Guiding values
The following guiding values are the foundation of good juvenile probation practice. These values, paired with practices that are focused around the four pillars, ultimately lead to youth success and a more equitable process.
Root juvenile probation in best practices to promote long-term success.
Juvenile probation should use research as a foundation for effective administration of their practice.
Individualize juvenile probation.
Juvenile probation should respect a youth’s individuality and focus on their identified strengths, risks, and needs to identify and provide appropriate services that empower the youth and their families.
Commit to equity with policy and action.
Juvenile probation should ensure access to opportunities and supports for pro-social development to all youth regardless of their sex, race, ethnicity, language, culture, Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Gender Expression (SOGIE) status, abilities, and socioeconomic status.
Use the least restrictive responses possible.
Juvenile probation should strive to hold youth responsible for the harm caused by their law violating behavior by providing interventions that meet their needs and employ their strengths, even if that means diverting to services or refraining from submitting a violation of probation for behaviors that do not constitute a new offense.
Hold itself accountable.
Juvenile probation should be transparent to the community about their purpose, practices, and outcomes. They should collect and analyze data, including qualitative data from youth and families, to measure and report their outcomes.
Ensure community safety.
By using research-informed practices to treat the criminogenic needs of youth, probation professionals will more effectively promote community safety and put youth on a path toward long-term success. This requires developing realistic and appropriate goals for youth on probation and holding youth accountable in developmentally appropriate ways for missteps and setbacks, as well as new offenses while under supervision.
Probation departments working with youth must foster each youth’s personal growth, positive behavior change, and long-term success.
The ability of probation departments to dedicate time and money to helping these youth by providing interventions that have the impact the system is trying to achieve requires providing individualized services tailored to each youth. In order to promote positive behavior change in youth that are placed on probation, probation professionals must use approaches that are informed by research on adolescent development , strength based, trauma responsive, and collaborative with system stakeholders, families, and communities.
The values at the foundation of this vision are established using current research regarding effective strategies for changing youth behavior. By using approaches within the four pillars, probation officers can more effectively promote positive behavior change and equitable outcomes for all youth they work with.
Adolescent development
In 1996, the first study with findings related to adolescent brain science was published. Since then, a range of studies have added to the discussion and understanding of adolescent brain development.
1967
Initial post-mortem brain studies, suggest earlier development of more basic sensory function in the brain while the parts that support reasoning are last to develop.[8]
1994
Research indicates that the hippocampus (the part of the brain that controls the memory) continues to develop into adolescence.[9]
2004
Structural MRI studies identify that a humans ability to process complex information continues to develop into adolescence.[10]
2006
Research suggests youth have a limited capacity for reasoning and control especially where they perceive opportunities for immediate reward[11][12][13][14]
2013
Function MRI studies indicate that a youths ability to exercise control over their reason and motivation is limited and continues to develop into adolescence[15]
2015
Research indicates that:
- A study found that the ability of adolescents to use the brain networks that support cognitive, sensorimotor, and motivational systems at the same time is increasing which allows for more complex reasoning that considers potential consequences to actions, however this ability is unstable (Marek et al. 2015).
- Additional Function MRI studies indicate that a youths ability to exercise control over their reason and motivation is limited and continues to develop into adolescence (Luna et al. 2015).
2016
Research indicates that:
- Maladaptive experiences (trauma, social influences, environmental influences) can disrupt normal trajectories and lead to abnormal trajectories (criminality).
- The developing adolescent brain can be instructed with positive experiences to correct effects of maladaptive experiences.[18]
Research suggests the human brain continues to develop throughout adolescence and until approximately 30 years old, specifically the growth of connection between the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus.[19][20] The continuing development of the prefrontal cortex, the hippocampus, and the connection between the two, lend to behaviors that are characteristic of adolescence. Below are some key aspects from the literature:
What does this mean for Juvenile probation officers?
Source: Unicef
Youth need support to promote healthy brain development and positive behavior development.
It is imperative to treat all youth as though their brain is still maturing, and there is opportunity to help promote their engagement in positive activities and experiences that can help promote normal brain development.
