Girls Study Group. Suitability of Assessment Instruments for Delinquent Girls. Understanding and Responding to Girls Delinquency.

Transcription

1 U.S. Departmet of Justice Office of Justice Programs Office of Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio APRIL 2010 Girls Study Group Uderstadig ad Respodig to Girls Deliquecy Jeff Slowikowski, Actig Admiistrator Suitability of Assessmet Istrumets for Deliquet Girls By Susa Brumbaugh, Jeifer L. Hardiso Walters, ad Laura A. Witerfield Accordig to data from the Federal Bureau of Ivestigatio, from 1991 to 2000, arrests of girls icreased more (or decreased less) tha arrests of boys for most types of offeses. By 2004, girls accouted for 30 percet of all juveile arrests. However, questios remai about whether these treds reflect a actual icrease i girls deliquecy or chages i societal resposes to girls behavior. To fid aswers to these questios, the Office of Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio coveed the Girls Study Group to establish a theoretical ad empirical foudatio to guide the developmet, testig, ad dissemiatio of strategies to reduce or prevet girls ivolvemet i deliquecy ad violece. Access OJJDP The Girls Study Group Series, of which this bulleti is a part, presets the Group s fidigs. The series examies issues such as patters of offedig amog adolescets ad how they differ for girls ad boys; risk ad protective factors associated with deliquecy, icludig geder differeces; ad the causes ad correlates of girls deliquecy. publicatios olie at Juveile justice policymakers have focused growig attetio o girls i recet years, i part because of a icrease i female arrests ad as a result of federal requiremets i the Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio Act. Although the overall total of juveile arrests i the Uited States dropped about 22 percet betwee 1996 ad 2005, arrests of males decreased 29 percet, whereas arrests of females decreased oly 14 percet. Furthermore, male arrests for violet crimes decreased more substatially (28 percet) tha did female arrests (10 percet) (Zah et al., Office of Justice Programs Iovatio Parterships Safer Neighborhoods

2 Girls Study Group 2008). Although their ivolvemet i the justice system has bee icreasig, girls received scat attetio util OJJDP required states to develop ad adopt policies to prohibit geder bias i placemet ad treatmet (Bowes ad Albert, 1996). 1 Meetig this madate requires that practitioers ad policymakers uderstad geder differeces that may lead to system biases. Stadardized istrumets are tools juveile justice practitioers use to idetify idividuals who pose some sort of risk (e.g., recidivism) or to idetify problem areas (e.g., substace abuse, metal health). These istrumets ca facilitate the collectio of prelimiary iformatio critical to security ad treatmet decisios. Withi the justice system, istrumets ca be used for various purposes ad at may poits i time. For example, istrumets ca be used Prior to setecig to iform placemet decisios or idetify youth who may be appropriate cadidates for diversio programs. I correctioal facilities ad probatio departmets to iform appropriate Authors Note The purpose of this review is to determie the extet to which assessmet istrumets used with at-risk ad justice-ivolved youth are equally appropriate ad effective i assessig girls ad boys. The authors reviewed hudreds of istrumets across a wide variety of assessmet areas to examie cosideratios of geder i the developmet of each istrumet as well as subsequet research that ivolves aalyses by geder. security classificatios or treatmet ad aid i release plaig. I treatmet facilities to guide case maagers i plaig services ad assessig treatmet progress. I each of these istaces, practitioers ca use stadardized istrumets oce for iitial screeig purposes or at regular itervals to gauge chages over time ad guide modificatios to security levels or treatmet services. To make appropriate processig decisios (filig, adjudicatio, detetio), juveile justice practitioers icludig judges, attoreys, case maagers, ad correctios ad probatio staff may rely i part o stadardized istrumets to determie the risks ad treatmet eeds of youth eterig ad ivolved i the justice system. Usig such tools helps systematize decisiomakig criteria across the juveile justice system. Recetly, because of the icrease i the umbers of girls i the juveile justice system ad heighteed public awareess about issues cocerig girls ad geder, 2 practitioers ad policymakers have begu to questio whether the istrumets curretly i use are appropriate for girls. Literature has idicated that geder is a importat variable i uderstadig deliquet behavior ad must be addressed whe developig assessmet tools. Backgroud ad Methods No research has systematically examied the extet to which existig adolescet istrumets used i the juveile justice system are equally effective for girls ad boys. OJJDP s Girls Study Group (GSG) coducted such a study ad has summarized the fidigs i this bulleti. 