Preventing and Reducing Juvenile Delinquency: A Comprehensive Framework

Books

James C. Howell

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • Dedication

    To my dear mom, Ethel Howell, the sweetest mother on Earth

    Copyright

    View Copyright Page

    Preface

    It is useful for readers to know the historical context of this book. The United States is currently approaching the 40th year of a general emphasis on punishment as the main instrument of criminal justice policy. The main impact of this trend on the criminal justice system can be viewed in the imprisonment trend line (Chapter 11, Figure 11.3). Of course, the “get tough on crime” movement worked insofar as increased imprisonment was the immediate objective. A prison-building binge naturally followed (Schlosser, 1998). Unfortunately, parole was largely abolished at the same time. Predictably, the current crisis is the return of adult inmates to society in droves and unrehabilitated—as many as 700,000 of them each year (Sabol, Minton, & Harrison, 2007).

    Juvenile justice policies were influenced significantly by the punishment trend in the criminal justice system (Mears, 2006) but not to the extent of the criminal justice apparatus. A major factor is a “habit of the heart” that continues to guide juvenile justice (Cullen, Bose, Jonson, & Unnever, 2007), meaning that most adults are unwavering in their belief that juveniles can be rehabilitated—from personal experience if nothing else. Yet the juvenile justice system was severely affected by the punishment trend in the adult system, because it is joined at the hip to the criminal justice system (by police and prosecutors on the front end), and by ill-informed outsiders who concocted an imaginary forthcoming horde of juvenile “superpredators” and a “wave” of violence, creating a “bloodbath.” This prospect was scary (see Chapter 1).

    The federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, where I worked at the time of the punishment surge, became concerned about the knee-jerk reactions to juvenile delinquency that were growing in the late 1980s and early 1990s. New punitive policies clearly were bringing more and more young offenders into the juvenile justice system, yet the new offenders did not seem to be more dangerous. A colleague (John J. Wilson) and I set out to formulate a balanced approach for the juvenile justice system that might appease conservatives (with graduated sanctions) and at the same time draw support from liberals for delinquency prevention and rehabilitation of juvenile offenders. We called it the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders (Wilson & Howell, 1993).

    This framework was developed at the height of moral panic over delinquency. U.S. Department of Justice policy at the time called for harsh sanctions for first-time juvenile offenders, a position stated in a policy paper issued by U.S. Attorney General William Barr. The policy paper contended that the best way to prevent juvenile offenders from becoming adult career criminals is

    by imposing tough, smart sanctions that are carefully tailored for the first-time juvenile offender…. Such punishment actually benefits the juvenile more than lenient sanctions, or no sanctions at all. Excessive leniency can result in additional transgressions, culminating in a life of crime. … A juvenile justice system that is too lenient can become, in effect, a conveyor belt for career criminals. (McBride, Scott, Schlesinger, Dillingham, & Buckman, 1992, p. 26)

    The policy paper recommended that states “establish a range of tough juvenile sanctions that emphasize discipline and responsibility to deter nonviolent first-time offenders from further crimes…. These sanctions should include the option of institutional settings…. One possibility is boot camps” (McBride et al, 1992, p. 27). In addition, the policy paper recommended that those making up the small group of chronic violent juvenile offenders should be treated as adults, contending that they “are as hardened as any adult offender” (p. 28).

    The Comprehensive Strategy shifted the U.S. Department of Justice's orientation to include prevention and its intervention policy to give priority to juvenile offenders who have histories of serious or violent offenses. This position was based on self-report studies showing that only a fraction of all juvenile offenders are serious chronic offenders (Elliott, Huizinga, & Morse, 1986) or violent offenders (Hamparian, Schuster, Dinitz, & Conrad, 1978). The attorney general's policy paper ignored the issue of prevention; in contrast, the Comprehensive Strategy placed top priority on prevention, especially through the strengthening of social institutions, beginning with families.

    Needless to say, the Comprehensive Strategy was not released from the U.S. Department of Justice until the value of a balanced approach was seen. It was then implemented, at least in part, in more than 50 localities in 20 states across the country.

    This book contains information that students of juvenile justice, laypersons, lawmakers, policy makers, and practitioners should find useful in designing strategic plans that address juvenile delinquency. Part I begins with an examination of the myths about juvenile delinquency and the juvenile justice system (Chapter 1) and the ensuing moral panic these myths stimulated (Chapter 2). Both of these phenomena are contrasted with empirical data on juvenile delinquency trends (Chapter 3), demonstrating that neither the myths nor panic was justified.

    The chapters in Part II feature the research base on juvenile delinquency and gang activity. I present a research-based theory of delinquency and gang involvement in Chapter 4. It is followed by reviews of the research on juvenile offender careers (Chapter 5) and youth gangs (Chapter 6). This section concludes with a review of research-based programs for addressing gang problems (Chapter 7).

    Part III features the Comprehensive Strategy framework (Chapter 10), which can be used to design and reform juvenile justice systems. It is important to recognize that the Comprehensive Strategy is not a prescriptive program; rather, it is a self-empowering framework that guides states, cities, and communities in assessing their own delinquency and gang problems and selecting their own solutions from the array of evidence-based programs and strategies.

    My presentation of the Comprehensive Strategy is preceded by an overview of the latest research on principles and characteristics of evidence-based programs (Chapter 8), followed by the most effective services (Chapter 9). The Comprehensive Strategy continuum from prevention to reentry is then illustrated with programs and strategies. The book concludes with current information on what doesn't work in preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency and gang problems (Chapter 11). The final chapter examines in detail the worst practice in the “get tough on juveniles” movement: the transfer of juveniles to the criminal justice system.

    A personal disclaimer is in order: To pretend that I am a dispassionate observer of the juvenile justice system would be misleading. The juvenile court system in the United States was founded on the recognition that children are not little adults and, in all justice and fairness, should not be treated as such (Tanenhaus, 2004). Because of their diminished capacity, deviant children and adolescents should be given room to reform, to keep their life chances intact. Thus the juvenile justice system was created as an alternative to the harsh, punishment-oriented criminal justice system, whose prisons serve as schools for crime and whose failure to rehabilitate criminal offenders disqualifies it as a model that should be used for juvenile offenders. The juvenile court is a unique American invention in the late 19th century that has since been replicated around the world. As Zimring (2002) notes, “No developed nation tries its youngest offenders in its regular criminal courts…. No legal institution in Anglo-American legal history has achieved such universal acceptance among the diverse legal systems of the industrialized democracies” (p. 142). How a society treats its young is an important measure of its claim to civilization. Juvenile courts are a cornerstone of our society.

    Acknowledgments

    I would be remiss if I did not personally express a debt of appreciation to several colleagues who contributed directly or indirectly to this book. John J. Wilson, former head of the OJJDP, earned my respect for several things. His steadfast support of the principles and legal requirements of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 is admirable. He remains the strongest advocate of juvenile justice that I have had the pleasure of knowing. His example inspired me during my tenure at OJJDP and made my collegial work with him all the more rewarding. As I explain in the preface to this book, we collaborated in developing the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. We regularly communicate on important developments in juvenile justice and continue to collaborate whenever the opportunity presents itself.

    Mark Lipsey helped me understand meta-analysis and the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches to moving research into practice. He recently created the Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol for this purpose. It is an evidence-based tool that scores current programs against research-based guidelines with uncanny precision, which I never even imagined would be possible. This brilliant creation of his has the potential to advance evidence-based programming in juvenile justice by leaps and bounds because it can be applied on a statewide basis using automated client tracking data. This unique system permits program evaluations at will. I'm thrilled to be a partner in his pioneering work. In all fairness, he should be credited as co-author of Chapters 8 and 9 of this book.

    John P. Moore, director of the National Youth Gang Center, has created an environment at the center that gives me many opportunities for rewarding gang research, on both the underlying causes of gang involvement and practical solutions to gang problems. Col. Moore (I address him thus out of respect for his distinguished career of public service in military intelligence) ingenuously led skilled technicians at our parent organization (the Institute for Intergovernmental Research) in creating a prototype Internet-based application for communities to use in strategic planning to address gang and delinquency problems (the Strategic Planning Tool: http://www.iir.com/nygc/tool/). Led by the White House, nine federal agencies collaborated in expanding our prototype into the tool that is now available, the Helping America's Youth Community Guide (http://guide.helpingamericasyouth.gov/). I have provided guidance to students in using it in conjunction with material in Chapters 710. First Lady Laura Bush has introduced the Community Guide across the United States in regional gatherings. For the first time in history, a user-friendly yet evidence-based tool is accessible on the Internet that any community can use, free of charge, to guide an assessment of their own delinquency and gang problems and build a continuum of research-based programs.

    My presentation of gang research in this book has benefited enormously from work with other colleagues at the National Youth Gang Center, Arlen Egley and Christina O'Donnell, and also David Curry at the University of Missouri, St. Louis, and Deborah Weisel at North Carolina State University. I also owe a special debt of gratitude to Marcus Felson, who kindly assisted me in presentations of his brilliant insights into youth gangs.

    The entire juvenile justice field is indebted to Rolf Loeber (Pittsburgh), Terry Thornberry (Rochester), and David Huizinga (Denver) as the directors of the three major U.S. longitudinal studies of the causes and correlates of delinquency (see “In Focus” Box 5.1 in Chapter 5). These studies were launched 20 years ago by the OJJDR in its Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency. These three landmark studies are the most comprehensive prospective studies of the causes and correlates of juvenile delinquency in the world. More than 200 published reports have emanated from them, and I draw on a number of them in this book. In this connection, I am honored to serve as special advisor to the Life History Research Program at the University of Pittsburgh that Rolf and Magda Stouthamer-Loeber expertly direct. They recently began the third longitudinal project in their Life History Research Program, the Pittsburgh Girls Study (http://www.wpic.pitt.edu/research/famhist/index.htm). All four of these great scholars have generously assisted me in my research for this book.

    Many others have kindly facilitated my research for this book. David Farrington (“Sir David,” I prefer to call him) thoughtfully provides me copies of his outstanding scholarly works. Among his many criminology hats, Prof. Farrington is past president of the American Society of Criminology. He and his co-author in systematic reviews to identify evidence-based programs, Brandon Welsh, have generously supplied me with their valuable and numerous publications.

    Dan Oates, library director, and Suzanne Sinclair, librarian, Health Sciences Library, First Health of the Carolinas, in Pinehurst, North Carolina, assisted my research greatly by obtaining publications from other libraries and various sources.

    I also thank the outside reviewers for valuable feedback on the first edition of this book. These thoughtful people included Kelly Asmussen, Lee Ellen Ayers, Colleen Clarke, Dorinda Dowis, Price Foster, Denise Herz, David Kotajarvi, Alfred Montalvo, and Sean Varano. In addition, Russell Smandych volunteered some particularly helpful suggestions.

    I owe a special debt of gratitude to Secretary George Sweat, North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice; Rob Lubitz, Director, Juvenile Justice Services Division, Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts; and Steven Hornsby, Deputy Commissioner for Juvenile Justice, Tennessee Department of Children's Services. These visionary gentlemen gave me and Mark Lipsey the opportunity to work with them in developing and pilot testing his Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol. Because of their unwavering commitment to effective juvenile justice programs and to a comprehensive system, the experience of working with them gave vitality to this book.

    I am indebted to my wife and life-course partner, Karen, for her steadfast support of my work and for her genuine interest in it. I also continually benefit professionally from a close, collegial relationship with our daughter, Megan, a research assistant and data analyst in the North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, particularly from her keen eye for important developments in the field.

    As is the case with any researcher's book, this one draws on other research that I have published since the first edition, in particular the following works:

    Howell, J. C. (2003). Diffusing research into practice using the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1, 219–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204003001003001
    Howell, J. C. (2006). The impact of gangs on communities. NYGC Bulletin No. 2. Tallahassee, FL: National Youth Gang Center.
    Howell, J. C. (2007). Menacing or mimicking? Realities of youth gangs. The Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 58, 9–20.
    Howell, J. C., & Egley, A. Jr. (2005). Gangs in small towns and rural counties. NYGC Bulletin No. 1. Tallahassee, FL: National Youth Gang Center.
    Howell, J. C., & Egley, A. Jr. (2005). Moving risk factors into developmental theories of gang membership. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3, 334–354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204005278679
    Howell, J. C., & Howell, M. Q. (2007). Violent juvenile delinquency: Changes, consequences, and implications. In D.Flannery, A.Vazonsyi, & I.Waldman (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of violent behavior (pp. 501–518). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.026
    Weisel, D. L., & Howell, J. C. (2007). Comprehensive gang assessment: A report to the Durham Police Department and Durham County Sheriff's Office. Durham, NC: Durham Police Department.

    I gratefully acknowledge these publishers for my use of material in this book.

    James C. (Buddy)HowellPinehurst, North Carolina
  • Concluding Observations

    We must get the right service to the right kid at the right time.

    —John J. Wilson,

    coauthor of the Comprehensive Strategy

    The past 20 years have been a tumultuous period for the American juvenile justice system. Although many have claimed that a general “epidemic” of juvenile violence occurred in the United States from the mid-1980s through the early 1990s, research has shown that this did not actually happen—not an overall epidemic. To be sure, there were increases in violence in some areas, but not in others, and there was no large overall increase. The increase in homicide and suicide with guns was the high-rate increase or “epidemic” component. The most recent moral panic over juvenile delinquency and the myths associated with it—such as that an epidemic of youth violence was taking place and that a new breed of juvenile superpredators was emerging—led to dramatic changes in juvenile justice policies and practices in the 1980s and 1990s, and their influence is still in evidence.

    Significant changes have occurred in the boundaries of the juvenile justice system and in policies and procedures for handling juvenile offenders within it (Bishop, 2006; Fagan & Zimring, 2000). Large numbers of juvenile offenders have been removed from the juvenile justice system and placed in the criminal justice system. Blended sentence provisions have been enacted into law along with offense-based determinant and mandatory minimum sentences. Punitive measures are used more widely than ever before. New laws have designated more juveniles as serious offenders, brought more minor offenders into the system, and extended periods of confinement in juvenile correctional facilities. One comparison illustrates the overall trend. From 1990 through 1999, the total number of juvenile arrests for violent offenses decreased by 55%, and juvenile arrests for serious property offenses decreasedby 23% (Snyder, 2000). Nevertheless, during approximately the same period, the total number of referrals to juvenile court increased by 44% (Stahl, 2001). Juvenile court intake and probation caseloads are overwhelming, and detention centers and juvenile reformatories have become and remain overcrowded, particularly with minor offenders. Minority youth, particularly black youngsters, are bearing the brunt of the punitive juvenile justice reforms that the panic over juvenile violence has wrought, although Latino and Latina youth are catching up (Villarruel & Walker, 2002). This is the general context in which juvenile justice systems across the United States currently operate. A growing number of state juvenile justice systems are now paying the price for violating the civil rights of confined people that are guaranteed under the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act. Since 2000, U.S. Department of Justice investigations have been made of 23 juvenile justice facilities in more than a dozen states (U.S. Department of Justice, 2007). Once again, juveniles are “victims of change” (Finestone, 1976).

    In Chapter 10 of this book I described and illustrated a comprehensive framework for integrating the various segments of the juvenile delinquency prevention field and juvenile justice systems in a way that can restore balance to these systems and refocus them on their fundamental mission. Delinquency prevention, effective early intervention, and a continuum of graduated sanctions linked with rehabilitation programs in the juvenile justice system are the main components of the Comprehensive Strategy. In the first level, delinquency prevention and early intervention programs are promoted as the most cost-effective approaches to dealing with juvenile delinquency. Emphasis is placed on intervening early with disruptive children and their families, and immediately when delinquency first occurs, to prevent child delinquents from becoming serious, violent, and chronic offenders. When other institutions fail to prevent delinquency, the juvenile justice system intervenes, at the second level, working with other agencies to reduce delinquency. The juvenile justice system naturally takes a developmental perspective in interventions with children or adolescents and their families, schools, and delinquent peer groups.

    The Comprehensive Strategy is a research-based framework that is grounded on information presented in Parts I and II of the book and on best practices and advanced management techniques that have been developed in the juvenile justice field over the past 25 years or more. I have used examples to illustrate the flexibility of the Comprehensive Strategy framework in several adaptations. Many more examples were documented in an earlier work (Howell, 2003b) that need not be repeated here.

    The Comprehensive Strategy empowers local professionals and citizens to conduct an assessment of their community's delinquency problem, select solutions they want to implement to address identified problems, and integrate the selected programs in an overall continuum of prevention and rehabilitation programs and strategies. This research-based, data-driven, and outcome-focused strategy is more likely to be effective than piecemeal approaches. For one thing, this strategy brings multiple interventions into play that address risk factors (for prevention purposes) in each of the developmental domains: family, school, peer group, community, and individual characteristics. Similarly, programs address treatment needs in each of these developmental domains.

    I described a continuum of effective prevention and early intervention programs in Chapter 9, and the principles behind them were presented in Chapter 8.1 chose not to describe treatment programs in detail in Chapter 9 because such descriptions rapidly become outdated. Moreover, these are now online and stored in electronic databases of rated programs that are regularly updated as new studies are reported. In addition, Lipsey's pioneering meta-analyses have led to the development of a very practical method for assessing existing program interventions against evidence-based practices, which also provides guidelines for engaging service providers in improving current programs to emulate best practices.

    Policy Change Proposals

    Three recent and profound developments reported in this book have turned the juvenile justice ship back on course. The first of these is new research on development of the adolescent brain, leading to the discovery that adolescents’ brains are far less developed than previously believed and that the brain is still developing during the teen years. This research reminds us of one of the key principles on which the juvenile justice system was founded: that children's developmental differences must be taken into account in how our society's institutions relate to them. The second profound development is the U.S. Supreme Court's 2005 decision (Roper v. Simmons) to prohibit executions of juvenile offenders. This decision realigns the United States with other developed countries that prohibit juvenile executions. Third, a systematic review of transfers of juveniles to the criminal justice system found that this policy does not pass the litmus test of reducing violence. Instead, “transferred juveniles are 34% more likely to be re-arrested for a violent or other crime than are juveniles retained” in the juvenile justice system (McGowan et al, 2007, p. S14).

    Together, these three developments remind us why the juvenile justice system was created. A fresh view of its history is available that illuminates its philosophical principles (Tanenhaus, 2004). The creators of the first juvenile courts based them on accumulated wisdom at that time, that children must be diverted from jails and prisons (schools for crime) maintained by the criminal justice system, that communities must be mobilized to reclaim offenders and prevent delinquency, that root causes of delinquency must be identified, and, of course, that the developmental differences between children, adolescents, and adults must be honored. These principles and the recent history of the juvenile justice system suggest several policy changes that, if made, could improve system operations considerably.

    Enormous amounts of juvenile justice system resources are wasted on the very large proportion of all juvenile offenders who will never become serious, violent, and chronic offenders. Lawmakers have gotten it backward in cracking down on first-time offenders, and this policy has overloaded juvenile courts, probation departments, and detention centers. We now know from several offender career studies that as many as two-thirds of all juvenile offenders will never become serious, violent, or chronic offenders. The necessary risk assessment technology is available today to sort these low-risk offenders out from the remainder so that they can receive the immediate sanctions and short-term program interventions that have proven effective with such juveniles.