For most youth, behavior incidents that come to the attention of public safety professionals, will be status offenses or low level non-violent misdemeanors.[31] These youth should be diverted from the juvenile justice system. Half or more of the youth introduced to the juvenile justice system do not reenter the juvenile system.[32]
Only a small portion of youth behavior incidents will be more serious, criminal offenses in which youth may actually benefit from the structure of effective juvenile justice system involvement. Even for these youth, who are referred more serious behaviors, it is critical to use lessons from adolescent development and brain science when interacting with them.
JPOs should strive to:[33]
- Help youth understand the reason they are on probation and the consequences of the actions that resulted in probation. This does not mean reminding youth about their bad behavior, but explaining the ripple effect of their actions.
- Help youth understand what is expected of them on probation and what responses they can receive by both achieving their goals and not completing their goals.
- Help youth create positive, short-term goals that result in behaviors that help them fulfill their probation requirements and achieve long-term success
- Help youth create goals that prepare them for the responsibilities they will have as adults
- Create an incentives program to respond to youth who are making progress. Incentivizing good behavior is a more effective approach to modifying behaviors because the brain prioritizes immediate rewards.
- Provide opportunities for positive youth development activities that are of interest to youth and expose them to positive peers. You can’t change their neighborhood, schools, or friend groups, but you can help them access activities that lead to forming relationships with positive peers.
- Create graduated responses to behaviors that are non-compliant so that youth can learn from their negative behavior and make positive changes.
Steps that will help lead to positive outcomes include:[34][35]
Collaboration
Probation officers wear many hats, but they cannot and should not be tasked to help youth alone.
Behavioral problems that go beyond “normal adolescent behavior” are the result of a variety of experiences with the societal systems in a person's life, such as their involvement with healthcare system, the school system, and other systems prevalent in their lives. The other systems present in a youth’s life need to be involved in promoting long term success. Without effective collaboration, a juvenile probation officer doing everything right will likely be unable to help a youth get back on track. However, a probation officer facilitating positive connections to family, school, and the community with the help of other professionals is likely to see that change.
Source: Transforming juvenile Probation, Annie E. Casey Foundation
Parties that you may need to collaborate with can/will include:
“Reach out to the community which would include cultural leaders that help to govern the jurisdiction which we work in.”
—JPO in New Mexico
According to the Urban Institute’s Bridging Research and Practice in Juvenile Probation (2018),[45] here are some tips for how to collaborate with others:
- Address time constraints with your superior
- In order to get others on board with your mission, educate them on what you what to change and why and then develop values with them.
- Engage partners regularly, and if you are helping with change efforts in your department, involve partners early on.
- Lay out a clear set of responsibilities for each party and foster a feeling of shared responsibility.
- Communicate formally and informally with partners.
- Hold regular meetings with those you partner with.
“We have support from our administrator. However, we still have stakeholders we struggle to get buy in from. With them we continue to present data that shows what works as well as educate on all of the national best practice research.”
—Juvenile Probation Administrator in Nebraska
Ways to partner with youth, families, and supportive adults
Families and caregivers are critical partners, and their engagement is crucial both in day-to-day case planning and during a change effort. Common characteristics of successful family engagement include
- treating families with dignity and respect,
- providing opportunities for peer-to-peer support,
- developing partnerships between service professionals
and families, - facilitating information-sharing between agency personnel and families, and
- building relationships to promote sustained participation.[46]
It is important to allow youth to define their caregivers or supportive adults;[47] those caregivers are viewed as valuable participants in the case-planning process.[48] For example, the Washington, DC, Department of Youth Rehabilitative Services convenes Youth Family Team Meetings consisting of parents and family members, mentors, teachers, and others involved in the youth’s life to help tailor case plans to their individual needs.[49]
For more detailed strategies to involve caregivers or supportive adults in case planning, see the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Family-Engaged Case Planning Model: Key Concepts (2016).