3 Girls Study Group Members Dr. Stephaie r. Hawkis, Pricipal Ivestigator, Girls Study Group (April 2008 Preset) Research Cliical Psychologist, RTI Iteratioal Dr. Margaret A. Zah, Pricipal Ivestigator, Girls Study Group (2004 March 2008) Seior Research Scietist, RTI Iteratioal; Professor, North Carolia State Uiversity Dr. robert Agew, Professor, Departmet of Sociology, Emory Uiversity Dr. Meda Chesey-Lid, Professor, Wome s Studies Program, Uiversity of Hawaii Maoa Dr. Gayle Dakof, Associate Research Professor, Departmet of Epidemiology ad Public Health, Uiversity of Miami Dr. Del Elliott, Director, Ceter for the Study ad Prevetio of Violece, Uiversity of Colorado Dr. Barry Feld, Professor, School of Law, Uiversity of Miesota Dr. Diaa Fishbei, Director, Trasdiscipliary Behavioral Sciece Program, RTI Iteratioal Dr. Peggy Giordao, Professor of Sociology, Ceter for Family ad Demographic Research, Bowlig Gree State Uiversity Dr. Cadace Kruttschitt, Professor, Departmet of Sociology, Uiversity of Toroto Dr. Jody Miller, Associate Professor, Departmet of Crimiology ad Crimial Justice, Uiversity of Missouri St. Louis Dr. Merry Morash, Professor, School of Crimial Justice, Michiga State Uiversity Dr. Darrell Steffesmeier, Professor, Departmet of Sociology, Pesylvaia State Uiversity Ms. Giovaa Taormia, Executive Director, Girls Circle Associatio Dr. Doa-Marie Wi, Seior Research Scietist, Ceter for Social Demography ad Ethography, Duke Uiversity 2

3 UUderstadig ad Respodig to Girls Deliquecy Examiig Two Categories of Istrumets Two broad types of istrumets were relevat to the GSG examiatio: risk assessmet istrumets used to assess the risk of outcomes (e.g., recidivism) ad treatmet-focused istrumets used to assist i the screeig ad diagosis of coditios (e.g., metal health disorders). Risk assessmet istrumets are used to predict or assess the potetial risk of various outcomes. These istrumets are usually developed by aalyzig historical cases to determie the factors that best predict the subsequet behavior of iterest. For example, a traditioal risk assessmet tool developed for use i correctioal facilities might be based o a historical sample of juveiles i the justice system that is used to determie the characteristics that best predicted subsequet offedig. These characteristics might iclude static factors, such as offese type or prior justice system ivolvemet, ad dyamic factors, such as educatio level or metal health status. These istrumets are usually tested o the typical juveile justice populatio, composed largely of boys, without a oversamplig of girls. Treatmet-focused istrumets idetify coditios without predictig subsequet behavior. These istrumets typically idetify the presece of metal health coditios ad substace abuse problems, but they may also measure positive ad egative behaviors. Some istrumets perform a global eeds assessmet to determie possible areas for treatmet ad services. Because the risk ad protective factors, coditios, ad disorders that these istrumets idetify ca differ by geder, examiig the effectiveess of istrumets with regard to geder is essetial. For example, usig a metal health screeig istrumet that does ot appropriately cosider geder may result i a missed opportuity for service or placemet of a child i a iappropriate treatmet program. Cosideratios Whe Examiig Geder Two mai factors should be cosidered whe examiig geder-based performace of istrumets: Whether the istrumet has gederbased developmet (e.g., gederspecific ormig or validatio, 4 geder-specific istrumets or items, or geder-specific scorig systems). The results of geder-based aalyses that have bee performed (e.g., geder differeces i scores or psychometrics, that is, tests to determie the reliability or validity of the istrumet). Some backgroud o each of these factors is described here. Geder-based developmet. The primary type of geder-based istrumet developmet is the process of ormig or validatig a istrumet separately by geder. The terms ormig ad validatio should be distiguished because they are applied differetly for the two types of istrumets described above. Treatmet-focused istrumets are geerally described as beig ormed, whereas risk assessmet istrumets that predict risk are geerally described as beig validated. A ormed istrumet allows the user to compare a umerical score of a particular idividual to the average scores of the ormig populatio represetative of the perso beig tested. Ideally, these average scores (also called orms) are based o a atioally represetative sample or a represetative sample of persos who exhibit the coditio of iterest (e.g., metal health coditio). Some istrumets also provide scores separately by geder. May commercial istrumets idicate ormig iformatio ad subgroup orms o their Web sites ad i their mauals. May istrumets offer separate orms by geder, but geder orms are ot always ecessary aalysis sometimes idicates o eed for them. Past research ad istrumet reviews also ofte provide helpful iformatio about geder ormig for a specific istrumet. Researchers who develop risk assessmet istrumets do ot usually use the term ormig but istead referece istrumet validatio. I this cotext, validatio describes how well the items or total scores predict risk. 5 For risk assessmet istrumets, validatio usually ivolves determiig item 3

