Finally, family risk factors include her 12-year-old son and 5-year-old family conflict, family management prob- lence). Because protective factors also tend to have cumulative effects, youth daughter. The youth witnessed the lems (e.g., failure of caretakers to set abuse but were not physically harmed. clear expectations, lack of supervision, who have or are exposed to a large number of protective factors show greater The officers learn that the husband is and excessively severe punishment), and currently intoxicated and has a history favorable attitudes toward and involve- resilience in coping with the risk factors in their lives than do those with fewer of abusing his wife. ment in crime and violence (for further A typical law enforcement response to discussion of risk factors for delinquency protective factors. such a situation is to apprehend the hus- see Gottfredson and Polakowski, 1995; Although the understanding of risk and band, assess the woman’s need for medi- Howell, 1997; Hawkins et al., 2000). protective factors is increasing, ques- cal attention, and determine the extent tions remain about how police and OJJDP’s longitudinal, prospective re- to which the welfare of the children was search on the causes and correlates of sheriff’s departments can best use this compromised. In cases where officers find information. Law enforcement adminis- delinquency has found that delinquency evidence of child endangerment, Child and violent behavior stem from the accu- trators who want to prevent delinquency Protective Services (CPS) may be asked to may be discouraged by the perceived mulation and interaction of risk factors intervene. CPS may determine that home in the five categories described above practical difficulties of coordinating a conditions pose a significant threat to the prevention program, especially because (Thornberry, Huizinga, and Loeber, 1995; children and take steps to remove them Hawkins et al., 1998). The probability most departments are already very busy from the home. However, this action is just responding to calls for service. Ad- of violence and delinquency increases generally reserved for only the most seri- (sometimes dramatically) with increases ministrators at the Westminster, CA, Po- ous cases. Because of legitimate concerns lice Department considered these issues in the number of risk factors (Office of about the potential negative effects of re- Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Preven- when they created the SHIELD program. moving children from the home, many chil- Instead of designing a program in which tion, 1998). For example, a study of 411 dren are left in homes where violence and South London boys found that the per- services are delivered directly by the criminal behavior are common. Police fre- police department, they developed a co- centage of boys convicted for violence quently have few alternatives when family more than doubled in the presence of 1 ordinated mechanism that uses a risk factors exist but CPS determines that multidisciplinary team to identify at-risk risk factor but increased tenfold in the the children’s welfare is not compromised presence of 4 or 5 risk factors (Farrington, youth and connect them to existing ser- to the extent necessary to remove them vices in the community. 1997). from home. Researchers have also identified a num- The SHIELD youth referral process gives ber of protective factors that provide a The SHIELD Program officers a procedure for providing assis- buffer against risk factors (Hawkins, The SHIELD program is designed to ac- tance to youth who are exposed to family Catalano, and Miller, 1992; Thornberry, complish two primary goals. First, it uses risk factors. In the scenario described Huizinga, and Loeber, 1995). These in- the contacts that police officers make in above, the responding officers would clude individual factors (e.g., high intelli- the course of their normal duties to iden- be required to do little more than their gence and positive social orientation), tify youth who they think are likely to normal reporting to initiate the SHIELD

