skip navigation


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

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. 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: 201806 Find in a Library
Title: Findings From the Philadelphia Detention Utilization and Planning Study
Corporate Author: National Council on Crime and Delinquency
United States of America
Date Published: January 19, 2001
Page Count: 30
Sponsoring Agency: National Council on Crime and Delinquency
Oakland, CA 94612
Sale Source: National Council on Crime and Delinquency
1970 Broadway, Suite 500
Oakland, CA 94612
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This report describes the processes and the results of an approach designed by the National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD) to help juvenile justice officials in Philadelphia assess current juvenile detention-use patterns, the projected need for secure beds, and various program options.
Abstract: NCCD's detention-use and planning model is organized into six phases: identify issues, problems, and goals; collect, prepare, and analyze detention population data; develop a forecasting model for planning purposes; identify program and policy options; examine the potential impact of alternative policy scenarios; and develop a comprehensive detention-use plan. Based on this model, data were developed and analyzed for Philadelphia's juvenile detention system. Data were obtained for the following areas: baseline projection of bed space needs under the status quo; the number of youth detained, released to alternatives, and not detained; any differences in detention status between males and females; the length of time youths are held in detention; the length of time to process a case from intake to disposition; the characteristics of youth who fail to appear at a court hearing; and the characteristics of youth who reoffend prior to disposition. Seven recommendations were developed from the data analysis. First, determine the eligibility and ineligibility criteria for alternatives to detention and institute a policy to place youths directly in those programs at intake. Second, develop, test, implement, and revise a nondiscriminatory detention risk assessment instrument. Third, use the new residential beds for girls wisely. Fourth, scrutinize all alternative-to-detention programs to assess their ability to promote court-hearing compliance. Fifth, create a court-operated notification program for all court appearances. Sixth, review existing programs and modify or create new programs to reduce predisposition reoffending. Seventh, shorten case processing time where appropriate. Action steps are outlined for each of these recommendations. 11 tables and an appended table of the most serious offense types of detention admissions
Main Term(s): Juvenile detention
Index Term(s): Alternatives to institutionalization; Juvenile detention reform; Juvenile justice planning; Pennsylvania
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.