4 Girls Study Group How Geder Ca Affect Classificatio ad Diagosis Whe istrumets that were developed ad tested with geeral deliquet populatios are applied to girls, the istrumet's performace may be egatively affected, eve if the study samples o which the test was coducted icluded girls. Geeral deliquet populatios typically iclude a large umber of boys. Whe istrumets developed i these populatios are used with girls, several cocers arise: wide variety of istrumets so that they ca make better iformed decisios about which istrumets to use with their populatios. This bulleti summarizes a prelimiary examiatio of the geder-based performace of risk assessmet ad treatmet istrumets for deliquet girls. A istrumet may ot accurately idetify egative behaviors (e.g., offedig) if the istrumet does ot accout for the small umber of girls who might exhibit the behavior. A istrumet may misclassify problematic behaviors (e.g., if girls are clustered ito oe category, such as low risk, a istrumet may ot adequately idetify high-risk girls because they appear to be at low risk compared with boys). A istrumet may ot distiguish subgroups (e.g., it may ot distiguish girls at high ad low risk). A istrumet may ot idetify or may misidetify the eeds ad stregths of girls because it does ot cotai items that are particularly relevat to girls (e.g., girls may be stregtheed by family or social support etworks). Istrumet review Process To assess whether risk assessmet ad treatmet-focused istrumets that are geder resposive exist for deliquet girls, the authors coducted a comprehesive examiatio of relevat istrumets. The examiatio had two primary phases: a prelimiary search for istrumets ad a itesive examiatio of istrumets that met the iclusio criteria. weights ad total scores i a costructio sample. These weights ad scores are later cofirmed i a secod validatio sample. A istrumet has bee validated by geder whe research shows that it ca predict risk equally for boys ad girls. Geder-based developmet ca also ivolve the creatio of geder-specific scorig systems uder which the specific items or questios o the istrumet are scored differetly for girls ad boys (as opposed to geder-based orms, which ivolve differet iterpretatios of the total score). Aother aspect of geder-based developmet ivolves the creatio of geder-specific items or, i some cases, completely separate versios of the istrumet for girls ad boys. Geder-based aalysis. As with gederbased developmet, geder-based aalyses coducted i subsequet research ca provide helpful idicatios of how well a istrumet works for girls. Idicators of geder-based performace iclude studies of istrumet psychometrics, such as validity (i.e., whether the istrumet measures what it is supposed to measure) ad reliability (i.e., whether the istrumet is stable over time or across differet raters). Factors such as validity ad reliability should be cosistet across geder. Additioally, if subsequet research reveals that a istrumet shows expected geder differeces (e.g., geder differeces the istrumet reveals are cosistet with existig literature), it ca be used to cofirm the appropriateess of a istrumet for girls. I the absece of research that idicates how well istrumets perform by geder, practitioers caot kow whether such istrumets accurately assess risks ad eeds for girls. Practitioers cocered about such issues eed a resource that examies geder-based performace across a The authors coducted the iitial literature searches betwee May 2006 ad February To esure cosistecy of iformatio across istrumets ad verify previously collected iformatio, the authors coducted a comprehesive quality check ad Web search for all istrumets i Jauary ad February The fidigs preseted here reflect the iformatio the authors located o each istrumet durig the give timeframes. The authors primarily examied istrumets explicitly iteded for use with youth ivolved i the justice system as well as istrumets that address issues that these youth frequetly face (e.g., suicide risk) regardless of whether the istrumets were specifically developed for this populatio. Thus, istrumets developed with commuity-based samples, but ot ecessarily iteded for youth i the juveile justice system, were also icluded. 6 The authors limited their review to istrumets i the followig four categories 4

