skip navigation


Abstract Database

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

To download this abstract, check the box next to the NCJ number then click the "Back To Search Results" link. Then, click the "Download" button on the Search Results page. Also see the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 196511 Find in a Library
Title: Evaluation of the Implementation of Juvenile Justice Reforms in Illinois
Journal: On Good Authority  Volume:5  Issue:5  Dated:June 2002  Pages:1-4
Author(s): Timothy Lavery
Date Published: June 2002
Page Count: 4
Type: Report (Annual/Periodic)
Format: News/Media
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This document provides the results of an evaluation of the Juvenile Justice Reform Provisions throughout the State of Illinois.
Abstract: The Juvenile Justice Reform Provisions of 1998 made changes to the juvenile justice system and the Illinois Juvenile Court Act. One change was the addition of a new policy statement to the Act, which adopted balanced and restorative justice (BARJ) as a guiding philosophy of the juvenile justice system. A survey was conducted of juvenile justice officials from different parts of the system, including police, probation officers, prosecutors, judges, and public defenders. These results focus on survey respondents’ knowledge and awareness of the reform provisions and BARJ. BARJ encourages juvenile offenders to provide direct reparations to victims and to the community. This allows victims and the community to become directly involved in the process of determining juvenile dispositions. Of the various professions in the juvenile justice system, results showed that probation officers were most likely to have attended a reform provision training session, followed by state’s attorneys. Fewer than 60 percent of the respondents from each profession strongly agreed or agreed that they were knowledgeable on the reform provisions. There is a similar pattern of results for overall knowledge of BARJ. Some juvenile justice professionals, when asked about the purpose of the reform provisions, focused on the punishment or accountability aspects rather than the aspects consistent with BARJ. A minority of Illinois countries has convened juvenile justice councils, which are collaborative groups of juvenile justice professionals that come together to address juvenile crime in their county. A minority of counties has also developed teen courts or community mediation programs as a result of the reform provisions. In teen court programs, peer volunteers rather than adults determine juvenile dispositions. In community mediation programs, community members determine juvenile dispositions. 2 figures
Main Term(s): Illinois; Juvenile justice reform
Index Term(s): Community service programs; Intermediate sanctions; Juvenile court reform; Juvenile justice policies; Juvenile restitution; Restitution programs; Victim compensation
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.