Some agencies have built system structures distinctly for family-member representation and engagement. For example, the NYC Department of Probation (DOP) worked with Community Connections for Youth to convene a Probation/ Parent Association consisting of senior DOP members and family members of justice-involved youth. The association met for six months and strategized ways to increase family engagement. As a result, the DOP established and funded a Parent Support Program, which places “peer coaches” in
the probation office to help families navigate the system. Peer coaches help connect families to support groups and programming and are also on call during the evenings and weekends to assist caregivers in crisis.[50]
Similarly, the Family Navigators program in the Lucas County Juvenile Court in Toledo, Ohio, employs “family ambassadors” to help educate and support parents and caregivers and connect them with community resources. The program is operated though a nonprofit (the Center of Hope) so it is strategically dissociated from the juvenile justice system in order to maintain rapport with the families it serves. Family ambassadors have lived experience with the juvenile justice system, and their role is multifaceted and includes calling caregivers to remind families of a court hearing and supporting them through the end of supervision.[51]
Pierce County, Washington, created a Family Council as a way to systematically include families in decisionmaking and change processes. The council consists of parents, young people with prior justice involvement, and court staff representatives and acts as an advisory group to guide program and policy decisions.[52]
Vera Institute of Justice developed a model for family engagement based on the principles of identification, engagement, and empowerment. To learn more about how Sedgwick County, Kansas, implemented a strengths-based family engagement model in their juvenile justice system using these principles, see Vera Institute of Justice’s Building on Family Strengths for Better Outcomes: Involving More Families, More Often, for More Youth.
For a detailed guide with tools and resources on how to engage caregivers, see the Council of State Governments Justice Center’s “Family Engagement and Involvement” resources.
For additional information on effectively engaging caregivers and supportive adults, see Justice for Families’ Family Engagement Resources and Tools.
Ways to partner with judges
Judges are perhaps the most important partners for agencies implementing a research-informed approach to probation. Judges often make decisions about which cases are diverted away from the system, whether a youth is adjudicated delinquent on a charge, and—for those who are—whether they are released, placed on probation, or committed to state custody. They also typically assign conditions of supervision for youth placed on probation and decide when to revoke a youth who fails to comply with those requirements. Their buy-in is crucial to successful change efforts; without it, most reform efforts will not work.
The field of juvenile justice research and practice has recognized this and developed many educational resources for informing judges about the unique context of adolescence and what improves outcomes for justice-involved youth. The following resources may help you as you work to develop and maintain support from judges in your jurisdiction.
For a juvenile court training curriculum on adolescent development, see Toward Developmentally Appropriate Practice: A Juvenile Court Training Curriculum, created by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation’s Model for Change project.
For judicial bench cards relating to principles of adolescent development, see NCJFCJ’s bench card for applying principles of adolescent development in delinquency proceedings; for cards relating to mental health, see Judicial Leadership to Address Adolescent Mental Health Needs in Trends in State Courts (2014) from the National Center for State Courts; and for cards relating to trauma, see NCJFCJ’s Ten Things Every Juvenile Court Judge Should Know About Trauma and Delinquency and NCTSN’s Bench Card for the Trauma-Informed Judge.
For a judicial guide to the National Council on Crime and Delinquency’s Structured Decision Making model, see the Judicial Guide to the Structured Decision Making Model in Juvenile Justice.
To access targeted training curricula for a fee, see the following:
- National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges’ Juvenile Justice Resources and Training Opportunities
- Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps’ Advancing Best Practices in Youth Justice Seminar
- Community Resources for Justice’s Training and Assessments
- Center for Juvenile Justice Reform’s Certificate Programs (Georgetown University)
- National Council on Crime and Delinquency’s training opportunities
Partnering with those in other systems
Urban’s research review identified several partner-engagement strategies specifically related to three of the core research- informed probation practices. These include the following:
Partner-engagement strategies to consider when implementing a screening and assessment system
- Involve court stakeholders when selecting a tool and in discussions about how the information will be used.[53]
- Share validation studies and interrater reliability studies with stakeholders.[54]
- Provide training for judges and attorneys on when and how to use assessment information and when and how information will be communicated to them. For more information, see Vincent, Guy, and Grisso’s Risk Assessment in Juvenile Justice: A Guidebook for Implementation.[55]
- Frame assessment results as one additional, reliable piece of information to consider when making decisions and emphasize that assessments enhance, rather than replace, individualized decisionmaking.[56]
Partner-engagement strategies to consider when implementing a graduated response system
- Demonstrate consistency in approaches to handling violations of supervision to gain and maintain confidence from court personnel.[57]
- Provide community partners structured decisionmaking tools to increase clarity and transparency regarding the use of sanctions and incentives.[58]
- Involve youth and families in planning for and assessing the new system to increase perceptions of fairness.[59]
- Hold information sessions for external partners, during which probation officers discuss their everyday use of graduated responses. Distribute written resources (such as brochures) that outline the rationale for and research supporting implementing graduated responses.