5 UUderstadig ad Respodig to Girls Deliquecy (the last three of which are treatmetfocused istrumets): Risk ad risk/eeds assessmet istrumets. Global eeds assessmet istrumets. Substace abuse istrumets. Metal health istrumets. The authors idetified istrumets through literature ad Web searches ad referece books. Books the authors cosulted icluded Assessig the Youthful Offeder: Issues ad Techiques (Hoge ad Adrews, 1996) ad Metal Health Screeig ad Assessmet i Juveile Justice (Grisso, Vicet, ad Seagrave, 2005). The authors also solicited practitioer iput through three sources. First, the authors capitalized o kowledge geerated from a related GSG project a review of programs for girls ad icluded istrumets that program directors of female-targeted programs idetified. Secod, the authors icluded assessmet istrumets reported by local program directors servig juveiles uder the Federal Serious ad Violet Offeder Reetry Iitiative. Fially, the authors icluded submissios received from practitioers through the GSG Web site. The prelimiary search yielded a iitial set of 327 istrumets. Before coductig the itesive examiatio, 184 istrumets were removed from the iitial set, for a fial total of 143 istrumets. Reasos for exclusio icluded the followig: Outdated or duplicate istrumets ( = 14). This set icluded istrumets replaced by later versios, subscales of existig istrumets, ad those that measured agaist outdated criteria (e.g., the Diagostic ad Statistical Maual of Metal Disorders, Third Editio [DSM III] istead of the DSM IV). Iappropriate istrumets ( = 33). This set icluded istrumets iteded for use with boys or adults, those exclusively used ad tested o o- U.S. populatios, ad those used solely for research or prevalece studies (e.g., surveys). Istrumets outside the project s scope ( = 92). This set icluded istrumets too broadly focused for commo use with justice-ivolved youth (i.e., they did ot fall ito oe of the four major categories: risk assessmet, global eeds assessmet, substace use, or metal health). Istrumets that could ot be verified ( = 45). This set icluded istrumets for which the authors could ot locate sufficiet detail to either cofirm the istrumet s existece or coduct the examiatio. 7 The authors cataloged iformatio about each istrumet i a spreadsheet. Sources of iformatio icluded Web sites ad documetatio from istrumet developers, existig istrumet reviews (e.g., the Metal Measuremets Yearbook ad the Natioal Istitute o Alcohol Abuse ad Alcoholism s Guide to Assessig Alcohol Problems), ad literature searches (icludig article abstracts ad full-text articles). The authors cosidered a istrumet to have favorable geder-based performace if it met at least oe of the followig criteria: Geder-based developmet. The istrumet offers geder-specific orms or scorig, has geder-specific versios, or icludes geder-specific items. Favorable geder-based aalysis. Aalysis idicated that the istrumet s validity or reliability did ot differ by geder, that its scores were ot correlated with geder, or that geder differeces the istrumet revealed were cosistet with the literature (e.g., girls scored higher o metal health issues ad boys o physical aggressio). 5

6 Girls Study Group A Olie Search Tool OJJDP is supportig a olie istrumet search tool that will allow researchers ad practitioers to fid detailed ad up-to-date iformatio about the istrumets icluded i this review. Go to: programs/girlsdeliquecy.html. For each istrumet, the authors developed the followig categories for fidigs: Favorable The istrumet had positive geder-based performace iformatio. Uclear The istrumet had mixed or icosistet geder-based performace iformatio. Ufavorable The istrumet had egative geder-based performace iformatio. Ukow The istrumet lacked geder iformatio. Results The authors examied 143 istrumets, with the followig results: Favorable 73 istrumets. Uclear 7 istrumets. Ufavorable 8 istrumets. Ukow 55 istrumets. Table 1 summarizes the overall fidigs as well as fidigs withi the four categories, each of which is defied ad preseted i more detail below. risk ad risk/eeds Assessmet Istrumets Justice system practitioers use risk assessmet istrumets to assess the probability of some future outcome of cocer. Such istrumets usually assess the likelihood of recidivism but ca also examie the likelihood of probatio revocatio or istitutioal misbehavior. By estimatig such probabilities, these istrumets help practitioers make decisios about placemet, security classificatio levels, ad the timig of release. This category also icludes combiatio risk/eeds assessmet istrumets, which examie risk factors ad treatmet eeds to determie a perso s risk level. The higher score from either the risk assessmet portio