    More gender-specific programming is needed in the juvenile justice system. Although most girls who become juvenile offenders take pathways to serious and violent delinquency that are similar to those taken by boys, it appears that a small proportion of girls may take a unique pathway to serious, violent, and chronic offender careers that winds through the juvenile justice system (see Chapter 5). Even though programs for serious and violent juvenile offenders appear to be as effective for girls as for boys (Lipsey & Wilson, 1998, p. 332), girls can benefit from gender-specific programs such as the following:

    • Programs that provide treatment for neglect and sexual and physical victimization
    • Programs that provide medical care for pregnant teens
    • Programs for unwed teenage mothers, including parent training and child care relief time
    • Programs that build and preserve the teen mother-child bond
    • Programs for sexually active females (and males)
    • Programs that include peer mediation to deal with conflicts concerning boyfriends and peer status

    Ideally, all state policies that allow the transfer of juveniles to the criminal justice system for criminal conviction and adult punishment should be ended. Aside from the fact that such policies are not the mark of a civilized society, the practice of exposing adolescents to adult courts and prisons is neither effective in reducing crime nor cost-effective. The criminal justice system does not have the capacity to treat or protect juveniles, and incarcerating juveniles in adult facilities is not effective in deterring crime.

    Those who have criticized the juvenile justice system for its alleged lack of due process claim that juveniles’ constitutional rights would be better protected in the criminal justice system (Feld, 1998a, 1999), but this has never proven to be true. Only about 5-10% of all criminal court cases proceed to trial, so only a small fraction of alleged offenders—less than 1 in 10—are afforded their constitutional process protections. Juveniles’ constitutional rights are far more likely to be irrelevant in criminal courts than they are in juvenile courts. More than one-half of all cases referred to juvenile courts are adjudicated (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006, p. 171), at which point almost all constitutional protections afforded to adults apply to juveniles.

    State legislatures should act immediately on the recommendations of the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (2007) regarding transfer of juveniles (see Box 12.2 in Chapter 12; also see Tonry, 2007, p. 4):

    • States that now set adult court jurisdiction at age 18 should keep it there, and other states should change their laws to restrict adult court jurisdiction to people 18 and older.
    • All laws providing for automatic jurisdiction in the adult courts for young people under age 18 charged with designated serious crimes should be repealed.
    • Laws permitting case-by-case transfers by prosecutors or criminal court judges should also be repealed. Until these are eliminated, juvenile court judges should make all transfer decisions.

    Adopting these recommendations would bring the United States into compliance with international standards and also reduce delinquency. Transferring juveniles from the juvenile justice system to the criminal justice system and confinement in prisons, where developmental and treatment programs are rare, drastically reduces their life chances, and this is simply morally wrong. By injecting common sense, laypersons often make points more simply and clearly than do academics. This observation made by the Reverend Thomas Masters is a case in point: “There's no way in the world you can receive a fair trial in an adult arena where you're looked upon as an adult when you have the mind of a child” (quoted in Zaczor, 2002, p. 7A).

    Other ineffective programs and practices should be abandoned as well (see Chapter 11). The use of detention for punishment purposes is one of these. This practice accomplishes nothing positive (i.e., it does not motivate youths to receive treatment), and research suggests that excessive use of detention may wipe out the positive effects of treatment programs. Generally, punitive detention includes the broad category of “shock incarceration” and programs such as Scared Straight and boot camps, which do not have the intended deterrence effect and may actually increase recidivism.

    Zero tolerance policies in schools are also ineffective and often make zero sense; for example, youths who are suspended or expelled from school for minor rule infractions often end up on the streets, where they may be exposed to harmful people and drawn into gangs. Large, congregate, custodial juvenile corrections facilities are not effective in rehabilitating juvenile offenders. Nor are long sentences effective. New research shows that curfew laws are not effective in reducing serious or violent juvenile crime. The hospitalization of youths with mental health problems is not effective. In addition, there is conflicting evidence about the effectiveness of several popular program interventions. These include drug testing and drug courts, electronic monitoring, police in schools, balanced and restorative justice, and motivational interviewing. I discussed these and other disputed interventions in Chapter 11.

    The criminal justice system has a dismal track record in that its three key components are largely ineffective, including sentencing, incarceration, and parole. Confinement does not reduce long-term crime, and executions have no deterrent effect. None of the widely used sentencing practices is effective, including mandatory minimum sentences, three-strikes laws, and “truth in sentencing” laws. The criminal justice system is described as “a system that has lost its way” (Travis & Petersilia, 2001, p. 299).

    Unfortunately, some of the routine punitive practices of the criminal justice system have been brought into the juvenile justice system, where they are inappropriate. Shackling and handcuffing petitioned juvenile offenders when bringing them into court is a common example (M. T. Moore, 2007). Wherever it is not prohibited by state laws, the practice of shackling and handcuffing juvenile offenders for court appearances should be discontinued in the United States unless the presiding judge has ordered handcuffing or other necessary restraints for the juvenile for a particular court appearance based on a determination that the juvenile is a threat to the public safety based on prior court-related behavior. For juvenile offenders, this practice reinforces the myth that they are necessarily hardened criminals. With few exceptions, they are not, and shackling may also constitute cruel and unusual punishment, particularly for children and adolescents who have mental health problems. The Supreme Court has said that the practice of shackling defendants can prejudice a jury; therefore, adult criminal courts are prohibited from bringing adults in front of a jury in shackles (M. T. Moore, 2007).

    Consideration should also be given to taking special precautions when placing juveniles in gang-related criminal intelligence databases. Constitutional due process issues come into play here because, across the United States, people identified in gang intelligence databases are more likely to be convicted and to receive sentence enhancements in states that have enacted such provisions. There should be a remedy to prevent erroneous identification as a gang member. One remedy is to provide for court hearings in which people could challenge the alleged gang status. Documenting a person as a gang member without such a hearing may well violate the due process requirements of the Constitution (Wright, 2006).

    Another remedy is to ensure that the criminal intelligence database is managed properly. State and local agencies that receive federal funds to operate criminal intelligence systems must comply with specific regulations, including those in 28 CFR Part 23 (Criminal Intelligence Systems Operating Policies). Technical assistance reviews of criminal intelligence systems and their compliance with the regulation have been provided at no charge through funding from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. In addition, such a review could address special procedures for handling criminal intelligence information on juveniles. One process for protecting juveniles is to firewall them in the criminal intelligence systems, restricting the dissemination of potentially incorrect information on their gang involvement. More frequent purging of the information on juveniles should also be considered, as suggested by research that shows that most adolescents who join a gang remain in it for less than 1 year (Chapter 7).

    The United States must work to eliminate the disproportionate representation and confinement of minorities in the juvenile and criminal justice systems. The actual differences in minority and nonminority crime rates do not justify the large differences in the two groups’ representation in the juvenile and criminal justice systems. The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, to which the United States is a party, defines race discrimination as conduct that has the “purpose or effect” of restricting rights on the basis of race (Human Rights Watch, 2000). Under the convention, governments may not engage in “benign neglect;” that is, they may not ignore the need to secure equal treatment of all racial and ethnic groups but rather must act affirmatively to prevent or end policies that have unjustified discriminatory impacts. Although the United States has not undertaken a national initiative in the criminal justice system, it has made significant progress in the juvenile arena through the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention's Disproportionate Minority Confinement Initiative. Nevertheless, greater effort must be exerted to achieve the overall goal. By using objective risk and need assessment instruments and placement instruments, communities can help greatly to reduce minority overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system.

    Lerman, an expert on systems used for counting youths in all situations of confinement in the United States (in mental health, substance abuse, child welfare, juvenile corrections, and adult corrections facilities), last called attention to the need to improve them at the beginning of this decade (Lerman, 2002). Yet few improvements have been made. The data generated by existing information systems typically are 3 to 5 years behind current usage of the facilities and yield deficient resident and admission data. Admission data are not even collected for juvenile justice system detention and long-term correctional facilities, so system flows cannot be observed. Only a modest investment of fiscal resources would be needed to improve these systems so that they yield more timely reports, fuller coverage of facilities, improved demographic enumeration, and unduplicated counts of intersystem trends. It is shameful that we know so little about the numbers, characteristics, presenting problems, and outcomes of many of the children and adolescents in confinement in the United States today. Reliable data on admissions to each of these components of the U.S. child care apparatus would permit system flow analyses of the type described in Chapter 10, permitting researchers to evaluate the costs and benefits of service options across the entire array of interventions.

    As a general observation, the spectrum of public sector services is overly reliant on institutional care. Service fragmentation is a main factor in the failure of child-serving systems to address the problems of youth. As Roush (1996a) sums it up, “Services fail because they are too crisis-oriented, too rigid in their classification of problems, too specialized, too isolated from other services, too inflexible to craft comprehensive solutions, too insufficiently funded, and they are mismanaged” (p. 29). By applying the principles and management tools of the Comprehensive Strategy, communities can resolve these problems. Orlando L. Martinez, commissioner of the Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice, eloquently stated, “The best way to predict a young person's future is to help create it” (quoted in Rubin, 2001, p. 15). As John Wilson (2000) has emphasized, preventing and reducing delinquency requires a coordinated effort at critical times in a child's life with a range of services, supports, and opportunities in a continuum of care.

    Appendix: Two Model Assessment Instruments

    Model Youth and Family Assessment of Needs and Strengths

    Youth Name:__________________________________ Case #:__________Country:___________________

    DOB:____/____/_____Race: 1. African American 2. Caucasian 3. Hispanic 4. Other Gender: 1. Male 2. Female

    Intake/Probation Officer:_______ Assessment Date:____/____/_____Type Assessment: 1. Initial 2. Reassessment

    _________________________________________________________________________________

    Family Needs and Strengths

    _________ 1. Substance Abuse

    0=No known current use or history of use by caregivers).
    1=Uses but no dependence; occasional social use; relationships with family members not strained by use
    2=Previous history of abuse but caregiver is currently in recovery after the completion of a treatment program and has had no relapse incidents.
    3=Some disruption in functioning; use has negative impact on employment, family life, legal involvement, or other areas. May include caregiver in recovery who has had relapse incidents.
    5=Major disruption in functioning resulting from frequent or chronic use of alcohol or illegal substances. Indicators may include loss of job, multiple arrests, chronic disruption of family life, or abusive destructive behavior due to substance abuse. Any admitted or clinically diagnosed dependency. Any previous or current referral for intensive outpatient/day treatment or inpatient treatment.

    _________ 2. Family Relationships (Consider Parent-Parent, Parent-Child, Child-Child)

    -1=Strong, supportive family relationships. While conflicts may occur, the home environment is very stable.
    1=Parent-to-parent, parent-to-child verbal conflict is frequently disruptive but appears to have no long-term impact on family stability.
    2=Family conflict or fights occur on a routine basis and create a highly unsettled or hostile family environment. Sporadic instances of physical assault may have occurred, but no serious injury has resulted. Conflict has a negative impact on family functioning according to family members or other reliable reporters. There is a probable need for outside intervention to address parent-parent or parent-child conflict.
    4=Conflict in the home has resulted in repeated instances or a chronic condition of physical or emotional abuse, or any instance of physical abuse has resulted in injuries that necessitated medical attention.

    _________ 3. Living Situation and Finances

    0=Suitable living environment, and family has adequate resources to meet basic needs of children.
    2=Family has housing, but it does not meet the health and safety needs of the children due to such things as inadequate plumbing, heating, wiring, housekeeping, or size. Current financial stress that results in family conflict and need for outside assistance.
    3=Serious problems, including nomadic lifestyle or failure to provide meals or medical care to meet health and safety needs of the children. Family has eviction notice, house is condemned or uninhabitable, or family is homeless.

    __________ 4. Parenting Skills

    -1=Both caregivers or single caregiver display strong parenting practices that are age-appropriate for the children in areas of discipline, expectations, communications, protection, and nurturing.
    1=Some improvement of basic parenting skills is needed by one or more caregivers to effectively control or nurture children. Parents obviously care about children and make efforts to provide appropriate parenting, but there are shortcomings in discipline or extent of structure and supervision.
    3=Significant shortcomings in parenting skills as evidenced by constant conflict over discipline; children often left unsupervised, repeated instances of parent-child role reversal.
    4=Caregivers display destructive or abusive parenting. Parental discipline and control is almost nonnexistent. Parents contribute to child's delinquency or make excuses for it. Parents refuse responsibility for youth or abandon youth.

    __________ 5. Disabilities of Caregivers

    0=Caregiver has no known physical disabilities, mental illness, emotional problems, or cognitive disabilities, or, if present, that do not interefere with parenting.
    1=Emotional, physical, or cognitive disabilities that negatively affect family.
    2=Caregiver has ongoing need for formal mental health treatment or has a serious chronic health problem or cognitive disability that seriously impairs ability to provide for youth.

    __________ 6. Intrafamilial Sexual Abuse

    0=No known problems or reason to suspect intrafamilial sexual abuse.
    2=Intrafamilial sexual abuse has been alleged or substantiated. Includes child welfare reports, self-reports by youth, and abuse suspected by others.

    __________ 7. Family Criminality

    0=No caregiver or siblings have been convicted or adjudicated for criminal acts in last 3 years.
    1=Caregivers or siblings have record of convictions or adjudications within last 3 years.
    2=One or both caregivers or siblings are currently incarcerated or are on probation or parole.
    Youth Needs and Strengths

    ________ 1. Peer Relationships

    -1=Peers provide good support and influence. Friends not known to be delinquent or to have influenced involvement in delinquent behavior.
    0=Youth is primarily a loner.
    1=Youth sometimes associates with others who have been involved in delinquent or criminal activity, but this is not primary peer group.
    3=Youth regularly associates with others who are involved in delinquent or criminal activity or drug or alcohol abuse. Youth usually is negatively influenced by peers, or youth usually provides a negative influence.
    4=Youth is a gang member, or youth is a loner who commits serious solitary delinquent acts.

    ________ 2. Adult Relationships

    -1=Youth has good relationship with parents and has strong relationships with several other prosocial adults in the community (e.g., teacher, coach, employer, neighbor).
    0=Youth has poor relationship with parents (or parents a negative influence) but has strong relationships with several other prosocial adults in the community.
    1=Youth has poor relationship with parents (or parents a negative influence) but has a strong relationship with a prosocial adult in the community.
    3=Youth has no strong relationships with any prosocial adults at home or in the community.

    ________ 3. School Functioning

    -1=Youth displays strong attachment or commitment to school as indicated by work effort, involvement in school activities, positive attitude toward school and teachers, and absence of behavioral or attendance problems.
    0=No history of attendance or behavioral problems.
    1=Occasional attendance or disciplinary problems that were handled at home or school.
    3=Chronic truancy or severe school behavior problems that necessitated outside intervention such as referral to the police or placement in an alternative educational program.
    4=Youth is not attending school (dropped out or withdrawn) or has been expelled.

    Is youth receiving, or diagnosed as needing, special education services? ____Yes ____No

    _________ 4. Employment or Vocational Preparation

    0=Youth does not attend school but is employed full time, or youth is in school full time.
    1=Youth is not in school and is not working, or is working less than 20 hours per week. Is motivated to work and has vocational interests but needs to receive additional training through vocational education, apprenticeship, or other employment-related program.
    3=Youth is not in school, is not employed, has few employment-related skills, and is not motivated to work or obtain training.

    _________ 5. Substance Abuse

    -1=No known current use or history of use.
    1=Occasional use but no dependence; satisfies curiosity or peer pressure; no pattern of strained relationship with parents concerning use.
    3=Some disruption in functioning; use has negative impact on scholastic achievement, attendance, employment, family life, legal involvement, or other areas. Any previous or current referral for outpatient substance abuse treatment. May include youth in recovery who has had relapse incidents.
    5=Major disruption in functioning resulting from frequent or chronic use of alcohol or illegal substances. Indicators may include drug- or alcohol-related chronic truancy or dropout, multiple school suspensions or expulsion, multiple sustance abuse-related arrests, chronic family conflict related to substance abuse, abusive or destructive behavior, or an admitted or clinically diagnosed dependency. Any previous or current referral for intensive outpatient/day treatment or inpatient substance abuse treatment.

    _________ 6. Aggressive or Assaultive Behavior

    0=Youth generally interacts with others in a positive way and resolves conflict without resorting to verbal threats, attempts to intimidate, or assaultive behavior.
    2=Occasionally provokes fights with peers or is sometimes threatening or verbally abusive to peers or adults. May have low tolerance for frustration or criticism and respond with angry outbursts.
    4=Frequently involved in threatening or assaultive behavior with peers and adults. Pervasive mood of anger and irritability. Uses anger, violence, or intimidation across situations and people. Any use of a weapon (knife, firearm) in threat or assault; or two or more arrests for a violent felony offense such as armed robbery, aggravated assault; or history of chronic or severe cruelty to animals.

    _________ 7. Sexual Behavior

    0=Youth appears to be sexually well-adjusted, and none of the following problems has been identified.
    2=May have sexual identity issues that result in conflict with self, family, or peers; or may be engaging in sexual practices that are potentially dangerous to health.
    3=Youth's sexual behavior inappropriate or disruptive of the youth's functioning. Excessive use of sexual language or references to sexual body parts; inappropriate touching of self or others; indecent exposure; invloved in prostitution, incestuous relationships, etc.
    4=Adjudicated for any sexual offense or uses sexual expression or behavior to attain power and control over others, harming or instilling fear in the victim.

    _________ 8. Emotional Stability (mental health problems other than those described in items 6, 7, and 8)

    0=Appropriate adolescent response; no apparent dysfunction; or youth with conduct or substance abuse problems presenting with behavioral difficulties (not result of emotional instability).
    3=Periodic or sporadic responses that limit but do not prohibit adequate functioning. Has moderate levels of symptoms such as flashbacks to traumatic events, depression without suicidal gestures, disabling anxiety, or mood shifts. Any previous or current referral for outpatient mental health treatment.
    5=Responses that prohibit or severely limit adequate functioning. Current or prior symptoms may include hearing voices, delusions, confused thinking, dramatic mood swings; history of suicidal gestures or self-mutilation. May also have a previous or current diagnosis—by a licensed mental health provider—such as depression, anxiety, psychosis, suicidal or homicidal gestures. Any previous or current referral for inpatient mental health treatment. Or, youth may require psychotropic medication to aid in managing behavior.

    _________ 9. Attitudes and Values

    -1=Expresses and generally abides by prosocial values and conventions; accepts responsibility for antisocial behavior and law violations. Usually takes responsibility for feelings, attitudes, and behaviors.
    2=Expresses mixed values: some prosocial and some antisocial. May believe social norms and expectations don't always apply to him- or herself. Justifies, minimizes, denies, or blames others for involvement in delinquent activities. Often does not take responsibility for attitudes and behaviors.
    4=Consistently expresses negative, antisocial values; accepts or proud of delinquent activities; attitude reflects criminal thinking.

    _________ 10. History of Abuse or Neglect as a Victim

    0=No history or indication of physical, sexual, or emotional abuse or neglect.
    2=One or two incidents (alleged or substantiated) of physical abuse or neglect.
    4=Chronic pattern (alleged or substantiated) of physical abuse or neglect, or any history of sexual abuse.

    _________ 11. Parenting

    0=Youth is not a teen parent, or is a parent with adequate parenting skills.
    1=Youth is a parent (or about to become one) and lacks some child-rearing skills; needs assistance or training to provide adequate care for the child.
    2=Youth is a parent (or about to become one) and has minimal knowledge or skills for child rearing and nurturance, or has abdicated responsibility for the child, or has demonstrated abusive or neglectful parenting.