2 referral process. The names and ages of youth from the target population. More nia’s Welfare and Institutions Codes, sec- the two children would be included in the recently, the Westminster Youth Delin- tions 827–830.1. police report as standard procedure be- quency and Gang Involvement Risk As- When they receive the student referral cause both were witnesses to the offense. sessment instruments were developed by The officers would be required only to drawing heavily on Lipsey and Derzon’s report, the members of the Youth and Family Resource Team consider a range determine which schools the youth at- (1998) synthesis of longitudinal research tend and mark a box on the police report examining predictors of delinquency. of school- and community-based treatment options and make recommendations form that indicates a potential SHIELD These instruments are used to strengthen referral. the screening process and prioritize ac- for treatment. However, treatment recommendations are often enhanced by infor- cess to services based on the level of risk each youth faces. mation that goes beyond the original The SHIELD Referral student referral report. Team members Process The risk assessment instruments enable familiar with the youth frequently provide At the outset of the SHIELD program, all the SRO to place youth in low-, medium-, additional information that allows the officers in Westminster were given the or high-risk categories for both general team to understand the youth’s circum- following orders as part of the youth re- delinquency and gang involvement. Sepa- stances more fully. This sharing of infor- ferral protocol:1 rate instruments were created for youth mation leads to better informed treatment at ages 6–11 and 12–14 to increase sensi- recommendations than would be pro- Police personnel are required to obtain tivity to the differing effects of risk fac- vided by any agency or service provider the name, age, and school attended tors on youth at different developmental working alone. of any minor youth living in a home levels.3 In addition to these instruments, where a report is filed involving the an inventory of protective factors is used Depending on the recommendation, treatment may or may not require parental following police activity: family vio- to supplement the assessment. These risk lence of any type, neglect or abandon- assessment instruments and procedures consent. For example, if the Youth and Family Resource Team recommends that ment, gang activity, drug sales or are in the testing phase, but they are al- usage, arrests made associated with ready proving useful in setting priorities a youth receive individual counseling from a community treatment provider, alcohol abuse, or any other call for for referral and treatment. service where the welfare of minor parental consent generally is necessary. youth is at risk due to the behavior If the SRO deems a case appropriate for However, in cases where the team recom- of older siblings or adults living in, SHIELD intervention, he or she creates a mends informal school-based monitoring or frequenting, the home. student referral report, which contains a of the youth, no parental consent is re- short synopsis of the incident as it per- quired. Treatment providers such as The SHIELD program model (see figure on tains to the youth, demographic informa- school counselors and community-based page 4) outlines the process of events tion about the youth and his or her fam- service providers are generally respon- that are involved in facilitating interven- ily, contact information for the parents, sible for getting parental consent when tion through the SHIELD program. When- and information from the assessments of it is necessary. In the early stages of the ever an officer responds to an incident or both risk and protective factors. The SRO program, treatment providers were also makes an arrest, he or she completes a then sends the student referral report to responsible for notifying parents of their standard report to document the details the Youth and Family Resource Team. This of the contact. If the officer identifies a multidisciplinary team includes officials youth as having been exposed to risk fac- from the local school district, such as the tors, he or she marks a box on the police pupil personnel administrator, the district report and forwards a full copy of the re- nurse, a specialist in drug abuse preven- port through departmental channels to tion, and school principals; counseling 2 the SHIELD resource officer (SRO). On staff from a community service provider; receiving a report, the SRO assumes re- a county social worker; the Westminster sponsibility for administering the SHIELD Community Services Recreation Supervi- program and screens the case to deter- sor; the SRO; and a second officer for- mine whether the circumstances make merly assigned to Drug Abuse Resistance the youth appropriate for SHIELD inter- Education (D.A.R.E.). Beyond the core vention. In the early stages of the pro- group of members who attend regular gram, the SRO simply used the family weekly meetings, the team may invite ad- risk factors that were noted in the youth ditional members, such as teachers and referral protocol to verify that the school counselors, who are familiar with a reporting officer had correctly identified a given youth. The disclosure of confidential information to such a multidisciplinary team for use in prevention and interven- 1 The description of the SHIELD referral process presented here draws on information from Kent and tion is authorized by the State of Califor- Wyrick, 1998. 2 This position title should not be confused with the 3 Researchers have noted the importance of recogniz- same abbreviation commonly used for school resource ing developmental factors in prevention programming officers. In the case of Westminster, however, the (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, SHIELD resource officer did formerly serve as a school 1998; Tatem-Kelley et al., 1997). resource officer.

3 child’s referral to the SHIELD program. The SHIELD Program Model Some parents were upset when they learned that the police department had Officer responds to an referred their child to the program. Be- incident involving youth. cause many youth in this program are exposed to domestic violence, the parent who is in the position to provide consent Officer identifies youth as for treatment may also be the one who potential SHIELD participant. created the risk factors in the home or allowed them to exist in the first place. Therefore, the process of obtaining paren- Officer completes a departmental tal consent is often delicate. In response or incident report. to this issue, the SRO now contacts parents directly when their child is referred Officer submits a report to police to the program. During this contact, records clerk. the SRO describes the program and ad- dresses any questions or concerns that the parents have. The SRO will make two Records clerk forwards report to attempts to contact a parent by telephone SHIELD Resource Officer (SRO). and will resort to sending a letter only if these two attempts are unsuccessful. In SRO uses Westminster Youth Delinquency some cases, the SRO makes home visits. and Gang Involvement Risk Assessment The Youth and Family Resource Team reas- and Protective Factors Assessment to sesses the treatment recommendations determine suitability of youth for SHIELD. and progress of each youth 3 weeks after the initial recommendation. While a youth is involved in treatment, the service pro- SRO determines that youth is appropriate SRO determines that viders send monthly progress reports to for SHIELD based on risk score. youth is not appropri- the SHIELD staff at the Westminster Police ate for SHIELD Department. These reports allow for based on risk score. ongoing tracking and reassessment of the SRO creates student referral report. services provided to program youth.