or the eeds assessmet portio of the istrumet determies the level of risk. 8 This category icludes istrumets desiged exclusively for assessig justice-ivolved or at-risk youth. It icludes geeral istrumets developed for use across various jurisdictios ad istrumets created for a specific jurisdictio. The authors reviewed a total of 35 risk assessmet istrumets ad foud 11 with favorable geder-based performace. Three istrumets had a ufavorable geder-based aalysis ad 21 istrumets had ukow geder-based performace iformatio. Six assessmets with favorable gederbased performace were developed for use i a specific jurisdictio. The sigle-jurisdictio istrumets may serve as promisig models for other commuities but must be locally validated to esure that they appropriately assess risk, takig local policies ad characteristics ito cosideratio (see Recommedatios for Practitioers ). Global eeds Assessmet Istrumets Needs assessmet istrumets provide a broad-based assessmet of youths' problem areas requirig further followup. May states ad jurisdictios use a separate eeds assessmet istrumet as a compaio to their risk assessmet istrumets. Some commercially available global eeds assessmet istrumets also exist. Table 1: Summary of Geder-Based Fidigs Across All Istrumet Types Istrumet Category Number of Istrumets Geder-Based Performace Favorable Uclear Ufavorable Ukow All Istrumets Risk Assessmet Istrumets Needs Assessmet Istrumets Substace Abuse Istrumets Metal Health Istrumets

7 UUderstadig ad Respodig to Girls Deliquecy The authors reviewed six istrumets i this category, ad two met the criteria for determiig favorable geder performace. For the remaiig four istrumets, the authors could ot locate geder iformatio. Substace Abuse Istrumets This category of istrumets icludes tools iteded to detect alcohol or substace use, icludig the presece or severity of abuse, depedece, ad problems associated with abuse. Some istrumets iclude metal health idicators ad ca also be used to detect co-occurrig substace abuse ad metal health disorders. Substace abuse istrumets are appropriate for use with both at-risk ad justice-ivolved youth. They ca be admiistered at multiple poits i time, icludig durig iitial itake ad whe eeded to determie treatmet progress for abusers. The authors reviewed 22 istrumets i this category; they foud 7 that had favorable geder performace. Four substace abuse istrumets had uclear or mixed geder aalysis results ad oe showed ufavorable geder results. For the remaiig 10 istrumets, results were ukow or the authors could ot locate sufficiet iformatio to determie geder performace. Metal Health Istrumets The fial category of istrumets covers a broad scope of topics withi the metal health area, from disorders to positive fuctioig ad adaptive behaviors. The authors reviewed a wide rage of metal health istrumets i the followig subcategories: atisocial behavior, abuse ad trauma, depressio ad suicide risk, behavior ratigs, self-cocept ad selfesteem, social-emotioal competece ad fuctioig, ad geeral istrumets that measure multiple disorders or clusters of symptoms. Withi this category, the authors reviewed 80 istrumets, of which 53 were favorable with regard to geder performace. The authors idetified three istrumets with uclear geder performace ad four istrumets with ufavorable geder performace. Isufficiet iformatio was available to determie geder performace for the remaiig 20 istrumets. Discussio of Fidigs Across all istrumet types, fidigs regardig geder performace are ecouragig. More tha half (73) of the 143 istrumets reviewed showed favorable geder-based aalysis or provided geder-based developmet the authors foud favorable geder-based aalysis for 25 istrumets; 28 had geder-based developmet but o additioal gederbased aalysis; ad 20 istrumets met both criteria. Of the four categories of istrumets reviewed, the metal health istrumets are most sesitive to geder cocers. Results for the risk assessmet istrumets were the least ecouragig. Out of the 35 istrumets reviewed, oly 5 geder-appropriate istrumets were developed for multiple jurisdictios. Although several jurisdictio-specific istrumets showed favorable geder performace, the work ad resources required to validate these istrumets for use i other jurisdictios could be sigificat. The other jurisdictio-specific risk assessmet istrumets are problematic either because their developers have ot aalyzed validity (i.e., the extet to which the istrumet accurately predicts the iteded outcome) separately by geder or because researchers have foud that the istrumet is less valid whe used for girls. These fidigs are especially worrisome because the cosequeces of misclassificatio for girls ca be serious both for the girls themselves (if their risk is overestimated) ad potetially for public safety (if their risk is uderestimated). Recommedatios