    _________ 12. Physical Health and Hygiene

    0=No apparent problem.
    1=Youth has medical, dental, or health education needs.
    2=Youth has physical handicap or chronic illness that limits functioning or requires regular medication or occasional hospitalization.

    _________ 13. Involvement in Structured Activities

    -1=In school and involved in one or more structured extracurricular activities such as athletics, clubs, employment.
    0=In school and involved in unstructured activities or hobbies, or not in school but working full time.
    1=Interested but not involved in any structured or unstructured activities.
    2=Not involved and not interested in any structured or unstructured activities.

    _________ 14. Total Family and Youth Score and Strengths and Needs Classification

    ______-8 to 15, Low Needs ______16 to 35, Medium Needs ______36+ High Needs

    Case Planning

    List the three most serious problems to be addressed in the case plan:

    Problem AreaDescription
    1.
    2.
    3.

    List the youth's major strengths that can be used in case planning:

    StrengthDescription
    1.
    2.
    3.

    Specialized Assessments

    Indicate areas where there may be a need for additional, specialized assessments to determine the full extent or nature of a problem. Items on which the family or youth has scored 2 or more points may require specialized assessments. Particular attention should be paid to family problems involving substance abuse, family conflict, and parenting skills and to youth problems involving school, substance abuse, assaultive behavior, sexual issues, and emotional stability.

    Problem AreaPerson InvolvedIssue Needing Further Assessment
    Model Risk Assessment Instrument

    Credits and Sources

    Figure 1.1: “Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders: An Assessment of the Extent of and Trends in Officially Recognized Serious Criminal Behavior in a Delinquent Population,” by H. N. Snyder, in R. Loeber and D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions (p. 440), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Copyright 1998 by Sage Publications, Inc. Reprinted with permission.

    Table 2.1: Snyder and Sickmund (2006, p. 70).

    Figure 2.1: Skiba, R. J., and Peterson, R. (1999). The dark side of zero tolerance: Can punishment lead to safe schools? Phi Delta Kappan, 80, pp. 372-376. Reprinted by permission of the illustrator, Joe Lee.

    Box 2.2: Education on Lockdown: The Schoolhouse to Jailhouse Track. Washington, DC: Advancement Project, 2005, pp. 16-17. Reprinted with permission.

    Box 2.3: Dwyer and Osher (2000, p. 17).

    Box 2.4: Dwyer and Osher (2000, p. 19).

    Box 2.5: Dwyer and Osher (2000, p. 18).

    Box 2.6: Arcia (2007).

    Box 2.7: Center for the Prevention of School Violence (http://www.ncdjjdp.org/cpsv/toolkit/index.html).

    Box 2.8: Keys to Reforming Zero Tolerance Policies: R. Skiba, C.R. Reynolds, S. Graham, P. Sheras et al., 2006. Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Box 2.9: Virginia Model for Student Threat Assessment reprinted with permission from Sopris West Educational

    Services. Guidelines for responding to student threats of violence by Dewey Cornell and Peter Sheras. Copyright © 2005.

    Box 3.1: Snyder and Sickmund (2006, pp. 122-124).

    Figure 3.1: Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report by Howard N. Snyder and Melissa Sickmund. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Copyright © 2006 by National Center for Juvenile Justice, p. 199.

    Figure 3.2: J. A. Butts and H. N. Snyder, 2006, p. 5. Too soon to tell: Deciphering recent trends in youth violence. Issue Brief #110. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children. Reprinted with permission.

    Box 3.4: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2006).

    Table 4.1: “Common Risk and Protective Factors in Successful Prevention Programs,” by J.A. Durlak, 1998, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68, p. 514. Copyright © 1998 by American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Table 4.2: “Common Risk and Protective Factors in Successful Prevention Programs,” by J.A. Durlak, 1998, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68, p. 516. Copyright © 1998 by American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Table 4.3: Hawkins, Catalano, and Arthur (2002); Hawkins et al. (1998); Howell and Egley (2005b); Huizinga, Weiher, Espiritu, and Esbensen (2003); Lipsey and Derzon (1998); Loeber and Farrington (1998, 2001a); Loeber, Farrington, and Petechuk (2003); Loeber, Farrington, Stouthamer-Loeber, et al. (2003); Stouthamer-Loeber, Loeber, et al. (2002); Taylor (2008); Thornberry, Lizotte, Krohn, Smith, and Porter (2003).

    Figure 4.1: “Moving risk factors into developmental theories of gang membership,” by J. C. Howell & A. Egley, Jr. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3, p. 340. ©2005 by Sage Publications, Inc. Reprinted with permission.

    Figure 5.1: Thornberry, T. P. 2005, p. 164. “Explaining multiple patterns of offending across the life course and across generations.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 602, pp. 156-195. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Figure 5.2: Thornberry, T. P. 2005, p. 165. “Explaining multiple patterns of offending across the life course and across generations.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 602, pp. 156-195. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Box 5.2: Snyder and Sickmund (1999, pp. 80-81).

    Figure 5.3: Modified from Figure A5 in Snyder, H.N., 1998, p. 440. “Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders: An assessment of the extent of and trends in officially recognized serious criminal behavior in a delinquent population.” In R. Loeber & D.P. Farrington (eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions, pp. 428-444. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Figure 5.4: “Behavioral Antecedents to Serious and Violent Offending: Joint Analyses From the Denver Youth Survey, Pittsburgh Youth Study and the Rochester Youth Development Study,” by R. Loeber, E. Wei, M. Stouthamer-Loeber, D. Huizinga, & T. P. Thornberry, 1999, Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 8, p. 247. Reprinted with permission.

    Figure 5.5: Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & White, H. R. (2008). Violence and serious theft: Development and prediction from childhood to adulthood (Figure 4.10, p. 91). New York: Routledge.

    Figure 5.6: Snyder, H. N., 2001, p. 45. “Epidemiology of official offending.” In R. Loeber & D.P. Farrington (eds.) Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs, pp. 24-46. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Figure 6.1: Egley, A.E. & O'Donnell, C.E., 2007. “The dark figure of officially-recorded gang crime.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Atlanta, GA. November.

    Table 6.1: Egley, O'Donnell, and Curry (2007); special analysis, Curry and Howell (2007).

    Table 6.2: National Youth Gang Survey data (Howell, 2006; Howell & Egley, 2005a).

    Figure 6.2: National Youth Gang Center.

    Table 6.3: Graffiti. Problem-Oriented Guides for Police. Problem-Specific Guides Series. Guide No. 9 (p. 9), by D. L. Weisel, 2004. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

    Box 6.4: Howell, J. C. (2007). Menacing or mimicking? Realities of youth gangs. The Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 58, 9-20.

    Box 6.5: Quotes from Felson, M. (2006). The street gang strategy. In M. Felson, Crime and nature (pp. 305-324). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Figure 6.3: Egley, A. Jr., Howell, J. C., & Major, A. (2006). National Youth Gang Survey: 1999-2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, p. 24. Data are for 2000.

    Figure 6.4: Egley, A. E., Howell, J. C., & Ritz, C. E. (2005, November). Exploring gang migration and proliferation patterns in the National Youth Gang Survey. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Canada.

    Figure 6.5: Bendixen, M., Endresen, I. M., &Olweus, D. (2006). Joining and leaving gangs: Selection and facilitation effects on self-reported antisocial behaviour in early adolescence. European Journal of Criminology, 3, 85-114.

    Figure 6.6: Bendixen, M., Endresen, I. M., & Olweus, D. (2006). Joining and leaving gangs: Selection and facilitation effects on self-reported antisocial behaviour in early adolescence. European Journal of Criminology, 3, 85-114.

    Figure 7.1: Phoenix Police Department. (1981). Hispanic gangs in Phoenix. Phoenix, AZ: Author.

    Figure 7.2: McGloin, J. M. (2005). Policy and intervention considerations of a network analysis of street gangs. Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 607-636.

    Figure 7.3: Modified from Howell, J. C. (2003). Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Figure 7.4: National Youth Gang Center. (2003). OJJDP comprehensive gang model training. Tallahassee, FL: Author.

    Figure 7.5: National Youth Gang Center. (2003). OJJDP comprehensive gang model training. Tallahassee, FL: Author.

    Table 8.1: Cullen, F. T. (2005). The twelve people who saved rehabilitation: How the science of criminology made a difference. Criminology, 43, 1-42.

    Figure 8.2: What 500 Intervention Studies Show About the Effects of Intervention on the Recidivism of Juvenile Offenders, p. 10. by M. W. Lipsey, 2000. Copyright © 2000 by Mark W. Lipsey. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Table 8.2: Lipsey, M. W. (1999). Can rehabilitative programs reduce the recidivism of juvenile offenders? An inquiry into the effectiveness of practical programs? Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law, 6, 611-641.

    Table 8.3: M. W. Lipsey, 2006. The Evidence Base for Effective Programs as a Source for Best Practice Guidelines. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Box 8.3: Lipsey, M. W. (2002). Meta-analysis and program outcome evaluation. Socialvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 9, 194-208. Also Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48, 1181-1209.

    Table 9.1: Elliott, D. S. (Ed.). (1998). Blueprints for violence prevention. Denver, CO: C&M. Also Mihalic, S., Irwin, K., Elliott, D., Fagan, A., and Hansen, D. (2001). Blueprints for violence prevention. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Box 9.3: Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., & Smith, P. (2006). Does correctional program quality really matter? The impact of adhering to the principles of effective intervention. Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 575-594. Also Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D. (1996). The correctional program assessment inventory (6th ed.). Saint John: University of New Brunswick, and Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D. (2001). The correctional program assessment inventory: 2000. Saint John: University of New Brunswick.

    Table 9.2: Personal communication, April 27, 2007.

    Table 9.3: Adapted from “Effective Interventions With Serious Juvenile Offenders: A Synthesis of Research,” by M. W. Lipsey and D. B. Wilson, in R. Loeber and D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions (p. 332), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Copyright 1998 by Sage Publications, Inc. Adapted with permission.

    Table 9.4: The evidence base for effective juvenile programs as a source for best practice guidelines, by M. W. Lipsey, 2007. Copyright © Mark W. Lipsey. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Table 9.5: The evidence base for effective juvenile programs as a source for best practice guidelines, by M. W. Lipsey, 2007. Copyright © Mark W. Lipsey. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Table 9.6: The evidence base for effective juvenile programs as a source for best practice guidelines, by M. W. Lipsey, 2007. Copyright © Mark W. Lipsey. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Table 9.7: What Works with Juvenile Offenders: Translating research into practice. Copyright ©2005 Mark W. Lipsey. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Table 9.8: Intervention Programs for Juvenile Offenders: “Best Practice” Guidelines from Meta-analysis. Copyright ©2005 Mark W. Lipsey. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Figure 9.1: R. Barnoski, 2004, p. 8. Outcome Evaluation of Washington State's Research-Based Programs for Juvenile Offenders. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.

    Figure 9.2: The evidence base for effective juvenile programs as a source for best practice guidelines, by M. W. Lipsey, 2007. Copyright © Mark W. Lipsey. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Table 9.9: U.S. Office of Special Education Programs, Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: http://www.pbis.org/main.htm.

    Box 9.4: Beckett, M., Hawken, A., & Jacknowitz, A. (2001). Accountability for after-school care: Devising standards and measuring adherence to them. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

    Box 10.1: Wilson, J. J., & Howell, J. C. (1993). A comprehensive strategy for serious, violent and chronic juvenile offenders. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Box 10.2: Coolbaugh, K., & Hansel, C. J. (2000). The comprehensive strategy: Lessons learned from the pilot sites. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Also Howell, J. C. (Ed.). (1995). Guide for implementing the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention; Wiebush, R. G. (Ed.). (2002). Graduated sanctions for juvenile offenders: A program model and planning guide. Oakland, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency and National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges; and Wilson, J. J., & Howell, J. C. (1993). A comprehensive strategy for serious, violent and chronic juvenile offenders. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Figure 10.1: Wilson, J. J., & Howell, J. C. (1993). A comprehensive strategy for serious, violent and chronic juvenile offenders. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Figure 10.2: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2003.

    Box 10.4: Wiebush, R. G. (Ed.). (2002). Graduated sanctions for juvenile offenders: A program model and planning guide. Oakland, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency and National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.

    Figure 10.3: Modified from Howell, J. C. (2003). Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Table 10.1: Missouri Office of State Courts Administrator: http://www.courts.mo.gov/file/Classification%20Matrix%2012.20.00.pdf.

    Figure 10.4: R. A. Mendel, 2007, p. 11. Pathways to juvenile detention reform: Vol. 14. Beyond detention: System transformation through juvenile detention reform. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation. Reprinted with permission.

    Figure 10.5: R. A. Mendel, 2007, p. 13. Pathways to juvenile detention reform: Vol. 14. Beyond detention: System transformation through juvenile detention reform. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation. Reprinted with permission.

    Box 10.7: Annie E. Casey Foundation (2006). Reentry: Helping former prisoners return to communities, a guide to key ideas, effective approaches, and technical assistance resources for making connections. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation, p. 11. Reprinted with permission.

    Box 10.8: G. A. Wasserman, S. J. Ko, and L. S. McReynolds, 2004, pp. 5-6. “Assessing the mental health status of youth in juvenile justice settings.” Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Figure 10.6: North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2008). 2007 annual report. Raleigh: Author.

    Figure 10.7: Adapted from Schumacher, M., & Kurz, G. (2000). The 8% solution: Preventing serious, repeat juvenile crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Figure 10.8: Modified from Howell, J. C. (2003). Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Box 10.9: Howell, J. C., Kelly, M. R., Palmer, J., & Mangum, R. L. (2004). Integrating child welfare, juvenile justice and other agencies in a continuum of services for children, youth and families. Child Welfare, 83, 143-156.

    Figure 10.9: The evidence base for effective juvenile programs as a source for best practice guidelines, by M. W. Lipsey, 2007. Copyright © Mark W. Lipsey. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Mark Lipsey.

    Figure 11.1: Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Figure 11.2: F. E. Zimring, 2007, p. 882. “Protect individual punishment decisions from mandatory penalties.” Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 881-886. Blackwell Publishing, Ltd.

    Box 11.3: Katner, D. R. (2002). A defense perspective of treatment programs for juvenile sex offenders. Juvenile Correctional Mental Health Report, 2(2), 17-30.

    Figure 11.3: F. E. Zimring, 2007, p. 882. “Protect individual punishment decisions from mandatory penalties.” Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 881-886. Blackwell Publishing, Ltd.

    Box 12.1: Griffin, P. (2003). Trying and sentencing juveniles as adults: An analysis of state transfer and blended sentencing laws. Special Project Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Also, Snyder, H. N., and Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Box 12.2: Adapted from Howell, J. C. (2003). Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Figure 12.1: Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report by Howard N. Snyder and Melissa Sickmund. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Copyright © 2006 by National Center for Juvenile Justice, p. 105.

    Table 12.1: Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report by Howard N. Snyder and Melissa Sickmund. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Copyright © 2006 by National Center for Juvenile Justice, p. 111. Also, Griffin, P. (2003). Trying and sentencing juveniles as adults: An analysis of state transfer and blended sentencing laws. Special Project Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Box 12.3: Adapted from Bishop, D. M. (2006). Public opinion and juvenile justice policy: Myths and misconceptions.

    Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 653-664.

    Box 12.4: Giedd, J., Blumenthal, J., Jeffries, N., Castellanos, E, Liu, H., Zijdenbos, A., et al. (1999). Brain development during childhood and adolescence: A longitudinal MRI study. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 861-863. Also, Spinks, S. (Writer, Director, & Producer). (2002, January 31). Inside the teenage brain [televised interview with Jay Giedd]. In S. Tiller (Senior Producer), Frontline. Boston: WGBH Boston. Retrieved August 25, 2008, from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/teenbrain/; Pagan, J. (2005). Adolescents, maturity and the law. The American Prospect. Special Report: Breaking Through, pp. A5-A7; Pagan, J. (2007). End natural life sentences for juveniles. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 735-746; Juvenile Justice Center. (2004). Adolescence, brain development, and legal culpability. Washington, DC: Juvenile Justice Center, American Bar Association; and Waber, D. P., De Moor, C., Forbes, P. W., Almli, C. R., Botteron, K. N., Leonard, G., et al. (2007). The NIH MRI study of normal brain development: Performance of a population based sample of healthy children aged 6 to 18 years on a neuropsychological battery. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 1-18.

    Box 12.5: National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (2005). Juvenile delinquency guidelines. Reno, NV: National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, p. 21.

    Box 12.6: Justice Policy Institute. (2007). The consequences aren't minor: The impact of trying youth as adults and strategies for reform. Washington, DC: Author.

    Box 12.7: McGowan, A., Hahn, R., Liberman, A., Crosby, A., Fullilove, M., Johnson, R., et al. (2007). Effects on violence of laws and policies facilitating the transfer of juveniles from the juvenile justice system to the adult justice system: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32(4 Suppl. 1), 7-21. Also, Task Force on Community Preventive Services. (2007). Recommendation against policies facilitating the transfer of juveniles from juvenile to adult justice systems for the purpose of reducing violence. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32(4 Suppl. 1), 5-6.