SRO does not create Services for At-Risk Youth SRO forwards student referral report SHIELD report. to Youth and Family Resource Team (YFRT). SHIELD relies on services that are already in the community. The program works closely with all of the local schools and the local Boys & Girls Club. During the YFRT recommends YFRT recommends first year of the program, 60 percent of community-based treatment. school-based treatment. youth who were referred to SHIELD received services in some form (Kent and Wyrick, 1998). Individual and group coun- Parents consent. Parents do not consent. Parents consent. seling were commonly used in both school and community settings. Issues covered in counseling varied based on Youth receive community- Youth receive limited Youth receive school- the circumstances of the individual youth, based treatment. school-based treatment. based treatment. but common themes included anger management, goal setting, pregnancy prevention, conflict resolution, and other coping skills. In some cases, treatment plans for YFRT reassesses youth after 3 weeks. youth were more specialized. For example, one youth who had a history of drug involvement and exposure to family YFRT forwards intervention progress reports violence served as an assistant instructor to SHIELD staff for case management. for a summer program on drug use prevention and received individual coun-

4 seling related to setting and achieving availability for high school youth who collaboration that the police department goals. were recommended for school-based had already established. Fourth, the pres- counseling services. ence within the Westminster Police De- Informal school-based monitoring is also partment of a Research and Planning Of- frequently included in treatment plans. In some cases, meeting needs meant de- fice with a full-time social psychologist Informal monitoring may be used in con- veloping entirely new programs. Recog- and several research associates allowed junction with other treatment or as a nizing the limited resources that were for an internal formative evaluation dur- stand-alone treatment when the youth available for leadership development, the ing the first year of SHIELD program op- show a low level of risk in conjunction Westminster Police Department collabo- eration and a 1-year followup. The evalua- with many protective factors or when pa- rated with local middle schools to create tion facilitated the development of rental consent for more intensive treat- the Westminster Youth Academy (for- SHIELD by identifying unanticipated ob- ment is not granted. When teachers and merly known as Warner Youth Leadership stacles to full implementation and provid- administrators are aware of the risk fac- Academy). This program is a school- ing timely feedback to program adminis- tors that a student faces outside the based effort to improve academic perfor- trators from a trusted source. classroom and they are actively monitor- mance and build leadership and planning ing that student, they are more likely to skills, thereby enhancing the protective detect and respond to early signs of prob- factors in the lives of at-risk youth. An Measuring Program Success lem behavior, abuse, or neglect. assessment of short-term behavioral and Any evaluation of program effectiveness academic outcomes revealed that SHIELD depends on the criteria that are chosen to Challenges for youth who participated in the Academy determine success. If connecting youth to Implementation significantly improved in attendance and community resources and services is the grade point average relative both to their criterion for success of the SHIELD pro- Relying on alternatives for treatment that own earlier performance and to the per- gram, then it is clearly a success. Of the already exist in the community poses formance of a comparison group of non- 43 randomly selected youth who were a challenge for implementation of the Academy students (Wyrick and Kent, tracked during the first year of operation, SHIELD model. The development of 1998). 60 percent received services of some SHIELD exposed gaps in the services kind, 26 percent could not be contacted available to youth in Westminster. As the Westminster has not eliminated every because they were no longer in the com- program has evolved, members of the deficit in services for at-risk youth. For munity (e.g., the family had relocated, or multidisciplinary team have tried to fill example, services that target non-English- the youth had run away), and 14 percent these gaps to provide a more complete speaking youth in a culturally appropriate were still in the community but did not and coordinated system of services. For way are still needed, and treatment op- receive services because of parental re- example, schools serve as a primary re- tions for children under age 5 remain lim- fusal (Kent and Wyrick, 1998). source for the program, but during the ited. Nevertheless, by even identifying summer months, school-based services needs that it cannot immediately fulfill, If delinquency prevention among targeted like counseling and instruction are not SHIELD has allowed Westminster to begin youth is the criterion for success, then available. To address this concern, the working on solutions for affected youth. judgments are more difficult to make. The Westminster Boys & Girls Club increased use of multiple treatment modalities and services and resources during summer Supporting Factors providers across the community makes months and prioritized SHIELD youth an impact evaluation of the SHIELD pro- The development of the SHIELD program based on who had the greatest need for gram challenging. Outcomes are largely in Westminster benefited greatly from continuing services. dependent on the quality of the services four supporting factors. First and fore- and programs to which youth are re- most, the program received visionary Even during the academic year, schools ferred. The formative evaluation included have varying resources for providing leadership and support from the adminis- a qualitative assessment of participant tration of the Westminster Police Depart- services to students. In Westminster, the satisfaction with the counseling provided workload of qualified counselors and ment, which—by recognizing the impor- through SHIELD, and the results were tance of targeted prevention and the role school psychologists at the high school promising. The findings from the evalua- level is much heavier than that of their of law enforcement support for commu- tion of the Westminster Youth Academy nity collaboration in delinquency preven- counterparts at the elementary or middle also reflect positively on the SHIELD pro- school level. As a result, high school tion—made the SHIELD program possible. gram (Wyrick and Kent, 1998). However, Second, Westminster secured Federal youth were not receiving the same level of results of these evaluations are short term focused preventive treatment as younger block grant funding to initiate the pro- and are limited to a portion of the youth gram and support it through its early de- students. In response, multidisciplinary who are engaged in the program. In the team members coordinated to arrange for velopment. However, external funding absence of impact evaluation data for each has not been required for continued pro- a supervised counseling intern from the treatment modality in the community, Boys & Girls Club to be assigned to the gram operation beyond the period of the assessment of the overall level of delin- initial grant. Third, the development of high school. The school provided space quency prevention that SHIELD has for the intern to meet with SHIELD pro- the Youth and Family Resource Team and brought to Westminster is impossible. Even the provision of services to youth ben- gram youth during school hours. This ar- if such an evaluation were conducted, rangement helped to fill a gap in service efited from the strong community ties and the potential for generalizing from the

