The increasing proportion of girls in the juvenile justice system has prompted courts to develop gender-responsive services. The present study examined data from a mid-sized county juvenile court to examine the effects of a group home intervention for girls. The study compared group home participants (n = 172) with girls who did not receive group home treatment (n = 814) using propensity score matching (PSM). Girls who received group home treatment were significantly less likely to re-offend in the 2-year follow-up period. Policy and practice implications for gender-responsive services as well as future directions for research are discussed.
American Bar Association & National Bar Association. (2001). Justice by gender: The lack of appropriate prevention, diversion and treatment alternatives for girls in the justice system. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
AustinP. C. (2011). Comparing paired vs. non-paired statistical methods of analyses when making inferences about absolute risk reductions in propensity-score matched samples. Statistics in Medicine, 30, 1292-1301.
3.
BloomB.OwenB.DeschenesE.RosenbaumJ. (2002). Improving juvenile justice for females: A statewide assessment in California. Crime & Delinquency, 48, 526-552. doi:10.1177/001112802237128
4.
BurkeC.KeatonS.PennellS. (2003). Addressing the gender-specific needs of girls: An evaluation of San Diego’s WINGS program (Board of Corrections final report). San Diego, CA: San Diego County Probation Department and San Diego Association of Governments.
5.
CaliendoM.KopeinigS. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22, 31-72.
6.
Chesney-LindM.IrwinK. (2008). Beyond bad girls: Gender, violence and hype. New York, NY: Routledge.
7.
Chesney-LindM.MorashM.StevensT. (2008). Girls troubles, girls’ delinquency, and gender responsive programming: A review. Australian & New Zealand Society of Criminology, 41, 162-189. doi:10.1375/acri.41.1.162
8.
Chesney-LindM.SheldenR. G. (2004). Girls, delinquency, and juvenile justice (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
9.
DavidsonJ. T.PaskoL.Chesney-LindM. (2011). “She’s way too good to lose”: An evaluation of Honolulu’s Girls Court. Women & Criminal Justice, 21, 308-327.
10.
DayJ. C.ZahnM. A.TichavskyL. P. (2014). What works for whom? The effects of gender responsive programming on girls and boys in secure detention. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 52, 93-129.
GaarderE.RodriguezN.ZatzM. S. (2004). Criers, liars, and manipulators: Probation officers’ views of girls. Justice Quarterly, 21, 547-578.
13.
GarciaC. A.LaneJ. (2010). Looking in the rearview mirror: What incarcerated women think girls need from the system. Feminist Criminology, 5, 227-243.
14.
Greene, Peters, & Associates. (1997). Guiding principles for promising female programming: An inventory of best practices. Nashville, TN: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
15.
JavdaniS.AllenN. E. (2016). An ecological model for intervention for juvenile justice-involved girls: Development and preliminary prospective evaluation. Feminist Criminology, 11, 135-162. doi:10.1177/1557085114559514
16.
JavdaniS.SadehN.VeronaE. (2011). Gendered social forces: A review of the impact of institutionalized factors on women and girls’ criminal justice trajectories. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17, 161-211.
17.
KerigP. K.SchindlerS. R. (2013). Engendering the evidence base: A critical review of the conceptual and empirical foundations of gender-responsive interventions for girls’ delinquency. Laws, 2, 244-282.
18.
KrisbergB. (2005). Young women and the juvenile justice system. In Juvenile justice: Redeeming our children (pp. 113-123). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
19.
LipseyM. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims & Offenders, 4, 124-147.
20.
Maryland Department of Juvenile Services. (2012, January). Department of Juvenile Services recidivism report. Baltimore: Author.
21.
MatthewsB.HubbardD. J. (2008). Moving ahead: Five essential elements for working effectively with girls. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 494-502.
22.
National Council on Crime and Delinquency. (2001). Evaluation of the RYSE program, Alameda County Probation Department: A report prepared for Alameda County Probation Department. Oakland, CA: Author.
RosenbaumP. R.RubinD. B. (1985). Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician, 39, 33-38.
26.
RyanJ. P.MarshallJ. M.HerzD.HernandezP. M. (2008). Juvenile delinquency in child welfare: Investigating group home effects. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 1088-1099. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2008.02.004
27.
SchwartzJ.SteffensmeierD. (2012). Stability and change in girls’ delinquency and the gender gap: Trends in violence and alcohol offending across multiple sources of evidence. In MillerS.LeveL. D.KerigP. K. (Eds.), Delinquent girls: Contexts, relationships, and adaptation (pp. 3-23). New York, NY: Springer.
28.
SickmundM.PuzzancheraC. (2014). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2014 national report. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.
29.
StevensT.MorashM.Chesney-LindM. (2011). Are girls getting tougher, or are we getting tougher on girls? Probability of arrest and juvenile court oversight in 1980 and 2000. Justice Quarterly, 28, 718-744.
30.
StuartE. A. (2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science, 25, 1-21.
31.
ThoemmesF.KimE. S. (2011). A systematic review of propensity score methods in the social sciences. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 90-118.
32.
WalkerS. C.MunoA.Sullivan-ColglazierC. (2015). Principles in practice: A multistate study of gender-responsive reforms in the juvenile justice system. Crime & Delinquency, 61, 742-766. doi:10.1177/0011128712449712
33.
WatsonL.EdelmanP. (2012). Improving the juvenile justice system for girls: Lessons from the states. Washington, DC: Georgetown Center on Poverty, Inequality and Public Policy.
34.
ZahnM. A.DayJ. C.MihalicS. F.TichavskyL. (2009). Determining what works for girls in the juvenile justice system. A summary of evaluation evidence. Crime & Delinquency, 55, 266-293. doi:10.1177/0011128708330649
35.
ZahnM. A.HawkinsS.ChianconeJ.WhitworthA. (2008). The girls study group—Charting the way to delinquency prevention for girls (Bulletin). Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