    Glossary

    • Adjudicated delinquent. A youth who has been found by a judge in juvenile court to have committed a law violation, that is, a delinquent act.
    • Adjudicatory hearing. The fact-finding (trial) phase of a juvenile case in which a judge receives and weighs evidence before deciding whether a delinquency or status offense has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
    • Aftercare. Generally refers to the period of care after confinement in any setting, but the term is more specifically used in reference to “reintegrative” or “reentry” services that aim to link newly released incarcerated youths with their communities, families, schools, or jobs.
    • Age blocks. Middle childhood, ages 7-9; late childhood, ages 10-12; early adolescence, ages 13-15; late adolescence, ages 16-19; early adulthood, ages 20-25 (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Age cohort. A group of people who are about the same age and who are followed up over time (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Age-crime curve. A universally observed curve showing that the prevalence of offenders is low in late childhood and early adolescence, peaks in middle to late adolescence, and decreases subsequently (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Age of onset. Youngest age at which offending is recorded through either self-reports or official records (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Aggravating risk factors. Factors that predict a high likelihood of later offending in the general population (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Antisocial behavior. Behaviors that inflict harm on others, including minor and moderate nondelinquent problem behaviors and delinquent offenses (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Arrest. Apprehension by the police and charging (booking) for an offense.
    • Best-practice program. A program that is evidence based or research based (see evidence-based program, research-based program, and Chapter 8, Box 8.1).
    • Child delinquents. Children (under age 13) who commit delinquent offenses.
    • Chronic juvenile offenders. Those who commit four or more offenses of any type, including nonfelony offenses such as truancy and running away (Howell, 2003b).
    • Cohort. All people who share a particular demographic characteristic; a birth cohort is all people born in a given year in a particular locality. See age cohort.
    • Conduct disorder. Youth who persistently violate the rights of others and breach age-appropriate norms of society are classified by the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) as having conduct disorder (CD). The DSM-IV categorizes CD behaviors into four main groupings: aggression to people and animals, destruction of property, deceitfulness or theft, and serious violations of rules (American Psychiatric Association, 2000).
    • Conviction. Sentencing in criminal court for committing a crime.
    • Crime Index. Includes all eight crimes in the Violent Crime Index and Property Crime Index (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006, p. 122). See Violent Crime Index and Property Crime Index.
    • Cumulative onset. The cumulative percentage of people starting to offend up to a certain age (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Delinquent juvenile. Any juvenile who, while less than 18 years of age but at least 6 years of age (which varies in state laws), commits a crime or infraction under state law or under an ordinance of local government, including a violation of motor vehicle laws.
    • Desistance. Cessation of offending forever or for a long period of time (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Developmental delinquency pathway. Pattern of development in offending from less serious problem behaviors to more serious offenses (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Developmental sequence. Order of occurrence of different problem behaviors (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Drug dealing. Selling marijuana and other illegal drugs (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Duration. The number of years for which people offend (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Escalation. Increasing severity of offenses committed by a person over time (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Evidence-based program. A program or practice that meets the following requirements: (a) The program or practice is governed by a program manual or protocol that specifies the nature, quality, and amount of service that constitutes the program; and (b) scientific research using methods that meet high scientific standards for evaluating the effects of such programs must have demonstrated with two or more separate client samples that the program improves client outcomes central to the purpose of the program (Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 37, Chapter 5, Part 1, Section 1; see Chapter 8, Box 8.1).
    • Firearm. A weapon (e.g., handgun, rifle, or shotgun) that propels a shot or bullet by gunpowder.
    • Gang. A group that has three or more members, generally ages 12-24; shares some sense of identity, especially symbols and a name; views itself as a gang and is recognized by others as a gang; has some permanence and a degree of organization; uses verbal and nonverbal forms of communication; and is involved in an elevated level of criminal activity (Curry & Decker, 2003; Esbensen, Winfree, He, & Taylor, 2001; Klein, 1995).
    • Gang migration. The movement of gang members from one geographic area to another (Maxson, 1998).
    • Hindering risk factors. Factors that predict a low likelihood of desisting from offending among those who have previously offended (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Hybrid gang culture. Gang culture characterized by a mixture of graffiti and symbols (that are copied from other gangs); less concern over turf or territory; members of mixed race or ethnicity; members may belong to more than one gang; members may switch from one gang to another (Starbuck et al., 2001).
    • Indicated (or tertiary) prevention programs. Programs provided to people who either have a particular problem (i.e., “indicated”) or are predisposed to a given problem, such as delinquency.
    • Juvenile. Generally considered adolescents, ages 13-19, but state statutes define juveniles as those who are under the original jurisdiction of juvenile courts, which can range from as young as age 6 (in North Carolina) through age 17 (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006, p. 103).
    • Meta-analysis. A quantitative technique for coding, analyzing, and summarizing research evidence. Used for statistically representing and analyzing findings from a set of empirical research studies, typically a large (“meta” or more comprehensive) set of studies (Lipsey & Wilson, 2000).
    • Minor theft. Stealing outside the home or shoplifting (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Moderate theft. Typically defined as stealing a bicycle or skateboard, stealing things worth more than $5, joyriding, purse snatching, dealing in stolen goods, or stealing from a car (Loeber et al, 2008).
    • Moderate violence. Violent act such as gang fighting (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Odds ratio. A measure of the strength of a relationship between two variables (i.e., number of times more likely).
    • Offending frequency. The annual rate of offending for those who are offenders (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Offending or offenses. Delinquent acts committed during the juvenile years (under age 18) and criminal acts committed during adulthood (from age 18 onward) (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Official offending. Offenses measured by means of information from the criminal court, juvenile court, or police arrest records.
    • Pathway. A segment of a delinquent or criminal career trajectory; “the stages of behavior that unfold over time in a predictable order” (Loeber et al., 1997, p. 322). See developmental delinquency pathway.
    • Persistence. The proportion of offenders who continue to offend over different age blocks (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Prevalence. The proportion of a population (expressed as a percentage) who engage in illegal offenses or other problem behaviors (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Preventive promotive factors. Factors that predict a low probability of offending in the general population (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Primary (or universal) prevention programs. Programs provided to a whole population group, such as all children through school-wide implementation.
    • Probability or forward probability. The probability that a person will escalate over time from less serious to more serious forms of offending (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Promotive factors. Factors that predict a low probability of serious offending either in the general population or among offenders (Loeber et al., 2008). See preventive promotive factors and remedial promotive factors.
    • Property Crime Index. Includes burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006, p. 122).
    • Protective factors. Factors that predict a low probability of offending among youth exposed to risk factors (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Psychopathology. Any sort of psychological disorder that causes distress, either for the individual or for those in the individual's life. Depression, schizophrenia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, alcohol dependency, conduct disorder, and bulimia are all forms of psychopathology (Steinberg, 2002, p. 36).
    • Psychopathy. A very specific and distinctive type of psychopathology, a type of personality disorder defined chiefly by a combination of manipulative, stimulation-seeking antisocial behavior, callousness, and emotional detachment (Steinberg, 2002, p. 37).
    • Public order offenses. Obstruction of justice, disorderly conduct, escapes from institutions, weapon offenses, and probation and parole violations (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006).
    • Remedial promotive factors. Factors that predict cessation of offending among those who have previously offended (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Reported offending. Offending as measured by means of self-reports and reports by parents and teachers (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Research-based program. A program or practice that has some research demonstrating effectiveness but that does not yet meet the standard of an evidence-based program (Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 37, Chapter 5, Part 1, Section 1; see Chapter 8, Box 8.1).
    • Resilience. The ability to survive adverse conditions or to achieve positive outcomes in the face of high risks (Tiet & Huizinga, 2002).
    • Risk factors. Factors that predict a high likelihood of offending either in the general population or among offenders (Loeber et al., 2008). See also aggravating risk factors and hindering risk factors.
    • Selective or secondary prevention programs. Programs that focus on at-risk populations.
    • Self-reported offending. Offending as measured by means of self-reports only (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Serious juvenile offenders. Those who commit the following felony offenses: larceny or theft, burglary or breaking and entering, extortion, arson, and drug trafficking or other controlled dangerous substance violations (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2006).
    • Serious theft. Breaking and entering or auto theft (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Serious violence. Forcible robbery, attacking with intent to injure, sexual coercion, or rape.
    • Serious, violent, chronic juvenile offenders. Those who commit four or more serious or violent offenses (Howell, 2003b).
    • Specialization. The tendency for people to commit some types of offenses disproportionately and repeatedly (Loeber et al., 2008).
    • Status offenses. Noncriminal offenses that apply only to children and adolescents, such as being truant, running away from home, possessing alcohol or cigarettes, or disobeying.
    • Substance use. Use of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, or other psychoactive substances (Loeber et al, 2008).
    • System of care. “A comprehensive spectrum of mental health and other necessary services which are organized into a coordinated network to meet the multiple and changing needs of severely emotionally disturbed children and adolescents” (Stroul & Friedman, 1986, p. iv).
    • Tertiary prevention programs. See indicated prevention programs.
    • Theft. See minor theft, moderate theft, and serious theft.
    • Trajectories. Classification of individuals according to their pattern of offending over time (Loeber et al, 2008).
    • Transfer hearings. At a probable cause hearing in juvenile court, a prosecutor or a judge may give notice that if probable cause is found, the juvenile may be transferred to the adult system for prosecution.
    • Transitions (within trajectories). Short-term changes in social roles within long-term trajectories, such as dropping out of school, divorce, and desistance from delinquency.
    • Tyranny of small numbers. The mathematical principle that, when translated into a percentage, a small increase in a small number will appear to be much larger than a nominal increase in a large number.
    • Universal prevention programs. See primary prevention programs.
    • Violence. See moderate violence and serious violence.
    • Violent Crime Index. Includes murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006, p. 122).