for Practitioers Practitioers who wat to assess girls risks ad treatmet eeds accurately face cosiderable barriers ad ukows. The olie search tool provides iformatio about may istrumets ad whether they evaluate girls appropriately. May istrumets are available, however, ad literature o the subject is expasive ad ever-growig. Local juveile justice systems ad commuity prevetio programs should cosider the followig issues whe selectig ad admiisterig istrumets: The istrumet s purpose. Whe selectig istrumets, practitioers must esure that the istrumet s purpose ad their ow reaso for usig it match. For example, they should ot use a diagostic-focused istrumet to determie risk because these istrumets were ot developed to determie risk behaviors. Coversely, usig a predictive risk assessmet tool may ot be sufficiet to determie appropriate treatmet for offedig youth. Before makig specific decisios about which istrumets to select, practitioers may wat to orgaize a plaig sessio with staff who work with juveiles to discuss screeig ad assessmet eeds ad solicit iput o what is workig ad what is ot. Geder performace. Practitioers should check curret istrumets agaist the iformatio cotaied 7

8 Girls Study Group Selectig Appropriate Risk ad Needs Assessmet Istrumets Whe selectig a istrumet, ask the followig questios: i the olie search tool ad cosider selectig those with favorable gederbased performace over istrumets with ufavorable, mixed, or ukow geder-based performace. What do we wat to accomplish? What are the decisios we wat to make? Do we wat to do a iitial screeig or a assessmet? Are we tryig to fid a istrumet to do a iitial screeig to decide who might eed further assessmet, or are we doig a assessmet to determie who eeds treatmet or followup care? Are we iterested i assessig a sigle factor or a host of factors? Are we iter ested i screeig for either substace abuse or suicide risk or for multiple metal health risks, such as psychosocial fuctioig across a variety of cotexts? Who do we wat to assess every child referred or a certai subgroup? Are we goig to admiister this istrumet to every referred child or just those who meet certai criteria or are flagged by a screeig tool? What will be the source of the iformatio iformatio i the case file or a per- soal iterview? If a iterview, with whom? How accessible are the parties beig iterviewed, particularly if we are ot iterviewig the youth who is cetral to the case? Will it be easy to fold the iterview protocol ito the ogoig system processig? How hard will it be to actually itegrate the istrumet ito ogoig policies ad procedures? Who will admiister the istrumet? Will admiistratio ivolve may staff withi the system? Will it ivolve geeral itake staff, case supervisio staff, or specialists? What kids of special traiig will these staff eed? Will admiistratio be cotracted outside to a special vedor? Has the istrumet we are cosiderig actually bee used i a juveile justice populatio? Has it bee used o girls? How well does the istrumet work for various racial ad ethic populatios? Is the istrumet culturally appropriate for the types of cliets we serve? Has the istrumet bee ormed or validated? If so, o what populatio? Was the sample represetative? Has the istrumet bee show to be reliable ad valid? I other places that have used the istrumet, has there bee agreemet o scorig betwee staff admiisterig the istrumet? Does the istrumet provide cosistet results whe admiistered multiple times? How difficult is it to determie what the istrumet is askig? Does it measure what it is supposed to measure? What are the costs of purchasig or usig the istrumet? Is it i the public domai, or must it be purchased? What are the startup or per-use costs? What are the costs associated with traiig existig staff or hirig traied staff? Stregth-based istrumets. Juveile justice practitioers ad policymakers are showig icreasig iterest i stregth-based istrumets that emerged from the drug-prevetio movemet of the 1960s ad were supported by the positive psychology movemet i the 1990s. These istrumets measure both egative ad positive iflueces o a youth s behavior by icludig protective factors to assess the level of risk for deliquet behavior. This approach represets a paradigm shift from a medical model focusig o problem assessmet ad remediatio to a model stressig the developmet of assets. Stregth-based istrumets ca create a well-balaced assessmet by expadig, stregtheig, ad improvig the juveile justice system s capacity to iclude the positive factors that affect a youth ad the youth s family, peers, ad commuity i additio to accoutig for risk factors. Local validatio. A jurisdictio should ot use a istrumet developed i a differet jurisdictio without subsequet validatio i its ow populatio. Practitioers must locally validate istrumets because the statistics used to develop a istrumet will fit the give distributio of a sample. Additioally, the specific scores assiged to idividual items or questios ad the total score will better reflect jurisdictiospecific policies ad characteristics if the istrumet has bee validated i the local populatio. Noetheless, adoptig extat istrumets is a feasible ad practical approach if The istrumet was developed through a adequate research 8