- Secure judges’ approval of the graduated response system before implementation, especially when responses require judicial approval. Failing to do so can undermine probation officers’ promises to youth, which damages perceptions of fairness.[60]
Partner-engagement strategies to consider when matching services and promoting positive youth development
- Establish ongoing collaborations with service providers in the community. Consider generating a community of service providers to whom probation officers can refer youth (based on needs assessment).[61]
- Build relationships in the neighborhoods youth live in and explore what mentoring opportunities—formal and informal—exist.
- Work with the supportive adults in a client’s life to promote positive outcomes. These might include parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, cousins, teachers, or coaches (among others).
strength-based
Traditionally, approaches to helping youth in the juvenile justice system have been deficit-based, assessing a youth's risks and needs, trying to rehabilitate them, and otherwise improving them.
This approach, while well-intentioned, inherently ignores the already existing potential and ability of youth to improve with positive approaches. Strength-based juvenile probation supervision emphasizes the strengths (abilities, skills, interests, and protective factors) of each youth, family, and community to help youth make long term positive behavior changes.
Nissen (2006)[62] compares traditional deficit-based juvenile justice approaches to strength-based traditions.
How to use a more strength-based approach:
- Emphasize each youth and family’s strengths
- Understand that every youth, family, and community has strengths
- Do not underestimate what can be a strength.
- Understand that while trauma, adverse experiences, and challenges can have negative influence on a youth, family, and community, they can also instill resiliency and strength.
- Let the youth and family identify their strengths
- Sit down with the youth and map their strengths out. Talk about their life, and interests and goals.
- Document their strengths, as you would their risks and needs
- Build their case plan around their strengths. Thinking about how they can use their strengths to continue to build skills
- Look to their community to find outlets to explore and use their strengths
- Use language that emphasizes strengths rather than needs.
- Advocate for departmental culture changes to promote strengths
Strength-based language
For thousands of years, scientists have debated the use of language and how it affects our perception and vice versa. Recent studies have shown that people that use different languages have different cognitive responses to images than one another, therefore showing some evidence for the idea that the language we speak and the words we use does have some sort of effect on how we perceive things.[63] With this knowledge in mind, it is important that JPOs apply this concept to the words they use so that they have a positive perception of their role in a youth’s life and so youth feel supported.
By changing the way you talk about, to, and around youth involved in the juvenile justice system, you can play an integral role in shifting the field toward a more strength based approach. The words you use can help shape the attitudes of those around you to fit a more rehabilitative model that focuses on using youths’ strengths to motivate positive behavior change in place of focusing on youth’s problems, which leads them to be labeled as a “delinquent” or a “bad kid.”
Here are examples of terms commonly used in the juvenile justice system and alternatives that do not carry the same negative connotations.
For more information about how language shapes the way we think, here is a short TED Talk on the subject:
JPOs need to use practices that are ACEs and trauma-responsive. There are many ways that trauma and ACEs affect youth, such as impairment of adolescent development, mental health issues, and behavioral problems. By using a strength-based approach, you can aid in the development of resiliency. By connecting with youth, families, and service providers, you can identify ACEs and trauma and connect them to services that can address these needs. Without this vital step, youth will be set up to fail in a system that doesn’t understand their needs and how to help them.
Being Trauma-Responsive
JPOs should use trauma-responsive practices
Helping youth and families access services to appropriately process and cope with trauma experiences is vital to helping them make long term positive behavior changes. In order to best serve families and youth, JPOs should ensure that their practices are trauma-responsive. Trauma-responsive practices are actions that take traumatic experiences and their consequences into consideration when making decisions and providing services.