5 findings would be limited because of the The SHIELD program is not expensive; staff Farrington, D.P. 1997. Early prediction of unique combination of services available time is the primary expense for law en- violent and nonviolent youthful offending. in the community. Nevertheless, the forcement. In Westminster, the SHIELD pro- European Journal on Criminal Policy and identification and referral activities gram is staffed by one full-time officer and Research 5:51–66. stand as the central program elements of two half-time police interns. The interns Gottfredson, M.R., and Polakowski, M. SHIELD, and these show great promise as are responsible primarily for assisting with a model for the mobilization of commu- the development of student referral re- 1995. Determinants and prevention of criminal behavior. In Psychology and nity resources to prevent delinquency. ports for the Youth and Family Resource Policing Team and maintaining a computerized , edited by N. Brewer and C. Wilson. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum case management system. The officer car- Replication of SHIELD ries out administrative functions of the Associates, pp. 395–412. The administration of the Westminster program, participates in Youth and Family Hawkins, J.D., Catalano, R.F., and Miller, Police Department believes that focused Resource Team meetings, and completes J.Y. 1992. Risk and protective factors for delinquency prevention is an important risk assessment instruments for youth. alcohol and other drug problems in ado- component of its law enforcement and lescence and early adulthood: Implica- community protection responsibilities. tions for substance abuse prevention. The SHIELD program was designed to al- Conclusion Psychological Bulletin 112(1):64–105. low the police department to contribute The unique position of local law enforce- most effectively to community-based de- ment agencies in communities allows Hawkins, J.D., Herrenkohl, T., Farrington, linquency prevention efforts. By drawing them to play important roles in the early D.P., Brewer, D., Catalano, R.F., and on the experiences in Westminster, law identification of at-risk youth. Programs Harachi, T.W. 1998. A review of predictors enforcement agencies in other communi- and approaches that take advantage of of youth violence. In Serious and Violent ties may replicate the SHIELD program this position and provide a clear mecha- Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Suc- and modify it to suit their local needs. nism for linking at-risk youth to services cessful Interventions, edited by R. Loeber in the community show great promise for and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Of the supporting factors noted above, preventing delinquency. The SHIELD pro- Sage Publications, pp. 106–146. the only one that must exist prior to repli- gram is continuing to evolve in its effort Hawkins, J.D., Herrenkohl, T.I., Farrington, cation is strong administrative support to better meet the needs of youth in the within the law enforcement agency. A D.P., Brewer, D., Catalano, R.F., Harachi, community and better mobilize resources T.W., and Cothern, L. 2000. Predictors of history of community collaboration and to support this effort. The critical sup- strong ties to service providers and Youth Violence. Bulletin. Washington, DC: porting factor for the SHIELD program is schools is important and will help any U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Jus- not funding—it is the commitment and tice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice program, but these are not critical pre- support of law enforcement administra- existing conditions. When a law enforce- and Delinquency Prevention. tors and personnel who are dedicated to ment agency decides to replicate SHIELD, preventing delinquency. Local law en- Howell, J.C. 1997. Juvenile Justice and the first step is to assemble the Youth and forcement agencies are encouraged to Youth Violence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Family Resource Team. Agencies repre- consider replication and adaptation of Publications. sented on this team should assist in con- SHIELD in their jurisdictions. sidering modifications to the referral pro- Kent, D.R., and Wyrick, P.A. 1998. Police cess and assessing the availability of local Referral of Youth to Community Resources: services. Although a systematic assess- For Further Information A Formative Evaluation of Interagency ment of services available in the commu- Cooperation in Serving Youth at Risk of For more information about the SHIELD nity was not done in Westminster prior to Delinquency. Westminster, CA: City of program, contact: program implementation, such an assess- Westminster Police Department, Research ment would benefit any replication effort. Captain Andrew Hall and Planning Office. This assessment, also known as a re- City of Westminster Police Department Kettner, P.M., Moroney, R.M., and Martin, source inventory, should examine a vari- 8200 Westminster Boulevard L.L. 1999. Designing and Managing Pro- ety of factors (for example, the types of Westminster, CA 92683 grams: An Effectiveness-Based Approach. services available and their service ca- 714–898–3315, ext. 302 2d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publica- pacity, the length of waiting lists, the ex- tions. tent and quality of recordkeeping, and the number and condition of facilities) to References Lipsey, M.W., and Derzon, J.H. 1998. Pre- identify service providers, highlight un- Brewer, D.D., Hawkins, J.D., Catalano, R.F., dictors of violent or serious delinquency tapped resources, and uncover gaps in and Neckerman, H.J. 1995. Preventing se- in adolescence and early adulthood: A services available to youth. A local col- rious, violent, and chronic juvenile offend- synthesis of longitudinal research. In Seri- lege or university research partner may ing: A review of evaluations and selected ous and Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk be available to assist with this effort at strategies in childhood, adolescence, and Factors and Successful Interventions, ed- low cost. Additional information on con- the community. In A Sourcebook: Serious, ited by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. ducting needs assessments and resource Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, inventories can be found in Witkin and edited by J.C. Howell, B. Krisberg, J.D. pp. 86–105. Altschuld (1995) and Kettner, Moroney, and Hawkins, and J.J. Wilson. Thousand Oaks, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Martin (1999). CA: Sage Publications, pp. 61–141. Prevention. 1998. Serious and Violent