    References

    Acker, J. A. (2007). Impose an immediate moratorium on executions. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 641–650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00462.x
    Acoca, L. (1998). Outside/inside: The violation of American girls at home, on the streets, and in the juvenile justice system. Crime & Delinquency, 44, 561–589. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128798044004006
    Acoca, L. (1999). Investing in girls: A 21st-century strategy. Juvenile Justice, 6(1), 3–13.
    Acoca, L., & Dedel, K. (1998). No place to hide: Understanding and meeting the needs of girls in the California juvenile justice system. San Francisco: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
    Adams, K. (2007). Abolish juvenile curfews. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 663–671. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00484.x
    Advancement Project. (2005). Education on lockdown: The schoolhouse to jailhouse track. Washington, DC: Author.
    Agnew, R. (2005). Why do criminals offend? A general theory of crime and delinquency. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury
    Ainsworth, J. E. (1991). Re-imagining childhood and reconstructing the legal order: The case for abolishing the juvenile court. North Carolina Law Review, 69, 1083–1133.
    Ainsworth, J. E. (1995). Youth justice in a unified court: Response to critics of juvenile court abolition. Boston College Law Review, 36, 927–951.
    American Bar Association. (2001). Zero tolerance report. Chicago: Author.
    American Bar Association & National Bar Association. (2001). Justice by gender: The lack of appropriate prevention, diversion and treatment alternatives for girls in the juvenile justice system. Washington, DC: Authors.
    American Civil Liberties Union. (2007). Criminalizing the classroom: The over-policing of New York City schools. New York: American Civil Liberties Union, New York Civil Liberties Union.
    American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan. (2004). Second chances: Juveniles serving life without parole in Michigan. Detroit: Author.
    American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (
    4th ed.
    , rev). Washington, DC: Author.
    Amnesty International. (1996). United States of America: Use of electro-shock stun belts. New York: Author.
    Amnesty International. (1998a). Betraying the young: Human rights violations against children in the US justice system. New York: Author.
    Amnesty International. (1998b). On the wrong side of history: Children and the death penalty in the USA. New York: Author.
    Amnesty International. (1999). Race, rights, and brutality: Portraits of abuse in the USA. New York: Author.
    Amnesty International. (2002). Amnesty International report 2002. New York: Author.
    Andrews, D. A. (2006). Enhancing adherence to risk-need-responsivity. Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 595–602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00394.x
    Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1998). The psychology of criminal conduct (
    2nd ed.
    ). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
    Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2006). The psychology of criminal conduct (
    4th ed.
    ). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson/LexisNexis.
    Andrews, D., Bonta, J., &Wormith, S. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 7–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128705281756
    Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2006). Reentry: Helping former prisoners return to communities, a guide to key ideas, effective approaches, and technical assistance resources for making connections. Baltimore, MD: Author.
    Aos, S., Phipps, P., Barnoski, R., & Lieb, R. (2001). The comparative costs and benefits of programs to reduce crime (Version 4.0). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Retrieved June 6, 2002, from http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/crime/costben.html
    Arbreton, A. J. A., & McClanahan, W. (2002). Targeted outreach: Boys and Girls Clubs of America's approach to gang prevention and intervention. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.
    Archbold, C. A., & Meyer, M. (2000). Anatomy of a gang suppression unit: The social construction of an organizational response to gang problems. Police Quarterly, 2(2), 201–224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109861119900200204
    Arcia, E. (2007). A comparison of elementary/K-8 and middle schools’ suspension rates. Urban Education, 42, 456–459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042085907304879
    Armstrong, M. L. (1998). Adolescent pathways: Exploring the intersections between child welfare and juvenile justice, PINS, and mental health. New York: Vera Institute of Justice.
    Arthur, L. G. (1998). Abolish the juvenile court?Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 49(1), 51–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.1998.tb01478.x
    Associated Press. (1996, February 18). Expert warns of US “bloodbath” (AP wire story).
    Augimeri, L. K., Jiang, D., Koegl, C., & Carey, J. (2006). Differential effects of the SNAP™ Under 12 Outreach Project (SNAP™ ORP) associated with client risk and treatment intensity. Retrieved August 11, 2008, from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/0/l/5/6/p201560_index.html
    Austin, J., Johnson, K. D., & Weitzer, R. (2005). Alternatives to the secure detention and confinement of juvenile offenders. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Austin, J., Marino, A. B., Carroll, L., McCall, P. L., & Richards, S. C. (2000, November). The use of incarceration in the United States: National policy white paper for the American Society of Criminology, National Policy Committee. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, San Francisco.
    Backer, T. E. (1993). Information alchemy: Transforming information through knowledge utilization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44, 217–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/%28SICI%291097-4571%28199305%2944:4%3C217::AID-ASI9%3E3.0.CO;2-D
    Baer, J. S., MacLean, M. G., & Marlatt, G. A. (1998). Linking etiology and treatment for adolescent substance abuse: Toward a better match. In R.Jessor (Ed.), New perspectives on adolescent risk behavior (pp. 182–220). New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Baldry, A. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2007). Effectiveness of programs to prevent school bullying. Victims and Offenders, 2, 183–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15564880701263155
    Ball, R. A., & Curry, G. D. (1995). The logic of definition in criminology: Purposes and methods for defining “gangs.”Criminology, 33, 225–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1995.tb01177.x
    Bandes, S. (2000, November 19). To reform the LAPD, more civilian pressure is necessary. Los Angeles Times, p. M6.
    Barnoski, R. (2004a). Assessing risk for re-offense: Validating the Washington State juvenile court assessment. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
    Barnoski, R. (2004b). Outcome evaluation of Washington State's research-based programs for juvenile offenders. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
    Battin, S. R., Hill, K. G., Abbott, R. D., Catalano, R. R., & Hawkins, J. D. (1998). The contribution of gang membership to delinquency beyond delinquent friends. Criminology, 36, 93–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01241.x
    Baumeister, R. R., Smart, L., & Boden, J. W. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103, 5–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.5
    Bazemore, G., & Umbreit, M. S. (1997). Balanced and restorative justice: A framework for juvenile justice in the 21st century. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.
    Beckett, K., & Sasson, T. (2003). The politics of injustice: Crime and punishment in America. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229614
    Beckett, K., & Sasson, T. (2004). The politics of injustice: Crime and punishment in America (
    2nd ed.
    ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.
    Beckett, M., Hawken, A., & Jacknowitz, A. (2001). Accountability for after-school care: Devising standards and measuring adherence to them. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
    Bendixen, M., Endresen, I. M., & Olweus, D. (2006). Joining and leaving gangs: Selection and facilitation effects on self-reported antisocial behaviour in early adolescence. European Journal of Criminology, 3, 85–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1477370806059082
    Bennett, W. J., Dilulio, J. J. Jr., & Walters, J. P. (1996). Body count: Moral poverty… and how to win America's war against crime and drugs. New York: Simon & Schuster.
    Bernard, T. J. (1992). The cycle of juvenile justice. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Bernard, T., & Ritti, R. R. (1991). The Philadelphia Birth Cohort and selective incapacitation. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 28, 33–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427891028001003
    Beyer, M. (1997). Experts for juveniles at risk of adult sentences. In P.Puritz, A.Capozello, & W.Shang (Eds.), More than meets the eye: Rethinking assessment, competency and sentencing for a harsher era of juvenile justice (pp. 1–22). Washington, DC: American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center.
    Bilchik, S. (1998). A juvenile justice system for the 21st century. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Bilukha, O., Hahn, R. A., Crosby, A., Fullilove, M. T., Liberman, A., et al. (2005). Effectiveness of early childhood home visitation in preventing violence: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2 Suppl. 1), 11–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.004
    Bingenheimer, J. B., Brennan, R. T., & Earls, F. J. (2005). Firearm violence exposure and serious violent behavior. Science, 308, 1323–1326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1110096
    Bishop, D. M. (2006). Public opinion and juvenile justice policy: Myths and misconceptions. Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 653–664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00408.x
    Bishop, D. M., & Frazier, C. E. (2000). Consequences of transfer. In J.Fagan & F. E.Zimring (Eds.), The changing borders of juvenile justice: Transfer of adolescents to the criminal court (pp. 227–276). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Biskupic, J. (1996, June 25). Civil forfeiture in drug case upheld, 8 to 1. USA Today, pp. 1A-3A.
    Bjerregaard, B. (2008). Gang membership and drug involvement: Untangling the complex relationship. Crime and Delinquency.
    Blackburn, A. G., Mullings, J. L., Marquart, J. W., & Trulson, C. R. (2007). The next generation of prisoners: Toward an understanding of violent institutionalized delinquents. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 5, 35–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204006295156
    Blackwood, A. (2001, July 8). Boy's death puts spotlight on boot camps. News and Observer (Raleigh, NC), p. 15A.
    Blalock, B., & Arthur, P. (2006). Advocates needed to safeguard rights of youth in DOJ conditions cases. Youth Law News, 27(4), 1–5.
    Block, R., & Block, C. R. (1993). Street gang crime in Chicago (Research in Brief). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Bloom, B., Owen, B., Deschenes, E. P., & Rosenbaum, J. (2002). Improving juvenile justice for females: A statewide assessment for California. Crime and Delinquency, 48, 526–552. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001112802237128
    Blum, A. (2001, July 13). Vance punishes 8 after probe of student tours of D.C. jail. Washington Post, p. B4.
    Blumstein, A. (1983). Selective incapacitation as a means of crime control. American Behavioral Scientist, 27, 87–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000276483027001006
    Blumstein, A. (1995a, August). Violence by young people: Why the deadly nexus?National Institute of Justice Journal, 229, 1–9.
    Blumstein, A. (1995b). Youth violence, guns, and the illicit-drug industry. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 10–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1143998
    Blumstein, A. (1996). Youth violence, guns, and the illicit drug markets (Research Preview). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., & Nagin, D. (Eds.). (1978). Deterrence and incapacitation: Estimating the effects of criminal sanctions on crime rates. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
    Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., Roth, J. A., & Visher, C. A. (Eds.). (1986). Criminal careers and career criminals. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    Blumstein, A., & Rosenfeld, R. (1999). Trends in rates of violence in the U.S.A. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 8, 139–167.
    Bonta, J. (1996). Risk-needs assessment and treatment. In A. T.Harland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work (pp. 18–32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Bouley, E., &Wells, T. (2001). Attitudes of citizens in a southern rural county toward juvenile crime and justice issues. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 17, 60–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1043986201017001006
    Bovard, J. (1999, May 27). Your car may be committing crimes. USA Today, p. 15A.
    Boyle, P. (2001, April). A DAREing rescue. Youth Today, pp. 1, 16-19.
    Boyle, P. (2005). Behind the death penalty ban. Youth Today, 14(l), 36–38.
    Bradshaw, W., & Roseboro, D. (2005). An empirical review of family group conferencing in juvenile offenses. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 56, 21–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.2005.tb00176.x
    Braga, A. A. (2004). Gun violence among serious young offenders. Problem-oriented guides for police. Problem-Specific Guides Series Guide No. 23. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
    Braga, A. A., Kennedy, D. M., & Tita, G. E. (2002). New approaches to the strategic prevention of gang and group-involved violence. In C. R.Huff (Ed.), Gangs in America III (pp. 271–285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452232201
    Braga, A. A., Kennedy, D. M., Waring, E. J., & Piehl, A. M. (2001). Problem-oriented policing, deterrence, and youth violence: An evaluation of Boston's Operation Ceasefire. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38, 195–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427801038003001
    Braga, A. A., & Pierce, G. L. (2005). Disrupting illegal firearms markets in Boston: The effects of Operation Ceasefire on the supply of new handguns to criminals. Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 717–748. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00353.x
    Brame, B., Nagin, D. S., &Tremblay, R. E. (2001). Developmental trajectories of physical aggression from school entry to late adolescence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 42, 503–512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00744
    Bratton, W. (1998). Turnaround: How America's top cop reversed the crime epidemic. New York: Random House.
    Brendtro, L. K., &Ness, A. E. (1995). Fixing flaws or building strengths?Reclaiming Children and Youth, 4, 2–7.
    Brent, D. A., & Birmaher, B. (2002). Adolescent depression. New England Journal of Medicine, 347, 667–671. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp012249
    Brezina, T., Agnew, R., Cullen, F. T., & Wright, J. P. (2004). The code of the street: A quantitative assessment of Elijah Anderson's subculture of violence thesis and its contribution to youth violence research. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 303–328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204004267780
    Bridges, G. S. (1997). A study on racial and ethnic disparities in superior court bail and pre-trial detention practices in Washington. Olympia: Washington State Minority and Justice Commission.
    Bridges, G. S., Crutchfield, R. D., & Simpson, E. E. (1987). Crime, social structure and criminal punishment: White and nonwhite rates of imprisonment. Social Problems, 34, 345–361. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/800812
    Broidy, L. M., Tremblay, R. E., Brame, B., Fergusson, D., Horwood, J. L., Laird, R., et al. (2003). Developmental trajectories of childhood disruptive behaviors and adolescent delinquency: A six-site, cross-national study. Developmental Psychology, 39, 222–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.222
    Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Brooks, K., Schiraldi, V. & Ziedenberg, J. (2001). School house hype: Two years later. Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice.
    Brooks-Gunn, J., Graber, J. A., & Paikoff, R. L. (1994). Studying links between hormones and negative affect: Models and measures. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4, 469–486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327795jra0404_2
    Brown, J. M., &Langan, P. A. (1998). State court sentencing of convicted felons (Bulletin). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Browning, K., & Huizinga, D. (1999). Highlights of findings from the Denver Youth Survey. Fact Sheet No. 1999-106. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Brownstein, H. (1996). The rise and fall of a violent crime wave: Crack cocaine and the social construction of a crime problem. Guilderland, NY: Harrow and Heston.
    Building Blocks for Youth. (2000). Youth crime/adult time: Is justice served?Washington, DC: Author.
    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. (1999). The Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative performance report. Washington, DC: Author.
    Bureau of Justice Assistance. (1997). Urban street gang enforcement. Washington, DC: Author.
    Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2007). Key facts at a glance: Correctional populations. Retrieved December 24, 2007, from http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/glance/tables/corr2tab.htm
    Burke, C., & Pennell, S. (2001). Breaking Cycles evaluation: A comprehensive approach to youthful offenders. San Diego, CA: San Diego Association of Governments.
    Burke, J. D., Loeber, R., & Birmaher, B. (2002). Oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder: A review of the past 10 years, Part II. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry41, 1275–1293. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200211000-00009
    Burns, B. J., Goldman, S. K., Faw, L., & Burchard, J. (1999). The wraparound evidence base. In B. J.Burns & S. K.Goldman (Eds.), Promising practices in wraparound for children with serious emotional disturbances and their families: Systems of care (pp. 77–100). Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research, Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice.
    Burns, B. J., Landsverk, J., Kelleher, K., Faw, L., Hazen, A., & Keeler, G. (2001). Mental health, education, child welfare, and juvenile justice service use. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 273–304). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Burrell, S. (2000). Pathways to juvenile detention reform: Vol. 6. Improving conditions of confinement in secure detention facilities. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
    Bursik, R. J. Jr., & Grasmick, H. G. (1993). Neighborhoods and crime: The dimensions of effective community control. New York: Lexington.
    Bushway, S. D., Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2003). Desistance as a developmental process: A comparison of static and dynamic approaches. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19, 129–153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023050103707
    Butterfield, F. (1997, July 21). With juvenile courts in chaos, some propose scrapping them. New York Times, pp. Al, A13.
    Butts, J. A. (1999, May). Feeding kids to the monster. Youth Today, p. 23.
    Butts, J. A., Coggeshall, M., Gouvis, C., Mears, D., Travis, J., Waul, M., et al. (2002). Youth, guns, and the juvenile justice system. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
    Butts, J. A., & Mitchell, O. (2000). Brick by brick: Dismantling the border between juvenile and adult justice. In C. M.Friel (Ed.), Criminal justice 2000: Boundary changes in criminal justice (Vol. II, pp. 167–213). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Butts, J. A., & Snyder, H. N. (1997). The youngest delinquents: Offenders under age 15. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Butts, J. A., & Snyder, H. N. (2006). Too soon to tell: Deciphering recent trends in youth violence. Issue Brief #110. Chicago: Chapin Hall Center for Children.
    Butts, J. A., & Snyder, H. N. (2007, Spring). Where are juvenile crime trends headed?Juvenile and Family Justice Today, pp. 16–20.
    Butts, J. A., & Travis, J. (2002). The rise and fall of American youth violence: 1980 to 2000. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
    Bynum, T. S., & Varano, S. P. (2003). The anti-gang initiative in Detroit: An aggressive enforcement approach to gangs. In S. H.Decker (Ed.), Policing gangs and youth violence (pp. 214–238). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
    Cairns, R. B., & Cairns, B. D. (1991). Social cognition and social networks: A developmental perspective. In D. J.Pepler & K. H.Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 249–278). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Cairns, R. B., & Cairns, B. D. (1994). Lifelines and risks: Pathways of youth in our time. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Caldwell, M. R., Vitacco, M., & Van Rybroek, G. J. (2006). Are violent delinquents worth treating? A cost-benefit analysis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43, 148–168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427805280053
    Caliber Associates. (2006). National evaluation of the Title V Community Prevention Grants Program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Campbell, R., & Reeves, J. L. (1994). Cracked coverage: Television news, the anti-cocaine crusade, and the Reagan legacy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
    Carroll, L., & Mondrick, M. E. (1976). Racial bias in the decision to grant parole. Law and Society Review, 11(1), 93–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3053205
    Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (1996). The social development model: A theory of antisocial behavior. In J. D.Hawkins (Ed.), Delinquency and crime: Current theories (pp. 149–197). New York Cambridge University Press.
    Cauffman, E. (2004). A statewide screening of mental health symptoms among juvenile offenders in detention. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 43, 430–439. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200404000-00009
    Center for Public Integrity. (2003). Harmful error: Investigating America's local prosecutors. Washington, DC: Center for Public Integrity.
    Center for Sex Offender Management. (2006). Understanding treatment for adults and juveniles who have committed sex offenses. Silver Spring, MD: Center for Sex Offender Management.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1994, March 4). Health risk behaviors among adolescents who do and do not attend school: United States, 1992. Prevention Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 43(8), 129–132.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2006). Youth risk behavior surveillance: United States, 2005. Prevention Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 55(SS-5), 1–108.
    Chaiken, M. R. (2000). Violent neighborhoods, violent kids. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Chambliss, W. J. (1995). Crime control and ethnic minorities: Legitimizing racial oppression by creating moral panics. In D. F.Hawkins (Ed.), Ethnicity, race, and crime: Perspectives across time and place (pp. 235–258). Albany: State University of New York Press.
    Chandler, K. A., Chapman, C. D., Rand, M. R., & Taylor, B. M. (1998). Students’ reports of school crime: 1989 and 1995. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics and National Center for Education Statistics.
    Chard-Wierschem, D. (1998). In pursuit of the “true” relationship: A longitudinal study of the effects of religiosity on delinquency and substance abuse. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University at Albany, State University of New York.
    Cheatwood, D. (1993). Capital punishment and the deterrence of violent crime in comparable counties. Criminal Justice Review, 18, 165–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/073401689301800202
    Chesney-Lind, M. (1997). The female offender: Girls, women, and crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452232157
    Chesney-Lind, M., &Brown, M. (1999). Girls and violence. In D. J.Flannery & C. R.Huff (Eds.), Youth violence: Prevention, intervention, and social policy (pp. 171–199). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
    Chesney-Lind, M., & Sheldon, R. (1998). Girls, delinquency, and juvenile justice. Belmont, CA: West/Wadsworth.
    Chicago Police Department, Gang Crime Section. (1992). Street gangs. Chicago: Author.
    Chiricos, T. G., & Crawford, C. (1995). Race and imprisonment: A contextual assessment of the evidence. In D. F.Hawkins (Ed.), Ethnicity, race, and crime: Perspectives across time and place (pp. 281–309). Albany: State University of New York Press.
    Christie, C. A., Jolivette, K., &Nelson, C. M. (2005). Breaking the school to prison pipeline: Identifying school risk and protective factors for youth delinquency. Exceptionality, 13, 69–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327035ex1302_2
    Chung, H. L., Schubert, C. A., & Mulvey, E. P. (2007). An empirical portrait of community reentry among serious juvenile offenders in two metropolitan cities. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 1402–1426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093854807307170
    Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy. (2003). Bringing evidence-driven progress to crime and substance-abuse policy: A recommended federal strategy. Washington, DC: Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy.
    Cohen, M. (1998). The monetary value of saving a high-risk youth. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 14, 5–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023092324459
    Cohen, S. (1980). Folk devils and moral panics: The creation of the mods and rockers. New York: Basil Blackwell.
    Cohn, A., Biondi, L., Flaim, L. C., Paskowski, M., & Cohn, S. (1997). Evaluating electronic monitoring programs. Alternatives to Incarceration, 3, 16–24.
    Coie, J. D., & Dodge, K. A. (1998). The development of aggression and antisocial behavior. In N.Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (
    5th ed.
    , pp. 779–861). New York: Wiley.
    Coie, J. D., & Miller-Johnson, S. (2001). Peer factors and interventions. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 191–209). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Suppl.), 95–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/228943
    Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Columbia University Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. (2003). Columbia University guidelines for child and adolescent mental health referral. New York: Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Columbia University.
    Convention on the Rights of the Child. (1989). Article 37(a), G.A. res. 44/25, annex, 44 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 167, U.N. Doc. A/44/49, entered into force September 2, 1990.
    Cook, P. J., & Laub, J. H. (1998). The unprecedented epidemic of youth violence. In M.Tonry & M. H.Moore (Eds.), Youth violence (pp. 27–64). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Cook, P. J., & Ludwig, J. (2001, June 10). Protecting the public in presidential style. News and Observer (Raleigh, NC), p. A31.
    Cook, P. J., & Ludwig, J. (2006). The social costs of gun ownership. Journal of Public Economics, 90, 379–391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.02.003
    Coolbaugh, K., & Hansel, C. J. (2000). The comprehensive strategy: Lessons learned from the pilot sites. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Cornell, D., & Sheras, P. (2006). Guidelines for responding to student threats of violence. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
    Cothern, L. (2000). Juveniles and the death penalty: A report of the federal Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Coughlin, B. C., & Venkatesh, S. A. (2003). The urban street gang after 1970. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 41–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.29.101602.130751