The NCTSN recognize trauma-responsive systems as those that:[64]
- Ensure that there are resources available to families and providers that explain trauma and its effects. Increasing their knowledge can help them identify and begin to discuss experiences they may not recognize as trauma.
- Regularly screen for trauma and the symptoms related to trauma (This should be done by staff trained to use the tool). If the screening identifies a need for assessment, refer youth to a mental health provider for a full assessment
- Use screening tools that are evidence-based and culturally responsive
- Focus on strengthening protective factors of youth and families. Design case plans with youth and family. The goals set in the case plan should encourage youth to use their strengths.
- Acknowledge that parents and caregivers may have their own trauma histories. Refer families to resources and treatment providers to help address trauma
- Cross-systems collaboration with child welfare systems in appropriate cases
- Ensure that you are aware of secondary traumatic stress and do what you can to prevent it and help them access treatment it if it occurs.
Understanding Trauma
What are ACEs?
The CDC defines ACEs as “potentially traumatic events that occur in childhood (0–17 years) such as experiencing violence, abuse, or neglect; witnessing violence in the home; and having a family member attempt or die by suicide.”[65] This also includes “aspects of the child’s environment that can undermine their sense of safety, stability, and bonding such as growing up in a household with substance misuse, mental health problems, or instability due to parental separation or incarceration of a parent, sibling, or other member of the household.” For juvenile justice professionals understanding the effects of ACEs can help you understand youth behavior and trauma. Here are some things you should know:
- Severe and persistent adverse experiences can produce toxic levels of stress altering the structure of the brain. This is especially true for children during the first 3 years of life.
- Safe, stable, consistent positive relationships and environments are critical for healthy physical and social development and can help mediate negative results of ACEs.
- ACEs increase the likelihood that a youth will be involved in the juvenile justice system, and leads to youth having a higher likelihood to reoffend. Detecting ACEs early and responding with appropriate treatment can be cost-effective.[66]
- Youth in the juvenile justice system with these experiences, especially those moderate to high risk youth who will be on your caseload deserve an opportunity to build modifications with the help of system professionals who can facilitate prosocial activities and promote a youth’s sense of safety and stability.
Source: RFK Children's Action Corps
What is trauma and what causes it?
Source: Changing Minds Toolkit
According to the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, more than 80% of youth involved in the justice system reported experiencing some form of trauma, with most of them experiencing multiple instances or chronic trauma.[67] Trauma is “a frightening, dangerous, or violent event that poses a threat to a child’s life or bodily integrity.”[68] Some of these events may include abuse, neglect, an accident, or other disturbing events. Trauma can be caused by experiencing an event directly or witnessing an event, but it can also be caused by events that happen before a youth is born. When a traumatic event happens to a youth’s family, even before they’re born, this can result in trans-generational trauma, which affects the behaviors and genetics of youth because of the way that their parents and grandparents have reacted to trauma.[69]
Trans-generational and other forms of trauma disparately affect youth of color. This can be caused by justice system and societal inequities (e.g., over-policing of neighborhoods), environmental factors, and systemic barriers. Generations of people of color have been through different societal periods, such as the Civil Rights Movement, and current youth of color are affected by these events because of the way trauma can be passed down through generations.[70] Understanding the many nuances of trauma and trans-generational trauma can help you better understand youth and their experiences in order to ensure that youth of all races and ethnicities can receive the best care possible.