9 UUderstadig ad Respodig to Girls Deliquecy process that used appropriate validatio techiques whe tested i its origial jurisdictio. The ew jurisdictio begis to collect data so that the istrumet ca be validated with its ow populatio. Cost. Despite the obvious expeses associated with commercially available istrumets, they should ot be automatically dismissed, especially cosiderig that may of the geder-appropriate istrumets idetified as favorable i this review have bee published commercially. These istrumets come with certai beefits, icludig that they Typically have extesive research behid them. Frequetly offer custom ormig or the developmet of jurisdictioad populatio-specific scores. Ofte allow for computerizatio of idividual scorig. May provide for staff traiig. Practitioers must weigh the beefits of usig commercially available istrumets agaist the sometimes cosiderable costs. Expeses ca iclude the origial purchase, admiistratio costs for each idividual assessed, ad the cost of traiig staff or cotractig with traied professioals to admiister the istrumet. Usig a istrumet i the public domai (i.e., a free istrumet) may also come with some costs. Costs may be associated with local validatio should a jurisdictio choose to implemet a istrumet i the public domai for which geder performace is ukow. Whe decidig whether to ivest i a commercial istrumet or use a free istrumet, practitioers will eed to assess a wide variety of cost cosideratios ad weigh these expeses agaist the cosequeces of ot cosiderig geder performace at all. Coclusio The iformatio cotaied i this bulleti is meat to be a useful additio to the resources already available to practitioers, which iclude olie ad published istrumet reviews. Examiig geder issues across a wide variety of istrumets has bee a iitial step i documetig what is kow about geder ad highlightig what remais ukow. Although the primary audiece of this bulleti is juveile justice practitioers, researchers ad istrumet developers iterested i effective measuremet may also fid it useful. Researchers ad istrumet developers may wat to esure that geder-based iformatio is clearly preseted i their research publicatios, as well as i istrumet mauals ad Web sites. This will make it easier for practitioers to determie which istrumets work best for girls. Edotes 1. The impetus for this icreased focus was the 1992 reauthorizatio of the Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio Act of 1974, which required states to provide details regardig their plas for addressig geder bias. This Act, which govers OJJDP s operatios, was reauthorized most recetly i The 2002 Act specifies that state plas addressig the use of Title II Formula ad Block Grats should iclude a pla for providig eeded geder-specific services for the prevetio ad treatmet of juveile deliquecy [42 U.S.C. 5633(a)(7)(B)(ii)]. 2. I geeral, the distictio betwee sex ad geder is that sex is biologically determied as either male or female, whereas geder refers to the psychological, social, ad cultural aspects of beig male or female. I this bulleti, we follow the covetio of usig girls whe speakig of the specific group of cocer, but also use geder to refer to the more geeral cocept of male/female idetity. 3. OJJDP asked the Girls Study Group to examie risk ad eeds assessmet tools used for deliquecy prevetio, itervetio, or treatmet purposes ad to determie their applicability for girls i light of the Group s fidigs. This review focuses o istrumet performace as it relates to geder oly. A full istrumet review could cover a wide variety of topics to determie the potetial usefuless of a istrumet, icludig its purpose, whether it is a static or chage measure, the costructs measured, the demographic ad geographic represetativeess of the sample used to develop the istrumet, psychometrics (how reliable ad valid the istrumet is), ad degree of specificity ad sesitivity. A full review would also address more practical iformatio such as readig level, available laguages, umber of items, time to admiister, cost/ availability, required traiig, origial ad revised publicatio dates, ad versio history. Although some of this iformatio will be available o the compaio Web site, a review of this depth was beyod the scope iteded by OJJDP for GSG. 4. The treatmet-focused istrumets ted to be ormed, whereas the risk assessmet istrumets ted to be validated. 9