    Council of State Governments. (2005). Report of the Re-Entry Policy Council. Lexington, KY: Author.
    Craig, W. M., Vitaro, C. G., & Tremblay, R. E. (2002). The road to gang membership: Characteristics of male gang and non-gang members from ages 10 to 14. Social Development, 11, 53–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00186
    Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1131945
    Crime and Justice Institute. (2004). Implementing evidence-based practices in community corrections: The principles of effective intervention. Boston: Author.
    Crowe, A. H. (1998). Drug identification and testing in the juvenile justice system. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Crowley, M. (2007, May). No mercy, kid!Reader's Digest, pp. 35–36.
    Crutchfield, R. D., Bridges, G. S., & Pitchford, S. R. (1994). Analytical and aggregation biases in analyses of imprisonment: Reconciling discrepancies in studies of racial disparity. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 31, 166–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427894031002005
    Cullen, F. T. (2005). The twelve people who saved rehabilitation: How the science of criminology made a difference. Criminology, 43, 1–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0011-1348.2005.00001.x
    Cullen, F. T. (2006). It's time to reaffirm rehabilitation. Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 665–672. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00409.x
    Cullen, F. T. (2007). Make rehabilitation corrections’ guiding paradigm. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 717–728. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00469.x
    Cullen, F. T., Bose, B. A., Jonson, C. N. L., & Unnever, J. D. (2007). Public support for early intervention: Is child saving a “habit of the heart”?Victims and Offenders, 2, 109–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15564880701263015
    Cullen, F. T., & Gendreau, P. (2000). Assessing correctional rehabilitation: Policy, practice, and prospects. In J.Homey (Ed.), Criminal justice 2000: Vol. 3. Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system (pp. 109–175). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Cullen, F. T., Golden, K. M., & Cullen, J. B. (1983). Is child saving dead? Attitudes toward juvenile rehabilitation in Illinois. Journal of Criminal Justice, 11, 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0047-2352%2883%2990093-4
    Cullen, F. T., Wright, J. P., & Blevins, K. R. (2006). Taking stock: The status of criminological theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.
    Cullen, F. T., Wright, J. P., Brown, S., Moon, M. M., Blankenship, M. B., & Applegate, B. K. (1998). Public support for early intervention programs: Implications for a progressive policy agenda. Crime and Delinquency, 44, 187–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128798044002001
    Curry, G. D. (1998). Responding to female gang involvement. In J.Hagedorn &M.Chesney-Lind (Eds.), Female gangs in America (pp. 133–143). Chicago: Lakeview.
    Curry, G. D. (2000). Self-reported gang involvement and officially recorded delinquency. Criminology, 38, 1253–1274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2000.tb01422.x
    Curry, G. D., & Decker, S. H. (2000). Referrals and the referral process in the St. Louis family court. St. Louis: Missouri Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice.
    Curry, G. D., & Decker, S. H. (2003). Confronting gangs: Crime and community (
    2nd ed.
    ). Los Angeles: Roxbury
    Curry, G. D., Decker, S. H., & Egley, A. Jr. (2002). Gang involvement and delinquency in a middle school population. Justice Quarterly, 19, 275–292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418820200095241
    Curry, G. D., Egley, A., & Howell, J. C. (2004, November). Youth gang homicide trends in the National Youth Gang Survey: 1999-2003. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Nashville, TN.
    Curry, G. D., & Howell, J. C. (2007, April 18). National Youth Gang Center. Unpublished document, Tallahassee, EL.
    Curry, G. D., & Spergel, I. A. (1988). Gang homicide, delinquency and community. Criminology, 26, 381–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1988.tb00847.x
    Dahmann, J. (1983). Prosecutorial response to violent gang criminality: An evaluation of Operation Hardcore. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Death Penalty Information Center. (2003, January 7). Facts about the death penalty. Washington, DC: Author.
    Decker, S. H. (1996). Collective and normative features of gang violence. Justice Quarterly, 13, 243–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418829600092931
    Decker, S. H. (2003). Policing gangs and youth violence: Where do we stand, where do we go from here? In S. H.Decker (Ed.), Policing gangs and youth violence (pp. 287–293). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
    Decker, S. H. (2007). Youth gangs and violent behavior. In D. J.Flannery, A. T.Vazsonyi, & I. D.Waldman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression (pp. 388–402). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.019
    Decker, S. H., Bynum, T., & Weisel, D. (1998). A tale of two cities: Gangs as organized crime groups. Justice Quarterly, 15, 395–423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418829800093821
    Decker, S. H., & Curry, G. D. (2000). Addressing key features of gang membership: Measuring the involvement of young members. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 473–482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2352%2800%2900063-5
    Decker, S., & Curry, G. D. (2002). “I'm down for my organization”: The rationality of responses to delinquency, youth crime and gangs. In A. R.Piquero & S. G.Tibbits (Eds.), Rational choice and criminal behavior (pp. 197–218). New York: Routledge.
    Decker, S. H., & Curry, G. D. (2003). Suppression without prevention, prevention without suppression. In S. H.Decker (Ed.), Policing gangs and youth violence (pp. 191–213). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
    Decker, S. H., Katz, C. M., & Webb, V. J. (2008). Understanding the black box of gang organization: Implications for involvement in violent crime, drug sales, and violent victimization. Crime & Delinquency, 54, 153–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128706296664
    Decker, S. H., & Van Winkle, B. (1996). Life in the gang: Family, friends, and violence. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174732
    DeComo, R. E. (1998). Estimating the prevalence of juvenile custody by race and gender. Crime & Delinquency, 44, 489–506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128798044004002
    DeComo, R. E., & Wiebush, R. (Eds.). (2005). Graduated sanctions for juvenile offenders: A program model and planning guide. Vol. II: Dispositional court hearing to case closure. Reno, NV: National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.
    Degnan, W. (1994). Lifeskills post-parole treatment program. Sanger, CA: Operation New Hope.
    Degnan, W., & Degnan, A. (1993). Lifestyle changes: One step at a time. Sanger, CA: Operation New Hope.
    DeMuro, P. (2000). Pathways to juvenile detention reform: Vol. 4. Consider the alternatives. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
    Deutsch, L. (2000, February 26). Los Angeles police officer gets five years. USA Today, p. 6A.
    Dilulio, J. J. Jr. (1995a). Arresting ideas. Policy Review, 74, 12–16.
    Dilulio, J. J. Jr. (1995b, November 27). The coming of the super-predators. Weekly Standard, pp. 23–28.
    Dilulio, J. J. Jr. (1996a). How to stop the coming crime wave. New York: Manhattan Institute.
    Dilulio, J. J. Jr. (1996b, Spring). They're coming: Florida's youth crime bomb. Impact, pp. 25–27.
    Dinkes, R., Cataldi, E. E., Kena, G., & Baum, K. (2006). Indicators of school crime and safety, 2006. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Center for Education Statistics, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Dishion, T. J., McCord, J., & Poulin, F. (1999). When interventions harm: Peer groups and problem behavior. American Psychologist, 54, 755–764. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.9.755
    Donohue, E., Schiraldi, V., & Ziedenberg, J. (1999). School house hype: School shootings and the real risks students face in America. Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice.
    Dorfman, L., & Schiraldi, V. (2001). Off balance: Youth, race and crime in the news. Washington, DC: Building Blocks for Youth.
    Duane, D. (2006, January-February). Straight outta Boston. Mother Jones, pp. 61–80.
    Dunford, F. W., & Elliott, D. S. (1984). Identifying career offenders using self-reported data. Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency, 21, 57–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427884021001004
    Durlak, J. A. (1998). Common risk and protective factors in successful prevention programs. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68, 512–520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0080360
    Durlak, J. A., & Lipsey, M. W. (1991). A practitioner's guide to meta-analysis. American Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 291–332.
    Dwyer, K., & Osher, D. (2000). Safeguarding our children: An action guide. Washington, DC: U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, American Institutes for Research.
    Eber, L., Sugai, G., Smith, C. R., & Scott, T. M. (2002). Wraparound and positive behavioral interventions and supports in schools. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 171–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10634266020100030501
    Eddy, R., Sabogal, H., & Walden, S. (1988). The cocaine wars. New York: WW Norton.
    Egley, A. Jr. (2005). Highlights of the 2002-2003 National Youth Gang Surveys. OJJDP Fact Sheet (June 2005-01). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Egley, A. Jr., Howell, J. C., & Major, A. K. (2004). Recent patterns of gang problems in the United States: Results from the 1996-2002 National Youth Gang Survey. In F.-A.Esbensen, L.Gaines, & S. G.Tibbetts (Eds.), American youth gangs at the millennium (pp. 90–108). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
    Egley, A. Jr., Howell, J. C., & Major, A. (2006). National Youth Gang Survey: 1999-2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Egley, A. E., Howell, J. C., & Ritz, C. E. (2005, November). Exploring gang migration and proliferation patterns in the National Youth Gang Survey. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Canada.
    Egley, A. Jr., & Major, A. K. (2004). Highlights of the 2002 National Youth Gang Survey. OJJDP Fact Sheet (# 2004-01). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Egley, A. E., & O'Donnell, C. E. (2007, November). The dark figure of officially-recorded gang crime. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Atlanta, GA.
    Egley, A. Jr., & O'Donnell, C. E. (2008). Highlights of the 2007 National Youth Gang Survey: Preliminary findings. Tallahassee, FL: National Youth Gang Center.
    Egley, A. Jr., O'Donnell, C. E., & Curry, G. D. (2007). Highlights of the 2005 National Youth Gang Survey: Preliminary findings. Tallahassee, FL: National Youth Gang Center.
    Egley, A. Jr., & Ritz, C. E. (2006). Highlights of the 2004 National Youth Gang Survey. OJJDP Fact Sheet #2006-01. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Eitle, D., Gunkel, S., & Gundy, K. V. (2004). Cumulative exposure to stressful life events and male gang membership. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 95–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2003.12.001
    Eitle, D., & Turner, R. J. (2002). Exposure to community violence and young adult crime: The effects of witnessing violence, traumatic victimization, and other stressful life events. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39, 214–237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002242780203900204
    Elder, G. H. Jr. (Ed.). (1985a). Life course dynamics: Trajectories and transitions, 1968-1980. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
    Elder, G. H. Jr. (1985b). Perspectives on the life course. In G. H.Elder Jr. (Ed.), Life course dynamics: Trajectories and transitions, 1968-1980 (pp. 23–49). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
    Elliott, D. S. (1994a). Serious violent offenders: Onset, developmental course, and termination. Criminology, 32, 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1994.tb01144.x
    Elliott, D. S. (1994b). Youth violence: An overview. Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence.
    Elliott, D. S. (1995, November). Lies, damn lies and arrest statistics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Boston.
    Elliott, D. S. (Ed.). (1998). Blueprints for violence prevention. Denver, CO: C&M.
    Elliott, D. S. (2000). Violent offending over the life course: A sociological perspective. In N. A.Krasnegor, N. B.Anderson, & D. R.Bynum (Eds.), Health and behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 189–204). Rockville, MD: National Institutes of Health.
    Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Menard, S. (1989). Multiple problem youth: Delinquency, substance abuse and mental health problems. New York: Springer-Verlag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-9637-6
    Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., & Morse, B. (1986). Self-reported violent offending. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1, 472–514. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/088626086001004006
    Elliott, D. S., & Mihalic, S. (2004). Issues in disseminating and replicating effective prevention programs. Prevention Science, 5, 47–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000013981.28071.52
    Ely, J. W., Osheroff, J. A., Ebell, M. H., Chambliss, M. L., Vinson, D. C., Stevermer, J. J., et al. (2002). Obstacles to answering doctors’ questions about patient care with evidence: Qualitative study. British Medical Journal, 324, 710–718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7339.710
    Empey, L. T. (1978). American delinquency: Its meaning and construction. Homewood, IL: Dorsey
    Esbensen, R., Deschenes, E. P., & Winfree, L. T. (1999). Differences between gang girls and gang boys: Results from a multi-site survey. Youth and Society, 31, 27–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0044118X99031001002
    Esbensen, R., & Huizinga, D. (1993). Gangs, drugs, and delinquency in a survey of urban youth. Criminology, 31, 565–589. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1993.tb01142.x
    Esbensen, R., Huizinga, D., & Menard, S. (1999). Family context and criminal victimization in adolescence. Youth & Society, 31, 168–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0044118X99031001002
    Esbensen, E., Huizinga, D., & Weiher, A. W. (1993). Gang and non-gang youth: Differences in explanatory variables. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 9, 94–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104398629300900203
    Esbensen, E., Osgood, D. W., Taylor, T. J., Peterson, D., & Freng, A. (2001). How great is G.R.E.A.T.? Results from a longitudinal quasi-experimental design. Criminology and Public Policy, 1, 87–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2001.tb00078.x
    Esbensen, E. & Tusinski, K. (2007). Youth gangs in the print media. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 14, 21–38.
    Esbensen, E., Winfree, L. T., He, N., & Taylor, T. J. (2001). Youth gangs and definitional issues: When is a gang a gang, and why does it matter?Crime & Delinquency, 47, 105–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128701047001005
    Espelage, D. L., Wasserman, S., & Fleisher, M. S. (2007). Social networks and violent behavior. In D. J.Flannery, A. T.Vazsonyi, & I. D.Waldman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression (pp. 450–464). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.023
    Espiritu, R. C., Huizinga, D., Crawford, A. M., & Loeber, R. (2001). Epidemiology of self-reported delinquency. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 47–66). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Executive Office of the President of the United States. (2005). National drug control strategy: FY 2006 budget summary. Washington, DC: The White House.
    Ezelle, M. E. (2007). Examining the overall and offense-specific criminal career lengths of a sample of serious offenders. Crime and Delinquency, 53, 3–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128706294437
    Fagan, J. (2002). Policing guns and youth violence. The Future of Children, 12, 133–151. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1602743
    Fagan, J. (2005). Adolescents, maturity and the law. The American Prospect. Special Report: Breaking Through, pp. A5-A7.
    Fagan, J. (2007). End natural life sentences for juveniles. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 735–746. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00481.x
    Fagan, J., & Zimring, F. E. (Eds.). (2000). The changing borders of juvenile justice: Transfer of adolescents to the criminal court. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Farabee, D. (2005). Rethinking rehabilitation: Why can't we reform our criminals?. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
    Farrington, D. P. (1986). Age and crime. In M.Tonry & N.Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 7, pp. 189–250). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Farrington, D. P. (2005). Integrated developmental and life-course theories of offending. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
    Farrington, D. P. (2007). Origin of violent behavior over the life span. In D. J.Flannery, A. T.Vazsonyi, & I. D.Waldman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression (pp. 19–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.003
    Farrington, D. P., Jolliffe, D., Loeber, R., & Homish, D. L. (2007). How many offenses are really committed per juvenile court offender?Victims and Offenders, 2, 227–249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15564880701403934
    Farrington, D. P., & Welsh, B. C. (2007). Saving children from a life of crime: Early risk factors and effective interventions. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2006). Uniform crime report, 2005. Washington, DC: Author.
    Feld, B. C. (1993). Criminalizing the American juvenile court. In M.Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 17, pp. 197–280). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Feld, B. C. (1998a). Abolish the juvenile court: Youthfulness, criminal responsibility, and sentencing policy. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 88, 68–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1144075
    Feld, B. C. (1998b). Juvenile and criminal justice systems’ responses to youth. In M.Tonry & M. H.Moore (Eds.), Youth violence (pp. 189–262). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Feld, B. C. (1999). The honest politician's guide to juvenile justice policy in the twenty-first century. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 564, 10–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716299564001002
    Feld, B. C. (2003). Competence, culpability, and punishment: Implications of Atkins for executing and sentencing adolescents. Hofstra Law Review, 32, 463–552.
    Felson, M. (2006). The street gang strategy. In M. Felson, Crime and nature (pp. 305–324). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452204260
    Ferguson, C. J., Miguel, C. S., Kilburn, J. C., & Sanchez, P. (2007). The effectiveness of school-based anti-bullying programs: A meta-analytic review. Criminal Justice Review, 32, 401–414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734016807311712
    Fessenden, F. (2000, April 8). Rampage killers: A statistical portrait. New York Times. Retrieved December 16, 2000, from http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/040900rampage-killers.html
    Fields, G. (1999, July 21). Senate hearing takes up debate over police seizures of property. USA Today, p. 6A.
    Fields, G. (2000, April 18). Police group wants national study of justice system. USA Today, p. 7A.
    Fight Crime: Invest in Kids. (2002). A school and youth violence prevention plan. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved August 20, 2002, from http://www.fightcrime.org
    Fight Crime: Invest in Kids. (2004). Caught in the crossfire: Arresting gang violence by investing in kids. Washington, DC: Author.
    Finckenauer, J. O., & Gavin, P. W. (1999). Scared Straight: The panacea phenomenon revisited. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
    Finestone, H. (1976). Victims of change. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
    Finkelhor, D., & Dziuba-Leatherman, J. (1994). Victimization of children. American Psychologist, 49, 173–183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.3.173
    Fishman, M. (1978). Crime waves as ideology. Social Problems, 25, 531–543. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/800102
    Flannery, D. J., Singer, M. I., van Dulmen, M., Kretschmar, J. M., & Belliston, L. M. (2007). Exposure to violence, mental health, and violent behavior. In D.Flannery, A.Vazonsyi, & I.Waldman (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of violent behavior (pp. 306–321). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.015
    Flannery, D. J., Vazsonyi, A. T., & Waldman, I. D. (2007). Cambridge handbook of violent behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840
    Fleisher, M. S. (1998). Dead end kids: Gang girls and the boys they know. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
    Flores, A. W., Travis, L. E., & Latessa, E. (2003). Case classification for juvenile corrections: An assessment of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory. Cincinnati, OH: Center for Criminal Justice Research, University of Cincinnati.
    Forst, M., Fagan, J., & Vivona, T. S. (1989). Youth in prisons and training schools: Perceptions and consequences of the treatment-custody dichotomy. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 39(1), 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.1989.tb00634.x
    Fox, J. A. (1996a, October 10). The calm before the crime wave storm. Los Angeles Times, p. B9.
    Fox, J. A. (1996b). Trends in juvenile violence: A report to the United States attorney general on current and future rates of juvenile offending. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Fox, S. J. (1970). Juvenile justice reform: A historical perspective. Stanford Law Review, 22, 1187–1239. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1227960
    Freeman, R., Eber, L., Anderson, C., Irvin, L., Horner, R., Bounds, M., et al. (2006). Building inclusive school cultures using school-wide PBS: Designing effective individual support systems for students with significant disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 31, 4–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.31.1.4
    Fritsch, E. J., Caeti, T. J., & Taylor, R. W. (2003). Gang suppression through saturation patrol and aggressive curfew and truancy enforcement: A quasi-experimental test of the Dallas Anti-Gang Initiative. In S. H.Decker (Ed.), Policing gangs and youth violence (pp. 267–284). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
    Gambrill, E. (2006). Evidence-based practice and policy: Choices ahead. Research on Social Work Practice, 16, 338–357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049731505284205
    Garascia, J. A. (2005). The price we are willing to pay for punitive justice in the juvenile detention system. Indiana Law Journal, 80, 489–515.
    Gatti, U., Tremblay, R. E., Vitaro, E. & McDuff, P. (2005). Youth gangs, delinquency and drug use: A test of selection, facilitation, and enhancement hypotheses. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 1178–1190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.00423.x
    Gebo, E. (2005). Do family courts administer individualized justice in delinquency cases?Criminal Justice Policy Review, 16, 190–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0887403404267773
    Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D. (1996). The correctional program assessment inventory (
    6th ed.
    ). Saint John: University of New Brunswick.
    Gendreau, P., & Andrews, D. (2001). The correctional program assessment inventory: 2000. Saint John: University of New Brunswick.
    Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., & Smith, P. (2001). Implementation guidelines for correctional programs in the “real world.” In G. A.Bernfeld, D. P.Farrington, & A. W.Leschied (Eds.), Offender rehabilitation in practice (pp. 247–268). West Sussex, England: Wiley.
    Gendreau, P., Smith, P., & French, S. A. (2006). The theory of effective correctional intervention with offenders: Empirical status and future directions. In F. T.Cullen, J. P.Wright, & K. R.Blevins (Eds.), Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (pp. 419–446). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
    Geraghty, T. F. (1997). Justice for children: How do we get there?Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 88, 190–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1144077
    Gest, T. & Pope, V. (1996, March 25). Crime time bomb. U.S. News & World Report, pp. 29–36.
    Giedd, J., Blumenthal, J., Jeffries, N., Castellanos, R., Liu, H., Zijdenbos, A., et al. (1999). Brain development during childhood and adolescence: A longitudinal MRI study. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 861–863. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/13158
    Gilliam, W. S. (2005). Prekindergarteners left behind: Expulsion rates in state prekindergartener programs. New York: Foundation for Child Development.
    Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3–8.
    Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    Glaze, L. E., & Bonczar, T. P. (2006). Probation and parole in the United States, 2005 (NCJ 215091). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Goldstein, A. P., Click, B., & Gibbs, J. C. (1998). Aggression replacement training: A comprehensive intervention for aggressive youth (Rev. ed.). Champaign, IL: Research Press.
    Goldstein, H. (1979). Improving policing: A problem-oriented approach. Crime and Delinquency, 25, 236–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001112877902500207
    Gonzales, A. R. (2007, May 15). Prepared remarks of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales at the National Press Club on “Safer neighborhoods: A plan for partnership.”Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
    Goode, E., & Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994). Moral panics: The social construction of deviance. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
    Goodnough, A. (2006, March 18). 2nd autopsy in youth boot camp death fails to end questions. The New York Times.
    Gordon, R. A., Lahey, B. B., Kawai, E., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Farrington, D. P. (2004). Antisocial behavior and youth gang membership: Selection and socialization. Criminology, 42, 55–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2004.tb00513.x
    Gorman-Smith, D., & Loeber, R. (2005). Are developmental pathways in disruptive behaviors the same for girls and boys?Journal of Child and Family Studies, 14, 15–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10826-005-1109-9
    Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Schools and delinquency. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Gottfredson, D. C., Cross, A., & Soule, D. A. (2007). Distinguishing characteristics of effective and ineffective after-school programs to prevent delinquency and victimization. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 289–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00437.x
    Gottfredson, D. C., Gerstenblith, S. A., Soule, D. A., Womer, S. C., & Lu, S. (2004). Do after school programs reduce delinquency?Prevention Science, 5, 253–266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000045359.41696.02
    Gottfredson, D. C., & Gottfredson, G. D. (2002). Quality of school-based prevention programs. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39, 3–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002242780203900101
    Gottfredson, D. C., & Soule, D. A. (2005). The timing of property crime, violent crime, and substance use among juveniles. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 42, 110–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427804266563