Every youth responds to trauma and ACEs differently, which is why individualized case management and services is an imperative practice. Traumatic events can cause disorders such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), depression, and other psychological and developmental challenges that make these youth harder to serve. Adolescent development can also be affected by traumatic events. Many of these consequences of trauma are connected with behavioral problems that make it more likely for these youth to become involved in the juvenile justice system.[71]
Resiliency
Even though many of the consequences of trauma are negative, some youth develop resilience in response to trauma, which should be considered as a protective factor when assessing a youth that shows signs of trauma. Resilience is characterized by the possession of skills that help youth overcome obstacles that they face, and it leads to more success in school, higher levels of happiness, and lower levels of depression.[72] Different responses to trauma, such as strength-based models[73] and strong relationships with adults,[74] can help enhance services that support resilience, meaning that building positive relationships with these youth and engaging families to be supportive is an imperative role of a JPO. Helping youth build resiliency not only increases the likelihood that the youth will thrive, but it may also decrease the trans-generational risk of trauma and ACEs.[75]
The NCTSN also recognize that a trauma-respsonsive justice system has these characteristics:[76]
- Trauma-informed policies and procedures
- Identification and screening of youth who have been traumatized
- Clinical assessment and intervention for trauma-impaired youth
- Trauma-informed programming and staff education
- Prevention and management of secondary traumatic stress (STS)
- Trauma-informed partnering with youth and families
- Trauma-informed cross system collaboration
- Trauma-informed approaches to address disparities and diversity
References
- American Academy of Child and Adolescence Psychiatry (2016). Teen brain: Behavior, problem solving, and decision making.
- Tuell, J.A., Heldman, J., & Harp, K. (2017). Translating the Science of Adolescent Development to Sustainable Best Practice.
- Annie E. Casey Foundation (2018). Transforming juvenile probation: A vision for getting it right.
- This category includes criminal homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, simple assault, and other person offenses such as kidnapping, custody interference, unlawful restraint, false imprisonment, reckless endangerment, harassment, etc., and attempts to commit any such acts.
- Sickmund, M., Sladky, A., and Kang, W. (2019). Easy Access to Juvenile Court Statistics: 1985–2017. Online.
- This category includes criminal homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, simple assault, and other person offenses such as kidnapping, custody interference, unlawful restraint, false imprisonment, reckless endangerment, harassment, etc., and attempts to commit any such acts.
- Puzzanchera, C., Sladky, A. and Kang, W. (2019). Easy Access to Juvenile Populations: 1990–2018. Online.
- Yakovlev, P.I., Lecours, A.R. and Minkowski, A. (1967). The Myelogenetic Cycles of Regional Maturation of the Brain, in Regional Development of the Brain in Early Life (pp. 3–70), Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.
- Benes, F. M., Turtle, M., Khan, Y. et al. (1994). Myelination of a Key Relay Zone in the Hippocampal Formation Occurs in the Human Brain during Childhood, Adolescence, and Adulthood, Archives of General Psychiatry, 51(6), 477–484.
- Gogtay, N., Giedd, J.N., Lusk, L. et al. (2004). Dynamic Mapping of Human Cortical Development during Childhood through Early Adulthood, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.
- Casey, B., Jones, R. M., & Hare, T. A. (2008). The adolescent brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124(1), 111–126.
- Ernst, M., Pine, D.S. and Hardin, M. (2006). Triadic Model of the Neurobiology of Motivated Behavior in Adolescence, Psychological Medicine, 36 (3), 299–312.
- Steinberg, L. (2008). A Social Neuroscience Perspective on Adolescent Risk-Taking, Developmental Review, 28(1), 78–106.
- Shulman, E.P., Smith, A.R., Silva, K. et al. (2015). The Dual Systems Model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.
- Diamond, A. (2013). Executive Functions, Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168.
- Luna, B., Marek, S., Larsen, B. et al. (2015). An Integrative Model of the Maturation of Cognitive Control, Annual Review of Neuroscience, 38, 151–170.
- Marek, S., Hwang, K., Foran, W. et al. (2015). The Contribution of Network Organization and Integration to the Development of Cognitive Control. PLoS Biology, 13(12), e1002328.
- Luna, B. and Wright, C. (2016). Adolescent Brain Development: Implications for the juvenile criminal justice system. In K. Heilbrun, D. DeMatteo, N.E.S. Goldstein (eds.), APA handbook of psychology and juvenile justice (pp. 91–116). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
- Lebel, C., Gee, M., Camicioli, R. et al. (2012). Diffusion Tensor Imaging of White Matter Tract Evolution over the Lifespan, NeuroImage, 60(1), 340–352.
- Simmonds, D., Hallquist, M.N., Asato, M. et al. (2013). Developmental Stages and Sex Differences of White Matter and Behavioral Development through Adolescence: A longitudinal diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) study, NeuroImage.
