Digital.Maag Repository

A descriptive study and comparative analysis : does RECLAIM Ohio work in Jefferson County? /

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Knight, J. Douglas. en_US
dc.contributor.author Youngstown State University. Criminal Justice Dept. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2011-01-31T14:17:57Z
dc.date.accessioned 2019-09-08T02:29:55Z
dc.date.available 2011-01-31T14:17:57Z
dc.date.available 2019-09-08T02:29:55Z
dc.date.created 2001 en_US
dc.date.issued 2001 en_US
dc.identifier 50277200 en_US
dc.identifier.other b1896008x en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://jupiter.ysu.edu/record=b1896008 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1989/6183
dc.description ix, 123 leaves : ill. ; 29 cm. en_US
dc.description Thesis (M.S.)--Youngstown State University, 2001. en_US
dc.description Includes bibliographical references (leaves 78-82). en_US
dc.description.abstract Juvenile justice policies in America have become a central focal point for many professionals and practitioners within the criminal justice system. Since federal legislation was passed in 1974 that enacted the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, there has been tremendous pressure to implement rehabilitative guidelines, along with the already existent "Just Desserts" type policies. Promoting public safety, by reducing the risk through incapacitation of violent juvenile offenders, is a. primary concern. Is there enough being done by federal, state, and local governments to promote prevention before a juvenile becomes violent? Due to an increase in violent behavior issues, prison over-crowding problems, limited budgetary resources, and conservative ideals, program policy and evaluation characteristics for state mandated juvenile justice programs today must try to blend rehabilitative and "Just Desserts" sentencing for their delinquents. This descriptive study focused on issues that have been of a consistent concern within the juvenile justice profession. The issue that was particularly focused upon was increased rehabilitative programming measures verses deterrence mechanisms as a method to reducing recidivism activity among our delinquent population. Another issue that was evaluated was concern over whether or not our recidivism activity was effective for our minority-youth population. In addition to those issues, this study provided a comparative analysis between Jefferson County and other Ohio counties using the most current evaluation of Ohio's juvenile justice programming guidelines (known as RECLAIM Ohio). A detailed explanation of Ohio's existent juvenile justice program is presented and why there is a need to analyze that program. Finally this study examines a random sample of minority/non-minority adjudicated delinquent male/female youth from one of Ohio's medium sized counties, Jefferson. This study provides insight and an understanding as to whether or not, Ohio's current juvenile justice policies are on track in reducing recidivism rates among its juvenile population within its local communities. Among the most important findings within this study is that the youth selected for this study, who has prior records, were less likely to re-offend upon completion of a RECLAIM, Ohio program. Sixty-eight percent of the male minority felony offender sample population had a prior record; 50 percent were prior felony offenders. Forty-five percent of the total minority male youth group was selected as felony offenders for this study. Only 26 percent of the total minority male population who completed a RECLAIM Ohio program re-offended as a felony offender. The non-minority male felony offender group, the largest of the four felony offender groups, had a prior record (39%). Nineteen percent were prior felony offenders. Forty-eight percent of the total group was selected as a felony offender. Sixteen percent of the total non-minority male sample population re-offended as a felony offender. Of the non-minority female sample population, 33 percent of the sample had a prior record. There was only one non-minority female that had a prior felony offender. Twenty-two percent of the total group was selected as a felony offender for this study. None of the non-minority females re-offended as a felony offender. According to the data collected for this study, adjudicated youth within Jefferson County, upon being terminated from a RECLAIM Ohio program, are significantly less likely to re-offend in the same capacity as the offense that they w~re adjudicated. Although recidivism activity for the felony random sample was at 45 percent, only 18 percent, of the 45 percent to re-offend, committed a felony offender. The recidivism rate activity for the misdemeanor youth sample was 34 percent; only 11 percent of those youth had re-offended as a felony offender. These percentages indicate that RECLAIM Ohio, within Jefferson County, has been effective in reducing the level of delinquent behavior for youth who complete their RECLAIM Ohio programming requirements. en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibility by J. Douglas Knight. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries Master's Theses no. 0733 en_US
dc.subject.classification Master's Theses no. 0733 en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Ohio. Department of Youth Services.#Juvenile corrections--Ohio--Jefferson County. en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Teenagers--Services for--Ohio--Jefferson County. en_US
dc.title A descriptive study and comparative analysis : does RECLAIM Ohio work in Jefferson County? / en_US
dc.type Thesis en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search Digital.Maag


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account