    Gottfredson, D. C., & Wilson, D. B. (2003). Characteristics of effective school-based substance abuse prevention. Prevention Science, 4, 27–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021782710278
    Gottfredson, D. C., Wilson, D. B., & Najaka, S. S. (2002a). School-based crime prevention. In L. W.Sherman, D. P.Farrington, B. C.Welsh, & D. L.MacKenzie (Eds.), Evidence-based crime prevention (pp. 56–164). London: Routledge.
    Gottfredson, D. G., Wilson, D. B., & Najaka, S. S. (2002b). The schools. In J. Q.Wilson & J.Petersilia (Eds.), Crime: Public policies for crime control (pp. 149–189). Oakland, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.
    Gottfredson, G. D. (1987). Peer group interventions to reduce the risk of delinquent behavior: A selective review and a new evaluation. Criminology, 25, 671–714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1987.tb00815.x
    Gottfredson, G. D., & Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Gang problems and gang programs in a national sample of schools. Ellicott City, MD: Gottfredson Associates.
    Gottfredson, G. D., & Gottfredson, D. C. (2007). School violence. In D.Flannery, A.Vazonsyi, & I.Waldman (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of violent behavior (pp. 344–358). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.017
    Gottfredson, G. D., Gottfredson, D. C., Payne, A. A., & Gottfredson, N. C. (2005). School climate predictors of disorder: Results from a national study of delinquency prevention in schools. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 42, 412–444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427804271931
    Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
    Gottfredson, S. D., & Moriarty, L. J. (2006). Statistical risk assessment: Old problems and new applications. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 178–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128705281748
    Cover, A. R., MacKenzie, D. L., & Armstrong, G. S. (2000). Importation and deprivation explanations of juveniles’ adjustment to correctional facilities. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 450–467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306624X00444004
    Green, G. S., Carlson, P. M., & Colvin, R. E. (2004). Juvenile accountability and the specific deterrent effects of short-term confinement. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 55(1), 63–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.2004.tb00097.x
    Greene, J. A. (1999). Zero tolerance: A case study of police policies and practices in New York City. Crime and Delinquency, 45, 171–187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128799045002001
    Greene, J. R. (2007). Make police oversight independent and transparent. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 747–754. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00477.x
    Griffin, P. (2003). Trying and sentencing juveniles as adults: An analysis of state transfer and blended sentencing laws. Special Project Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Grisso, T. (1996). Society's retributive response to juvenile violence: A developmental perspective. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 229–247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01499022
    Grisso, T., & Schwartz, R. G. (Eds.). (2000). Youth on trial: A developmental perspective on juvenile justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Grisso, T., Steinberg, L., Woolard, J., Cauffman, E., Scott, E., Graham, S., et al. (2003). Juveniles’ competence to stand trial: A comparison of adolescents’ and adults’ capacities as trial defendants. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 333–363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1024065015717
    Grisso, T., & Underwood, L. A. (2004). Screening and assessing mental health and substance use disorders among youth in the juvenile justice system: A resource guide for practitioners. Delmar, NY: National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice, Policy Research Associates, Inc.
    Grisso, T., Vincent, G., & Seagrave, D. (2005). Mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice. New York: Guilford.
    Grossman, D. C., Mueller, B. A., Riedy, C., Dowd, M. D., Villaveces, A., Prodzinski, J., et al. (2005). Gun storage practices and risk of youth suicide and unintentional firearm injuries. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293, 707–714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.6.707
    Grossman, J. B., Price, M. L., Fellerath, V., Jucovy, L. Z., Kutloff, L. J., Raley, R., et al. (2002). Multiple choices after school: Findings from the Extended-Service Schools Initiative. New York: Wallace-Reader's Digest Fund.
    Grove, W. M., Eckert, E. D., Heston, L., Bouchard, T. J., Segal, N., & Lykken, D. T. (1990). Clinical vs. mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Unpublished manuscript, University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology.
    Grove, W. M., & Meehl, P. E. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 293–323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.2.2.293
    Gugliotta, G., & Leen, J. (1989). Kings of cocaine. New York: Simon & Schuster.
    Haapanen, R. A., & Britton, L. (2002). Drug testing for youthful offenders on parole: An experimental evaluation. Criminology and Public Policy, 1, 217–243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2002.tb00087.x
    Hagan, J., & Foster, H. (2000). Making corporate and criminal America less violent: Public norms and structural reforms. Contemporary Sociology, 29(1), 44–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2654930
    Hagan, J., & McCarthy, B. (1997). Mean streets: Youth crime and homelessness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625497
    Hahn, R. A., Bilukha, O., Crosby, A., Fullilove, M. T., Liberman, A., Moscicki, E., et al. (2005). Firearm laws and the reduction of violence. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28, 40–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.005
    Hahn, R. A., Fuqua-Whitley, D., Wethington, H., et al. (2007). Effectiveness of universal school based programs to prevent violent and aggressive behavior: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 33(Supplement), S114-S129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2007.04.012
    Hall, G. P., Thornberry, T. P., & Lizotte, A. J. (2006). The gang facilitation effect and neighborhood risk: Do gangs have a stronger influence on delinquency in disadvantaged areas? In J. F.Short & L. A.Hughes (Eds.), Studying youth gangs (pp. 47–62). Lanham, MD: AltaMira.
    Hallfors, D. D., Cho, H., Sanchez, V., Khatapoush, S., Kim, H. M., & Bauer, D. (2006). Efficacy vs. effectiveness trial, results of an indicated “model” substance abuse program: Implications for public health. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 2254–2259. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2005.067462
    Hallfors, D., & Godette, D. (2002). Will the “Principles of Effectiveness” improve prevention practice? Early findings from a diffusion study. Health Education Research, 17, 461–470. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/her/17.4.461
    Hammer, H., Finkelhor, D., & Sedlak, A. (2002). Runaway/thrownaway children: National estimates and characteristics. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Hamparian, D. M., Schuster, R., Dinitz, S., & Conrad, J. P. (1978). The violent few: A study of dangerous juvenile offenders. Lexington, MA: Lexington.
    Harcourt, B. E. (2001). Illusion of order: The false promise of broken window policing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Harcourt, B. E., & Ludwig, J. (2006). Broken windows: New evidence from New York City and a five-city social experiment. University of Chicago Law Review, 73, 271–320.
    Harries, K., & Cheatwood, D. (1997). The geography of execution: The capital punishment quagmire in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
    Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., & Quinsey, V. L. (1998). Appraisal and management of risk in sexual aggressors: Implications for criminal justice policy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4, 73–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.4.1-2.73
    Harrison, P. M., & Beck, A. J. (2006). Prisoners in 2005. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Hartman, D. A., & Golub, A. (1999). The social construction of the crack epidemic in the print media. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 31, 423–433. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02791072.1999.10471772
    Hawkins, D. E., & Kempf-Leonard, K. E. (2005). Our children, their children: Confronting racial and ethnic differences in American juvenile justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Hawkins, J. D. (1999). Preventing crime and violence through Communities That Care. European Journal on Crime Policy and Research, 7, 443–458. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008769321118
    Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. E., & Arthur, M. W. (2002). Promoting science-based prevention in communities. Addictive Behaviors, 27, 951–976. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4603%2802%2900298-8
    Hawkins, J. D., Herrenkohl, T. I., Farrington, D. P., Brewer, D. D., Catalano, R. E., & Harachi, T. W. (1998). A review of predictors of youth violence. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 106–146). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Hawkins, J. D., & Weis, J. G. (1985). The social development model: An integrated approach to delinquency prevention. Journal of Primary Prevention, 6, 73–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01325432
    Hayes, M., McReynolds, L. S., Wasserman, G. A., & Haxton, W. (2005). Comparison of the MAYSI-2's Paper and Voice Formats. Assessment, 12, 395–403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073191105280359
    Henggeler, S. W. (1997). The development of effective drug abuse services for youth. In J. A.Egertson, D. M.Fox, & A. I.Leshner (Eds.), Treating drug abusers effectively (pp. 253–279). New York: Basil Blackwell.
    Henggeler, S. W., Pickrel, S. G., & Brondino, M. J. (1999). Multisystemic treatment of substance abusing and dependent delinquents: Outcomes, treatment fidelity, and transportability. Mental Health Services Research, 1, 171–184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022373813261
    Henggeler, S. W. & Schoenwald, S. K. (1994). Boot camps for juvenile offenders: Just say “no.”Journal of Child and Family Studies, 3, 243–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02234684
    Henggeler, S. W., Schoenwald, S. K., Borduin, C. M., Rowland, M. D., & Cunningham, P. B. (1998). Multisystemic treatment of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. New York: Guilford.
    Henggeler, S. W., Schoenwald, S. K., Borduin, C. M., & Swenson, C. C. (2006). Methodological critique and meta-analysis as Trojan horse. Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 447–457. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2005.07.001
    Henry, R. (2007, June 17). Critics: Zero tolerance makes zero sense. The News & Observer, p. 11A.
    Herbert, B. (2007a, April 9). 6-year-olds under arrest. New York Times. Retrieved January 13, 2008, from http://select.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/opinion/09herbert.html
    Herbert, B. (2007b, June 9). School to prison pipeline. New York Times. Retrieved January 13, 2008, from http://select.nytimes.com/2007/06/09/opinion/09herbert.html
    Hickman, M. J. (2006). Citizen complaints about police use of force. Special report. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Hill, K. G., Howell, J. C., Hawkins, J. D., & Battin-Pearson, S. R. (1999). Childhood risk factors for adolescent gang membership: Results from the Seattle Social Development Project. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 300–322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427899036003003
    Hill, K. G., Lui, C., & Hawkins, J. D. (2001). Early precursors of gang membership: A study of Seattle youth. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Hindelang, M. J., Hirschi, T. & Weis, J. (1981). Measuring delinquency. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    Hipwell, A. E., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Keenan, K., White, H. R., & Kroneman, L. (2002). Characteristics of girls with early onset of disruptive and antisocial behavior. Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 12, 99–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cbm.489
    Hipwell, A. E., Pardini, D. A., Loeber, R., Sembower, M. A., Keenan, K., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (2007). Callous-unemotional behaviors in young girls: Shared and unique effects relative to conduct problems. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36, 293–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15374410701444165
    Hipwell, A. E., White, H. R., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Chung, T., & Sembower, M. A. (2005). Young girls’ expectancies about the effects of alcohol, future intentions and patterns of use. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 66, 630–639.
    Holman, B., & Ziedenberg, J. (2006). The dangers of detention: The impact of incarcerating youth in detention and other secure facilities. Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute.
    Howell, J. C. (Ed.). (1995). Guide for implementing the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Howell, J. C. (1996). Juvenile transfers to the criminal justice system: State-of-the-art. Law and Policy, 18, 17–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1996.tb00163.x
    Howell, J. C. (1997). Juvenile justice and youth violence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Howell, J. C. (1998a, February-March). Abolish the juvenile court? Nonsense!Juvenile Justice Update, pp. 1-2, 10-13.
    Howell, J. C. (1998b). Promising programs for youth gang violence prevention and intervention. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 284–312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Howell, J. C. (1998c, March-April). Superpredators and the prophets of doom. Youth Today, p. 50.
    Howell, J. C. (1998d). Youth gangs: An overview. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Howell, J. C. (1999). Youth gang homicides: A literature review. Crime & Delinquency, 45, 208–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128799045002003
    Howell, J. C. (2000). Youth gang programs and strategies. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Howell, J. C. (2003a). Diffusing research into practice using the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 1, 219–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204003001003001
    Howell, J. C. (2003b). Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Howell, J. C. (2006). The impact of gangs on communities. NYGC Bulletin No. 2. Tallahassee, FL: National Youth Gang Center.
    Howell, J. C. (2007). Menacing or mimicking? Realities of youth gangs. The Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 58, 9–20.
    Howell, J. C., & Curry, G. D. (2005). Mobilizing communities to address gang problems. Tallahassee, FL: National Youth Gang Center.
    Howell, J. C., Curry, G. D., Pontius, M., & Roush, D. W. (2003). National survey of youth gang problems in juvenile detention facilities. East Lansing: Michigan State University, National Juvenile Detention Association, Center for Research and Professional Development.
    Howell, J. C., & Decker, S. H. (1999). The youth gangs, drugs, and violence connection. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Howell, J. C., & Egley, A. Jr. (2005a). Gangs in small towns and rural counties. NYGC Bulletin No. 1. Tallahassee, FL: National Youth Gang Center.
    Howell, J. C., & Egley, A. Jr. (2005b). Moving risk factors into developmental theories of gang membership. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3, 334–354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204005278679
    Howell, J. C., Egley, A. Jr., & Gleason, D. K. (2000, November). Youth gangs: Definitions and the age-old issue. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, San Francisco.
    Howell, J. C., Egley, A. Jr., & Gleason, D. K. (2002). Modern day youth gangs. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Howell, J. C., & Gleason, D. K. (1999). Youth gang drug trafficking. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Howell, J. C., & Howell, M. Q. (2007). Violent juvenile delinquency: Changes, consequences, and implications. In D.Flannery, A.Vazonsyi, & I.Waldman (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of violent behavior (pp. 501–518). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.026
    Howell, J. C., Kelly, M. R., Palmer, J., & Mangum, R. L. (2004). Integrating child welfare, juvenile justice and other agencies in a continuum of services for children, youth and families. Child Welfare, 83, 143–156.
    Howell, J. C., & Lipsey, M. W. (2004a). A practical approach to evaluating and improving juvenile justice programs. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 55, 35–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.2004.tb00095.x
    Howell, J. C., & Lipsey, M. W. (2004b). A practical approach to linking graduated sanctions with a continuum of effective programs. Juvenile Sanctions Center Training and Technical Assistance Program Bulletin, 2(1), 1–10. Reno, NV: National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.
    Howell, J. C., & Lynch, J. (2000). Youth gangs in schools. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Howell, J. C., Moore, J. P., & Egley, A. Jr. (2002). The changing boundaries of youth gangs. In C. R.Huff (Ed.), Gangs in America (
    3rd ed.
    , pp. 3–18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452232201
    Hoyt, D. R., Ryan, K. D., & Cauce, A. M. (1999). Personal victimization in a high-risk environment: Homeless and runaway adolescents. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 371–392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427899036004002
    Hsia, H. M., & Beyer, M. (2000). System change through state challenge activities: Approaches and products. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Hughes, T., & Wilson, D. J.2002. Reentry trends in the United States. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
    Huizinga, D., Esbensen, F., & Weiher, A. W. (1996). The impact of arrest on subsequent delinquent behavior. In R.Loeber, D.Huizinga, & T. P.Thornberry (Eds.), Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency: Annual report 1995-1996 (pp. 82–101). Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Huizinga, D., & Jakob-Chien, C. (1998). The contemporaneous co-occurrence of serious and violent offending and other problem behavior. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 46–67). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Huizinga, D., Loeber, R., & Thornberry, T. P. (1994). Urban delinquency and substance abuse: Initial findings report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Huizinga, D., Loeber, R., & Thornberry, T. P. (1995). Recent findings from the Program of Research on Causes and Correlates of Delinquency. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Huizinga, D., Loeber, R., Thornberry, T. P., & Cothern, L. (2000). Co-occurrence of delinquency and other problem behaviors. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Huizinga, D., & Schumann, K. F. (2001). Gang membership in Bremen and Denver: Comparative longitudinal data. In M. W.Klein, H.-J.Kerner, C. L.Maxson, & E. G. M.Weitekamp (Eds.), The Eurogang paradox: Street gangs and youth groups in the U.S. and Europe (pp. 231–246). Amsterdam: Kluwer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0882-2_18
    Huizinga, D., Weiher, A. W., Espiritu, R., & Esbensen, F. (2003). Delinquency and crime: Some highlights from the Denver Youth Survey. In T. P.Thornberry & M. D.Krohn (Eds.), Taking stock of delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies (pp. 47–91). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47945-1_3
    Human Rights Watch. (1999). No minor matter: Children in Maryland's jails. New York: Author.
    Human Rights Watch. (2000). United States—Punishment and prejudice: Racial disparities in the war on drugs. New York: Author.
    Human Rights Watch. (2005). The rest of their lives: Life without parole for child offenders in the United States. New York: Human Rights Watch/Amnesty International.
    Hunzeker, D. (1995, May). Juvenile crime, grown up time. State Legislatures, pp. 15–19.
    Hutson, H. R., Anglin, D., & Mallon, W. (1992). Injuries and deaths from gang violence: They are preventable. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 21, 1234–1236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0196-0644%2805%2981752-4
    Hutzler, J. (1982). Cannon to the left, cannon to the right: Can the juvenile court survive?Today's Delinquent, 1, 25–38.
    Hyman, I. A. & Perone, D. C. (1998). The other side of school violence: Educator policies and practices that may contribute to student misbehavior. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 7–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405%2897%2987007-0
    Hyman, I. A., & Snook, P. A. (1999). Dangerous schools: What we can do about the physical and emotional abuse of our children. Indianapolis: Jossey-Bass.
    Institute of Medicine. (1990). Astudy of the evolution, effectiveness, and financing of public and private drug treatment systems. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    Institute of Medicine. (1994). Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontier for preventive intervention research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2000). A measured response to crime: IACP's call for a national commission. Alexandria, VA: Author.
    Ireland, T. O., Smith, C. A., & Thornberry, T. P. (2002). Developmental issues in the impact of child maltreatment on later delinquency and drug use. Criminology, 40, 359–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2002.tb00960.x
    Irwin, J. (2005). The warehouse prison: Disposal of the new dangerous class. Los Angeles: Roxbury
    Irwin, K. (2004). The violence of adolescent life: Experiencing and managing everyday threats. Youth and Society, 35, 452–479. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0044118X03260759
    Jackson, P. G., & Rudman, C. (1993). Moral panic and the response to gangs in California. In S.Cummings & D. J.Monti (Eds.), Gangs: The origins and impact of contemporary youth gangs in the United States (pp. 257–275). Albany: State University of New York Press.
    Jang, S. J., & Johnson, B. R. (2001). Neighborhood disorder, individual religiosity, and adolescent use of illicit drugs: A test of multilevel hypotheses. Criminology, 39, 109–144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00918.x
    Jessor, R., Donovan, J. E., & Costa, F. M. (1991). Beyond adolescence: Problem behavior and young adult development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Johnson, B. R., Li, S. D., Larson, D. B., & McCullough, M. (2000). A systematic review of the religiosity and delinquency literature. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 16, 32–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1043986200016001003
    Johnson, K. (2006a, July 13). Cities grapple with crime by kids: Offenders as young as 10 showing up; special units targeting juveniles. USA Today, p. A3.
    Johnson, K. (2006b, July 13). Police tie jump in crime to juveniles: Gangs, guns, add up to increased violence. USA Today, p. Al.
    Johnson, K. (2007, December 18). Police brutality cases up 25%. USA Today, p. Al.
    Johnson, K. (2008, January 8). Murder down 6.5% in big cities. USA Today, p. Al.
    Johnson, K., Wagner, D., & Matthews, T. (2001). Missouri juvenile risk assessment re-validation report. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
    Johnson, S. C. (2005, April 29). North American youth gangs: Patterns and remedies. Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.
    Johnston, L. D., Bachman, J. G., & O'Malley, P. M. (1995). Monitoring the future. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.
    Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2006). Monitoring the future: National survey results on drug use, 1975-2005: Volume I, Secondary school students. (NIH Publication No. 06-5883). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drag Abuse.
    Jones, P. R., & Wyant, B. R. (2007). Target juvenile needs to reduce delinquency. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 763–772. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00464.x
    Josi, D., & Sechrest, D. K. (1999). A pragmatic approach to parole aftercare: Evaluation of a community reintegration program for high-risk youthful offenders. Justice Quarterly, 16, 51–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418829900094051
    Justice Policy Institute. (2007). The consequences aren't minor: The impact of trying youth as adults and strategies for reform. Washington, DC: Author.
    Juvenile Justice Center. (2004). Adolescence, brain development, and legal culpability. Washington, DC: Juvenile Justice Center, American Bar Association.
    Kalb, L. M., Farrington, D. P., & Loeber, R. (2001). Leading longitudinal studies on delinquency, substance use, sexual behavior, and mental health problems with childhood samples. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 415–423). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Kalb, L. M., & Loeber, R. (2003). Child disobedience and noncompliance: A review. Pediatrics, 111, 641. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.111.3.641
    Kamradt, B. (2000). Wraparound Milwaukee: Aiding youth with mental health needs. Juvenile Justice, 7(1), 14–23.
    Katner, D. R. (2002). A defense perspective of treatment programs for juvenile sex offenders. Juvenile Correctional Mental Health Report, 2(2), 17–30.
    Katz, C. M., Webb, V. J., & Schaefer, D. R. (2000). The validity of police gang intelligence lists: Examining differences in delinquency between documented gang members and nondocumented delinquent youth. Police Quarterly, 3(4), 413–437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109861110000300404
    Katz, J., & Jackson-Jacobs, C. (2004). The criminologists’ gang. In C.Sumner (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to criminology (pp. 91–124). Maiden, MA: Blackwell.
    Katz, L. R. (1970). Gideon's trumpet: Mournful and muffled. Criminal Law Bulletin, 6, 529–576.
    Kaufman, J. G., & Widom, C. S. (1999). Childhood victimization, running away, and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 347–370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427899036004001
    Keenan, K. (2001). Uncovering preschool precursor problem behaviors. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 117–134). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Kelley, B. T., Huizinga, D., Thornberry, T. P., & Loeber, R. (1997). Epidemiology of serious violence. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Kelling, G. L., & Coles, C. M. (1996). Fixing broken windows: Restoring order and reducing crime in our communities. New York: Free Press.
    Kempf-Leonard, K., & Johansson, P. (2007). Gender and runaways: Risk factors, delinquency, and juvenile justice experiences. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 5, 308–327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204007301293
    Kempf-Leonard, K., & Tracy, P. E. (2000). The gender effect among serious, violent, and chronic offenders: A difference in degree rather than kind. In R.Muraskin (Ed.), It's a crime: Women and justice (pp. 453–478). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Kempf-Leonard, K., Tracy, P. E., & Howell, J. C. (2001). Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders: The relationship of delinquency career types to adult criminality. Justice Quarterly, 18, 449–478. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418820100094981
    Kennedy, D. M. (1999, July). Pulling levers: Getting deterrence right. National Institute of Justice Journal, 236, 2–8.
    Kennedy, D. M. (2007). Going to scale: A national structure for building on proved approaches to preventing gang violence. A discussion document. New York: Center for Crime Prevention and Control, John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
    Kennedy, D. M., Piehl, A. M., & Braga, A. A. (1996). Youth violence in Boston: Gun markets, serious youth offenders, and a use-reduction strategy. Law and Contemporary Problems, 59, 147–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1192213