- Gogtay, N., Giedd, J.N., Lusk, L. et al. (2004). Dynamic Mapping of Human Cortical Development during Childhood through Early Adulthood, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.
- Raznahan, A., Shaw, P.W., Lerch, J.P. et al. (2014). Longitudinal Four-dimensional Mapping of Subcortical Anatomy in Human Development, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(4), 1592–1597.
- Benes, F. M., Turtle, M., Khan, Y. et al. (1994). Myelination of a Key Relay Zone in the Hippocampal Formation Occurs in the Human Brain during Childhood, Adolescence, and Adulthood, Archives of General Psychiatry, 51(6), 477–484.
- Lee, J.K., Ekstrom, A.D. and Ghetti, S. (2014). Volume of Hippocampal Subfields and Episodic Memory in Childhood and Adolescence, NeuroImage, 94, 162–171.
- Galvan, A. (2013). The Teenage Brain: Sensitivity to Rewards, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(2), 88–93.
- Luna, B., Paulsen, D.J., Padmanabhan, A. et al. (2013). Cognitive Control and Motivation, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(2), 94–100.
- Luna, B. and Wright, C. (2016). Adolescent Brain Development: Implications for the juvenile criminal justice system. In K. Heilbrun, D. DeMatteo, N.E.S. Goldstein (eds.), APA handbook of psychology and juvenile justice (pp. 91–116). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
- Cancilliere, M.K., Yusufov, M., & Weyandt, L. (2018). Effects of co-occurring marijuana use and anxiety on brain structure and functioning: A systematic review of adolescent studies. Journal of Adolescence, 65, 177–188.
- Inman, D., El-Mallakh, P., Jensen, L., Ossege, J., Scott, L. (2020). Addressing substance use in adolescents: Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 16, 69–73.
- Lubman, D.I., Cheetham, A., & Yucel, M. (2015). Cannabis and adolescent brain development. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 148, 1–16.
- Tuell, J.A., Heldman, J., & Harp, K. (2017). Translating the Science of Adolescent Development to Sustainable Best Practice.
- Tuell, J.A., Heldman, J., & Harp, K. (2017). Translating the Science of Adolescent Development to Sustainable Best Practice.
- National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (2017). Resolution Regarding Juvenile Probation and Adolescent Development. (Landing page).
- National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (2017). Resolution Regarding Juvenile Probation and Adolescent Development. (Landing page).
- Goldstein, N. E., Gale-Bentz, E., McPhee, J., NeMoyer, A., Walker, S., Bishop, S., . . . Schwartz, R. G. (2019). Applying the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges’ resolution to juvenile probation reform. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 5(2), 170.
- Van Hasselt, V. B., & Hersen, M. (1998). Handbook of psychological treatment protocols for children and adolescents. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Routledge.
- Phillips, E. L., Phillips, E. A., Fixsen, D. L., & Wolf, M. M. (1971). Achievement place: Modification of the behaviors of pre‐delinquent boys within a token economy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 4, 45–59.
- Gatti, U., Tremblay, R. E., & Vitaro, F. (2009). Iatrogenic effect of juvenile justice. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50, 991–998.
- Tuell, J.A., Heldman, J., & Harp, K. (2017). Translating the Science of Adolescent Development to Sustainable Best Practice.
- Tuell, J.A., Heldman, J., & Harp, K. (2017). Translating the Science of Adolescent Development to Sustainable Best Practice.
- Grisso, T. & Vincent, G. (2014). Trauma in Dual Status Youth: Putting Things in Perspective. Boston: Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps.
- Casey, B., Jones, R. M., & Hare, T. A. (2008). The adolescent brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124(1), 111–126.
- Chein, J., Albert, D., O’Brien, L., Uckert, K., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain’s reward circuitry. Developmental Science, 14(2), F1–F10.
- Corepal, R., Tully, M. A., Kee, F., Miller, S. J., & Hunter, R. F. (2018). Behavioral incentive interventions for health behavior change: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prevention Medicine, 110, 55–66.
- Harvell, S., Love, H., Pelletier, E., & Warnberg, C. (2018). Bridging Research and Practice in Juvenile Probation. The Urban Institute.
