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: 205581 Find in a Library
Title: San Diego County Probation Department's Repeat Offender Prevention Program Final Evaluation Report
Author(s): Lisbeth Howard; Gina Misch; Cynthia Burke Ph.D.; Susan Pennell
Corporate Author: San Diego Assoc of Governments (SANDAG)
United States of America
Date Published: October 2002
Page Count: 189
Sponsoring Agency: San Diego Assoc of Governments (SANDAG)
San Diego, CA 92101
Sale Source: San Diego Assoc of Governments (SANDAG)
401 B Street
Suite 800
San Diego, CA 92101
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Program/Project Evaluation
Format: Document (Online)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This report presents findings from the outcome and process evaluations of the San Diego County Probation Department's (California) Repeat Offender Prevention Program (ROPP), which is intended to reduce delinquent and criminal behavior among juveniles at high risk of becoming serious chronic offenders.
Abstract: San Diego County was one of eight California counties that received funding from the State for the ROPP. ROPP has targeted first-time probationers 15 1/2 years old and younger who evidence risk factors for becoming serious, chronic offenders. The ROPP evaluation for all participating counties consisted of randomly assigning all eligible juveniles to ROPP (treatment group) or to standard probation (comparison group). These groups were then compared on the following outcomes: number, content, and disposition of subsequent petitions to declare the juvenile a ward of the juvenile court; number of days served in any local or State correctional facilities; number of days of school attendance during the current or most recent semester; and grade-point average for the most recently completed school semester. For each of these outcomes, the groups were compared at 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-month intervals from intake. Between May 1997 and December 2001, 196 cases were assigned to the San Diego County ROPP treatment group and 171 to the comparison group. The process evaluation included facilitating program replication by documenting implementation, as well as collecting qualitative information that would place the findings of the impact evaluation in context. The results of the impact evaluation showed variable results in anticipated outcomes. Although the ROPP sample did not have fewer filed or sustained petitions, ROPP participants were more likely than the comparison group to receive probation violations, which suggests the increased level of accountability that accompanied increased supervision. Other outcome measures were also positive in at least one of the four reassessment periods. Among the most effective ROPP features were the maintenance of a small client-to-staff ratio, having centrally located services, using graduated sanctions and immediate responses, providing intensive alcohol and drug-related treatment services, and having an onsite court school. Program features that were ineffective were including youth who would have been better served through programs that focus on specific risk factors and relying upon services outside the target community. Problems encountered included the lack of parental support for program efforts, the lack of continued collaboration and communication among and within agencies, and limited space for staff and clients. Future plans are described, and recommendations are offered for other counties that might pursue a ROPP. 2 tables, 25 figures, 2 references, and appended ROPP sample and comparison group descriptives, statistical significance test results, and data collection instruments
Main Term(s): Juvenile delinquency prevention programs
Index Term(s): California; Habitual offenders; Intensive juvenile probation; Juvenile probation; Juvenile probation effectiveness; Serious juvenile offenders
Note: Downloaded May 26, 2004.
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.