10 Girls Study Group 5. The term validatio is also used have bee developed for or tested whe describig treatmet-focused i juveile justice populatios. istrumets, but serves a differet I such istaces, the beefits of purpose i this case. I geeral, usig a stadardized istrumet validatio refers to the process of developed for aother populatio determiig whether a istru- may outweigh the risks of usig a met measures what it is supposed istrumet that was ot specifito measure. For treatmet-focused cally iteded for use with juveile istrumets, validatio determies deliquets. This is especially true how well the istrumet ideti- if the stadardized istrumet is fies the eeds or coditios it was geder appropriate. developed to idetify or diagose. For risk assessmet istrumets, 7. These teded to be istrumets validatio determies how well the idetified by practitioers ad istrumet predicts risk. istrumets metioed oly by acroym i article abstracts. 6. Assessig deliquet youth with istrumets that were origially 8. Although these combiatio istru iteded for geeral populatios mets ca scree for treatmet may ot always be appropriate, eeds, they primarily determie ad the cosequeces of doig so risk, which is what separates them are ukow. However, there may from the pure eeds assessmet be istaces i which a istrusectio. istrumets described i the ext met of a specific type is eeded, but o istrumets of that type Refereces Bowes, D., ad Albert, R.L State Challege Activities. Bulleti. Washigto, DC: U.S. Departmet of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio. Grisso, T., Vicet, G., ad Seagrave, D Metal Health Screeig ad Assessmet i Juveile Justice. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Hoge, R.D., ad Adrews, D.A Assessig the Youthful Offeder: Issues ad Techiques. New York, NY: Pleum Press. Zah, M.A., Brumbaugh, S., Steffesmeier, D., Feld, B.C., Morash, M., Chesey-Lid, M., Miller, J., Paye, A.A., Gottfredso, D.C., ad Kruttschitt, C Violece by Teeage Girls: Treds ad Cotext. Bulleti. Washigto, DC: U.S. Departmet of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio. Ackowledgmets The Girls Study Group is a group of multidiscipliary experts OJJDP has coveed to assess curret kowledge about the patters ad causes of female deliquecy ad desig appropriate itervetio programs based o this iformatio. This bulleti was writte by Susa Brumbaugh (RTI Iteratioal), Jeifer L. Hardiso Walters (RTI Iteratioal), ad the late Laura A. Witerfield (The Urba Istitute). The authors wish to thak Nahama Broer, Jacob Day, Nicole Horstma, Eri Keedy, Kelly McCue, Kara Riehma, Adrew Ritchey, Jeifer Schode, Moica Sheppard, Tara Warer, ad Siobha Youg of RTI Iteratioal ad Mary Pouli of the Justice Research ad Statistics Associatio for assistace i preparig this bulleti. The lead authors would especially like to recogize the efforts of Laura Witerfield, who was a itegral part of the research team ad cotiued to be ivolved i revisios throughout her 18-moth-log treatmet for cacer, util her utimely death i December This bulleti supersedes the earlier versio released i This bulleti was prepared uder cooperative agreemet umber 2004 JF FX K001 from the Office of Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio (OJJDP), U.S. Departmet of Justice. Poits of view or opiios expressed i this documet are those of the authors ad do ot ecessarily represet the official positio or policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Departmet of Justice. The Office of Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio is a compoet of the Office of Justice Programs, which also icludes the Bureau of Justice Assistace; the Bureau of Justice Statistics; the Commuity Capacity Developmet Office; the Natioal Istitute of Justice; the Office for Victims of Crime; ad the Office of Sex Offeder Setecig, Moitorig, Apprehedig, Registerig, ad Trackig (SMART). 10

11 Why Wait for the News? Sig Up for OJJDP s Olie Subscriptios Fid out fast what you eed to kow by subscribig to oe or both of OJJDP s free electroic services. Do you wat it ow? JuvJust s iformatio two to three times per week from OJJDP ad the field about ew publicatios, fudig opportuities, ad upcomig cofereces. Do you wat it soo, ad i a little more detail? The OJJDP a Glace bimothly electroic ewsletter covers may of the same topics as JuvJusT plus recet OJJDP activities but i more depth. It s easy: go to OJJDP s home page ( ad click o the subscribe liks to JuvJusT ad/or OJJDP a Glace. submit questios to Office of Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio Office of Justice Programs U.S. Departmet of Justice

12 U.S. Departmet of Justice Office of Justice Programs Office of Juveile Justice ad Deliquecy Prevetio Washigto, DC Official Busiess Pealty for Private Use $300 *NCJ~226531* PRESORTED STANDARD POSTAGE & FEES PAID DOJ/OJJDP PERmIT NO. G 91 Girls Study Group NCJ