- Family Engagement in Juvenile Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, last updated February 2017.
- Annie E. Casey Foundation, Case Planning for Healthy Development (St. Louis, MO: Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative, 2013).
- J. Burke et al., The Challenge and Opportunity of Parental Involvement in Juvenile Justice Services, Children and Youth Services Review39 (2014): 39–47.
- National Council on Crime and Delinquency and Annie E. Casey Foundation, DYRS Risk Assessment and Structured Decision-Making: Validation Study & System Assessment Summary Report (Washington, DC: District of Columbia Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services, 2012).
- Parent Peer Support Program, Community Connections for Youth, accessed August 15, 2019.
- S. Esthappan, J. Lacoe, and D. Young, Juvenile Probation Transformation: Applying the Approach in Lucas County, OH, and Pierce County, WA (Washington DC: The Urban Institute Justice Policy Center, 2019); Family Navigator Program, Center of Hope Family Services, Inc., accessed August 15, 2019.
- Esthappan, J. Lacoe, and D. Young, Juvenile Probation Transformation: Applying the Approach in Lucas County, OH, and Pierce County, WA (Washington DC: The Urban Institute Justice Policy Center, 2019).
- L. S. Guy et al., What Do Juvenile Probation Officers Think of Using the SAVRY and YLS/CMI for Case Management, and Do They Use the Instruments Properly? International Journal of Forensic Mental Health 13 no. 3 (2014): 227–41.
- D. Steinhart, A Practice Guide to Juvenile Detention Reform: Juvenile Detention Risk Assessment (Baltimore, MD: The Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2006).
- Vincent, Guy, and Grisso, Risk Assessment in Juvenile Justice, 1–98.
- Vincent, Guy, and Grisso, Risk Assessment in Juvenile Justice, 1–98.
- Graduated Responses for Youth Under DJS Supervision, Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, accessed September 13, 2019.
- Chief Probation Officers of California, Graduated Sanctions: Strategies for Responding to Violations of Probation Supervision, CPOC Brief 1 no. 4 (2014): 1–6
- Harvell et al., Bridging Research and Practice: Rethinking.
- Flynn, Hanks, and Bowers Jr., Process Evaluation of Juvenile Programming, 125–40.
- Vincent, Guy, and Grisso, Risk Assessment in Juvenile Justice, 1–98.
- Nissen, L. (2006). Bringing Strength-Based Philosophy to Life in Juvenile Justice. Reclaiming Children and Youth 15.1. pp.40–46.
- TED (Producer). (2017). How language shapes the way we think [video].
- National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) (n.d.). Creating Trauma-informed Systems, Essential Elements.
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2019). Preventing Adverse Childhood Experiences.
- Baglivio, M.T., Epps, N., Swartz, K., Huq, M.S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N.S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) in the lives of juvenile offenders. OJJDP Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3(2).
- National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) (n.d.). Creating Trauma-informed Systems, Essential Elements.
- National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) (n.d.). Creating Trauma-informed Systems, Essential Elements.
- Minulescu, M. (2016). Approaching trans-generational trauma in analytical psychotherapy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 217, 1112–1117.
- Minulescu, M. (2016). Approaching trans-generational trauma in analytical psychotherapy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 217, 1112–1117.
- Ezell, J.M., Richardson, M., Salari, S., & Henry, J.A. (2018). Implementing trauma-informed practice in juvenile justice systems: What can courts learn from child welfare interventions? Journal of Child and Adolescent Trauma, 11, 507–519.
- Baglivio, M.T., Epps, N., Swartz, K., Huq, M.S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N.S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) in the lives of juvenile offenders. OJJDP Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3(2).
- National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) (2016). Resilience and Child Traumatic Stress.
- Baglivio, M.T., Epps, N., Swartz, K., Huq, M.S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N.S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) in the lives of juvenile offenders. OJJDP Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3(2).
- Baglivio, M.T., Epps, N., Swartz, K., Huq, M.S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N.S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) in the lives of juvenile offenders. OJJDP Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3(2).
- National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) (n.d.). Creating Trauma-informed Systems, Essential Elements.