6 Juvenile Offenders. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Acknowledgments Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Jus- Phelan A. Wyrick is a program manager in the Research and Program Development tice and Delinquency Prevention. Division of OJJDP. He formerly served as a research associate in the Research and Tatem-Kelley, B., Loeber, R., Keenan, K., Planning Office in the Westminster, CA, Police Department. and DeLamatre, M. 1997. Developmental The author would like to thank Chief James I. Cook, Captain Andrew Hall, and Pathways in Boys’ Disruptive and Delin- Douglas R. Kent for their review and support of this Bulletin. quent Behavior. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Jus- tice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Share With Your Colleagues Thornberry, T.P., Huizinga, D., and Unless otherwise noted, OJJDP publications are not copyright protected. We Loeber, R. 1995. The prevention of seri- encourage you to reproduce this document, share it with your colleagues, and ous delinquency and violence: Implica- reprint it in your newsletter or journal. However, if you reprint, please cite OJJDP tions from the program of research on and the authors of this Bulletin. We are also interested in your feedback, such as the causes and correlates of delinquency. how you received a copy, how you intend to use the information, and how OJJDP In A Sourcebook: Serious, Violent, and materials meet your individual or agency needs. Please direct your comments and Chronic Juvenile Offenders, edited by J.C. questions to: Howell, B. Krisberg, J.D. Hawkins, and J.J. Wilson. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publi- Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse cations, pp. 213–237. Publication Reprint/Feedback P.O. Box 6000 Witkin, B.R., and Altschuld, J.W. 1995. Rockville, MD 20849–6000 Planning and Conducting Needs Assess- 800–638–8736 ments: A Practical Guide. Thousand Oaks, 301–519–5600 (fax) CA: Sage Publications. E-mail: [email protected] Wyrick, P.A., and Kent, D.R. 1998. Delin- quency Prevention Through Police and School Collaboration: Program Outcomes of the Warner Youth Leadership Academy. Westminster, CA: City of Westminster Po- lice Department, Research and Planning Office.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin- quency Prevention is a component of the Of- fice of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

7 U.S. Department of Justice PRESORTED STANDARD Office of Justice Programs POSTAGE & FEES PAID DOJ/OJJDP Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention PERMIT NO. G–91

Washington, DC 20531 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300

Bulletin NCJ 184579