    Kent, D. R., Donaldson, S. I., Wyrick, P. A., & Smith, P. J. (2000). Evaluating criminal justice programs designed to reduce crime by targeting repeat gang offenders. Evaluation and Program Planning, 23, 115–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189%2899%2900039-7
    Klein, M. W. (1971). Street gangs and street workers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Klein, M. W. (1995). The American street gang. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Klein, M. W. (2004). Gang cop: The words and ways of office Paco Domingo. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
    Klein, M. W., & Maxson, C. L. (1989). Street gang violence. In M. E.Wolfgang & N. A.Weiner (Eds.), Violent crime, violent criminals (pp. 198–234). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Klein, M. W., & Maxson, C. L. (2006). Street gang patterns and policies. New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195163445.001.0001
    Knitzer, J. (1982). Unclaimed children: The failure of public responsibility to children and adolescents in need of mental health services. Washington, DC: The Children's Defense Fund.
    Knitzer, J., & Cooper, J. (2006). Beyond integration: Challenges for children's mental health. Health Affairs, 25, 670–679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.25.3.670
    Kortenkamp, K., & Ehrle, J. (2002). The well-being of children involved with the child welfare system: A national overview. Juvenile and Family Justice Today, 11(2), 20–25.
    Kovacs, M. (1996). Presentation and course of major depressive disorder during childhood and later years of the life span. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 35, 705–715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199606000-00010
    Kovandzic, T. V., Sloan, J. J., & Vieraitis, L. M. (2002). Unintended consequences of politically popular sentencing policy: The homicide-promoting effects of “three strikes” in U.S. cities (1980-1999). Criminology and Public Policy, 1, 399–424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2002.tb00100.x
    Krajicek, D. J. (2000, February). Boot camps get a kick in the head. Youth Today, p. A2.
    Krisberg, B., Currie, E., Onek, D., & Wiebush, R. G. (1995). Graduated sanctions for serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. In J. C.Howell, B.Krisberg, J. D.Hawkins, & J. J.Wilson (Eds.), A sourcebook: Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders (pp. 142–170). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Krisberg, B., & Howell, J. C. (1998). The impact of the juvenile justice system and prospects for graduated sanctions in a comprehensive strategy. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 346–366). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Krisberg, B., & Marchionna, S. (2007, February). Attitudes of US voters toward youth crime and the justice system. Focus: Views from the National Council of Crime and Delinquency. Retrieved July 19, 2008, from the NCCD Web site: http://www.nccd-crc.org/nccd/pubs/zogby_feb07.pdf
    Krisberg, B., Neuenfeldt, D., Wiebush, R. G., & Rodriguez, O. (1994). Juvenile intensive supervision: Planning guide. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Thornberry, T. P., Smith, C. A., & McDowall, D. (1996). Reciprocal causal relationships among drug use, peers, and beliefs: A five-wave panel model. Journal of Drug Issues, 26, 405–428.
    Krohn, M. D., Thornberry, T. P., Rivera, C., & Le Blanc, M. (2001). Later careers of very young offenders. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 67–94). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Krug, E. G., Dahlberg, L. L., Mercy, J. A., Zwl, A. B., & Lozano, R. (2002). World report on violence and health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
    Kupchik, A. (2006a). Judging juveniles: Prosecuting adolescents in adult and juvenile courts. New York: New York University Press.
    Kupchik, A. (2006b). The decision to incarcerate in juvenile and criminal courts. Criminal Justice Review, 31, 309–336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734016806295584
    Kurlychek, M. C., & Johnson, B. D. (2004). The juvenile penalty: A comparison of juvenile and young adult sentencing outcomes in criminal court. Criminology, 42, 485–517. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2004.tb00527.x
    Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., & Lynn, N. (2006). School-based mental health: An empirical guide for decision-makers. Tampa: University of South Florida, the Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, Department of Child & Family Studies, Research and Training Center for Children's Mental Health.
    Lacourse, E., Nagin, D. S., Vitaro, R., Cote, S., Arseneault, L., & Tremblay, R. E. (2006). Prediction of early-onset deviant peer group affiliation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63, 562–568. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.63.5.562
    LaFree, G. D. (1980). The effect of sexual stratification by race on official reactions to rape. American Sociological Review, 45, 842–854. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2094898
    Lahey, B. B., Gordon, R. A., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Farrington, D. P. (1999). Boys who join gangs: A prospective study of predictors of first gang entry. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27, 261–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:JACP.0000039775.83318.57
    Landenberger, N., & Lipsey, M. W. (2005). The positive effects of cognitive-behavioral programs or offenders: A meta-analysis of factors associated with effective treatment. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 451–476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11292-005-3541-7
    Lane, J., & Meeker, J. W. (2000). Subcultural diversity and the fear of crime and gangs. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 497–521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128700046004005
    Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994 (Special Report). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Lattimore, P. K., Macdonald, J. M., Piquero, A. R., Linster, R. L., & Visher, C. A. (2004). Studying the characteristics of arrest frequency among paroled youthful offenders. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41, 37–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427803256094
    Laub, J. H., & Lauritsen, J. L. (1998). The interdependence of school violence with neighborhood and family conditions. In D. S.Elliott, B. A.Hamburg, & K. R.Williams (Eds.), Violence in American schools: A new perspective (pp. 127–155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Lauritsen, J. L. (2003). How families and communities influence youth victimization. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Lauritsen, J. L., & Quinet, K. F. D. (1995). Repeat victimization among adolescents and young adults. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 11, 143–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02221121
    Lauritsen, J. L., & White, N. A. (2001). Putting violence in its place: The influence of ethnicity, gender, and place on the risk for violence. Criminology and Public Policy, 1, 37–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2001.tb00076.x
    Lawrence, R., & Mueller, D. (2003). School shootings and the man-bites-dog criterion of newsworthiness. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1, 330–345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204003255842
    Leahy, J. (2007). HPD's missing weapons tally is now 35: It's almost twice what was reported in April review of property room. Houston Chronicle, June 23, B3.
    Le Blanc, M. (1998). Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders: Identification, classification, and prediction. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 167–193). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Le Blanc, M., & Loeber, R. (1993). Precursors, causes and the development of criminal offending. In D. F.Hay & A.Angold (Eds.), Precursors and causes in development and psychopathology (pp. 233–263). New York: Wiley.
    Le Blanc, M., & Loeber, R. (1998). Developmental criminology updated. In M.Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 23, pp. 115–198). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    LeCroy, C. W., Krysik, J., & Palumbo, D. (1998). Empirical validation of the Arizona Risk/Needs Instrument and assessment process. Tucson: LeCroy & Milligan Associates.
    Leffert, N., Saito, R. N., Blyth, D. A., & Kroenke, C. H. (1996). Making the case: Measuring the impact of youth development programs. Minneapolis: Search Institute.
    Leiber, M. J. (2002). Disproportionate minority confinement (DMC) of youth: An analysis of state and federal efforts to address the issue. Crime & Delinquency, 48, 3–45.
    Leinwand, D. (2000, February 25). LAPD, neighborhood shaken. USA Today, p. 3A.
    Lemert, E. M. (1951). Social pathology: Human deviance, social problems, and social control. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Lerman, P. (2002). Twentieth-century developments in America's institutional systems for youth in trouble. In M. K.Rosenheim, F. E.Zimring, D. S.Tanenhaus, & B.Dohrn (Eds.), A century of juvenile justice (pp. 4–109). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Lerman, P., & Pottick, K. J. (1995). The parents’ perspective: Delinquency, aggression, and mental health. Chur, Switzerland: Harwood.
    Lewis, D. O., Pincus, J. H., Bard, B., Richardson, E., Prichep, L. S., Feldman, M., et al. (1988). Neuropsychiatric, psychoeducational, and family characteristics of 14 juveniles condemned to death in the United States. American Journal of Psychiatry, 145, 585–589.
    Liebman, J. S., Fagan, J., & West, V. (2000). A broken system: Error rates in capital cases, 1973-1995. New York: Columbia University, School of Law.
    Lien, I.-J. (2005). The role of crime acts in constituting the gang's mentality. In S. H.Decker & F. M.Weerman (Eds.), European street gangs and troublesome youth groups (pp. 105–125). Lanham, MD: AltaMira.
    Lipsey, M. W. (1992). Juvenile delinquency treatment: A meta-analytic inquiry into the variability of effects. In T. D.Cook, H.Cooper, D. S.Cordray, H.Hartman, L. V.Hedges, R. J.Light, et al. (Eds.), Meta-analysis for explanation (pp. 83–127). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
    Lipsey, M. W. (1995). What do we learn from 400 research studies on the effectiveness of treatment with juvenile delinquents? In J.McGuire (Ed.), What works: Reducing reoffending (pp. 63–78). New York: Wiley.
    Lipsey, M. W. (1999a). Can intervention rehabilitate serious delinquents?Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 564, 142–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716299564001009
    Lipsey, M. W. (1999b). Can rehabilitative programs reduce the recidivism of juvenile offenders? An inquiry into the effectiveness of practical programs. Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law, 6, 611–641.
    Lipsey, M. W. (2000a). Meta-analysis and the learning curve in evaluation practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 21, 207–212.
    Lipsey, M. W. (2000b, July). What 500 intervention studies show about the effects of intervention on the recidivism of juvenile offenders. Paper presented at the Annual Conference on Criminal Justice Research and Evaluation, Washington, DC.
    Lipsey, M. W. (2002). Meta-analysis and program outcome evaluation. Socialvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 9, 194–208.
    Lipsey, M. W. (2005). The challenges of interpreting research for use by practitioners: Comments on the latest products from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2S1), 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2004.09.026
    Lipsey, M. W. (2006). The evidence base for effective juvenile programs as a source for best practice guidelines. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University, Center for Evaluation Research and Methodology.
    Lipsey, M. W. (2007). A standardized program evaluation protocol for programs serving juvenile probationers. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University, Center for Evaluation Research and Methodology.
    Lipsey, M. W. (2008). The Arizona Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP)for assessing the effectiveness of programs for juvenile probationers: SPEP ratings and relative recidivism reduction for the initial SPEP sample. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University, Center for Evaluation Research and Methodology.
    Lipsey, M. W., & Cullen, F. T. (2007). The effectiveness of correctional rehabilitation: A review of systematic reviews. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3, 297–320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112833
    Lipsey, M. W., & Derzon, J. H. (1998). Predictors of violent or serious delinquency in adolescence and early adulthood: A synthesis of longitudinal research. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 86–105). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Lipsey, M. W., Howell, J. C., & Tidd, S. T. (2003). Astandardized program evaluation protocol for North Carolina's juvenile justice system programs. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University, Center for Evaluation Research and Methodology.
    Lipsey, M. W., Howell, J. C., & Tidd, S. T. (2007a). A practical approach to evaluating and improving juvenile justice programs utilizing the Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP): An interim report. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University, Center for Evaluation Research and Methodology.
    Lipsey, M. W., Howell, J. C., & Tidd, S. T. (2007b). The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP): A practical approach to evaluating and improving juvenile justice programs in North Carolina. Final Evaluation Report. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University, Center for Evaluation Research and Methodology.
    Lipsey, M. W., & Landenberger, N. A. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral interventions. In B. C.Welsh & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Preventing crime: What works for children, offenders, victims, and places (pp. 57–71). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4244-2_4
    Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48, 1181–1209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.12.1181
    Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1998). Effective interventions with serious juvenile offenders: A synthesis of research. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 313–345). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2000). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). The way in which intervention studies have “personality” and why it is important to meta-analysis. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 24, 236–254.
    Lipsey, M. W., Wilson, D. B., & Cothern, L. (2000). Effective interventions for serious and violent juvenile offenders. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Lipton, D., Martinson, R., &Wilks, J. (1975). The effectiveness of correctional treatment: A survey of treatment evaluation studies. New York: Praeger.
    Littell, J. H. (2006). The case for multisystemic therapy: Evidence or orthodoxy?Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 459–472. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2005.07.002
    Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Howell, J. C., Tobin, K., & Howard, G. J. (2000). Factors influencing gun carrying among young urban males over the adolescent-young adult life course. Criminology, 38, 811–834. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2000.tb00907.x
    Loeber, R. (1988). Natural histories of juvenile conduct problems, delinquency, and associated substance abuse: Evidence for developmental progressions. In B. B.Lahey & A. E.Kazdin (Eds.), Advances in clinical child psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 73–124). New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-9829-5_2
    Loeber, R. (1990). Development and risk factors of juvenile antisocial behavior and delinquency. Clinical Psychology Review, 10, 1–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0272-7358%2890%2990105-J
    Loeber, R., Burke, J. D., Lahey, B. B., Winters, A., & Zera, M. (2000). Oppositional defiant and conduct disorder: A review of the past 10 years, Part I. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200001000-00001
    Loeber, R., DeLamatre, M., Tita, G., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Farrington, D. P. (1999). Gun injury and mortality: The delinquent backgrounds of juvenile victims. Violence and Victims, 14, 339–352.
    Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (Eds.). (1998). Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (2000). Young children who commit crime: Epidemiology, developmental origins, risk factors, early interventions, and policy implications. Development and Psychopathology, 12, 737–762. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0954579400004107
    Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (Eds.). (2001a). Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (2001b). Executive summary. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. xix-xxxi). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (2001c). The significance of child delinquency. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 1–22). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., & Petechuk, D. (2003). Child delinquency: Early intervention and prevention. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., White, H. R., et al. (2003). The development of male offending: Key findings from fourteen years of the Pittsburgh Youth Study. In T. P.Thornberry & M. D.Krohn (Eds.), Taking stock of delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies (pp. 93–136). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47945-1_4
    Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Van Kammen, W. B. (1998). Antisocial behavior and mental health problems. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & White, H. R. (2008). Violence and serious theft: Development and prediction from childhood to adulthood. New York: Routledge.
    Loeber, R., & Hay, D. F. (1997). Key issues in the development of aggression and violence from childhood to early adulthood. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 371–410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.371
    Loeber, R., Kalb, L., & Huizinga, D. (2001). Juvenile delinquency and serious injury victimization. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Loeber, R., Keenan, K., & Zhang, Q. (1997). Boys’ experimentation and persistence in developmental pathways toward serious delinquency. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 6, 321–357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1025004303603
    Loeber, R., & Le Blanc, M. (1990). Toward a developmental criminology. In M.Tonry & N.Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 12, pp. 375–473). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Loeber, R., Slot, W, & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (2007). A cumulative, three-dimensional, development model of serious delinquency. In P. O.Wikstrom & R.Sampson (Eds.), The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms and development series (pp. 153–194). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Loeber, R., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1996). The development of offending. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 12–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093854896023001003
    Loeber, R., Wei, E., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Huizinga, D., & Thornberry, T. P. (1999). Behavioral antecedents to serious and violent offending: Joint analyses from the Denver Youth Survey, Pittsburgh Youth Study and the Rochester Youth Development Study. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 8, 245–263.
    Loeber, R., Wung, P., Keenan, K., Giroux, B., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Van Kammen, W. B., et al. (1993). Developmental pathways in disruptive child behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 103–133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0954579400004296
    Logan, W. A. (1998). Proportionality and punishment: Imposing life without parole on juveniles. Wake Forest Law Review, 33, 681–725.
    Lovell, D., Johnson, L. C., & Cain, K. C. (2007). Recidivism of supermax prisoners in Washington State. Crime & Delinquency, 53, 633–656. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128706296466
    Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., & Smith, P. (2006). Does correctional program quality really matter? The impact of adhering to the principles of effective intervention. Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 575–594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00388.x
    Lubitz, R. (2001). Strategies to reduce commitments to youth development centers. Raleigh: North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Ludwig, J. (2005). Better gun enforcement, less crime. Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 677–716. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00352.x
    Lynch, J. P. (2002). Trends in juvenile violent offending: An analysis of victim survey dataWashington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Lynch, J. P., &Sabol, W. J. (1997). Did getting tough on crime pay?Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
    Lyons, D. (1997, May). Juvenile justice comes of age. State Legislatures, pp. 12–18.
    Lyons, W., & Drew, J. (2006). Punishing schools: Fear and citizenship in American public education. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    MacDonald, J. M., & Gover, A. R. (2005). Concentrated disadvantage and youth-on-youth homicide. Homicide Studies, 9, 30–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1088767904271433
    MacKenzie, D. L. (2006). What works in corrections: Reducing the criminal activities of offenders and delinquents. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499470
    MacKenzie, D. L., Wilson, D. B., Armstrong, G. S., & Gover, A. R. (2001). The impact of boot camps and traditional institutions on juvenile residents: Perceptions, adjustment, and changes in social bonds, impulsivity, and antisocial attitudes. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38, 279–313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427801038003004
    Maguire, K., & Pastore, A. L. (Eds.). (1995). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics: 1994. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Malcolm, J. L. (2002). Guns and violence: The English experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Males, M. A. (1996). The scapegoat generation: America's war on adolescents. Monroe, ME: Common Courage.
    Males, M. A., & Macallair, D. (1998). 77k impact of juvenile curfew laws in California. San Francisco: Justice Policy Institute, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice.
    Manhattan Institute, Center for Civic Innovation. (1999). “Broken windows” probation: The next step in fighting crime. New York: Author.
    Mankey, J., Baca, P., Rondenell, B. S., Webb, M., & McHugh, D. (2006). Guidelines for juvenile information sharing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Mann, C. R. (1993). Unequal justice: A question of color. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    Manning, P. K. (2003). Policing contingencies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Manning, P. K. (2005). Problem-oriented policing: Editorial introduction. Criminology & Public Policy, 4, 149–154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00012.x
    Martin, J., Nada-Raja, S., Langley, J., Freehan, M., McGee, R., Clarke, J., et al. (1998). Physical assault in New Zealand: The experience of 21 year old men and women in a community sample. New Zealand Medical Journal, 111, 158–160.
    Martinson, R. (1974). What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. Public Interest, 35, 22–54.
    Matthews, B., Hubbard, D. J., & Latessa, E. (2001). Making the next step: Using evaluability assessment to improve correctional programming. Prison Journal, 8, 454–472. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0032885501081004003
    Mauer, M. (1997). Intended and unintended consequences: State racial disparities in imprisonment. Washington, DC: Sentencing Project.
    Mauer, M., & Meda, C. E. (2003). Invisible punishment: The collateral consequences of mass imprisonment. New York: The New Press.
    Maxson, C. L. (1998). Gang members on the move. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Maxson, C. L., Curry, G. D., & Howell, J. C. (2002). Youth gang homicides in the United States in the 1990s. In S.Decker & W.Reed (Eds.), Responses to gangs: Evaluation and research (pp. 111–137). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Maxson, C. L., Whitlock, M. L., & Klein, M. W. (1998). Vulnerability to street gang membership: Implications for prevention. Social Service Review, 72, 70–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/515746
    Maxwell, S. R., & Davis, J. S. (1999). The salience of race and gender in pretrial release decisions: A comparison across multiple jurisdictions. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 10, 491–501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/088740349901000402
    McBride, A. G., Scott, R., Schlesinger, S. R., Dillingham, S. D., & Buckman, R. B. (1992). Combatting violent crime: 24 recommendations to strengthen criminal justice. Washington, DC: Office of the Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice.
    McCollum, B. (1997, March 20). Statement by Crime Subcommittee chairman Bill McCollum for hearing on reforming juvenile justice in America. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
    McCord, J., & Conway, P. K. (2005). Co-offending and patterns of juvenile crime. (Research in Brief). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
    McCord, J., Widom, C. S., & Crowell, N. A. (Eds.). (2001). Juvenile crime, juvenile justice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    McCorkle, R. C., & Miethe, T. D. (2002). Panic: The social construction of the street gang problem. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    McDonald, D. C., & Carlson, K. E. (1992). Federal sentencing in transition, 1986-90. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    McDowall, D., Loftin, C., & Wiersema, B. (2000). The impact of youth curfew laws on juvenile crime rates. Crime and Delinquency, 46, 76–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128700046001005
    McGarvey, E. L., & Waite, D. (2000). Profiles of incarcerated adolescents in Virginia correctional facilities: Fiscal years 1993-1998. Richmond: Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services.
    McGloin, J. M. (2005). Policy and intervention considerations of a network analysis of street gangs. Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 607–636. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00306.x
    McGowan, A., Hahn, R., Liberman, A., Crosby, A., Fullilove, M., Johnson, R., et al. (2007). Effects on violence of laws and policies facilitating the transfer of juveniles from the juvenile justice system to the adult justice system: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32(4 Suppl. 1), 7–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2006.12.003
    McGuire, C. (2007). Working paper on Central American youth gangs in the Washington D.C. areaWashington, DC: Washington Office on Latin America.
    McGuire, J. (2002). Integrating findings from research reviews. In J.McGuire (Ed.), Offender rehabilitation and treatment: Effective programmes and policies to reduce offending. West Sussex, UK: Wiley. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470713464
    McReynolds, L. S., Wasserman, G. A., DeComo, R. E., John, R., Keating, J. M., &Nolen, S. (2008). Psychiatric disorder in a juvenile assessment center. Crime and Delinquency, 54, 313–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128707301629
    Mears, D. P. (2000). Assessing the effectiveness of juvenile justice reforms: A closer look at the criteria and the impacts on various stakeholders. Law and Policy, 22, 175–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9930.00090
    Mears, D. P. (2001). Getting tough with juvenile offenders: Explaining support for sanctioning juveniles as adults. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 28, 206–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093854801028002004
    Mears, D. P. (2002). Sentencing guidelines and the transformation of juvenile justice in the 21st century. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 18, 6–19.
    Mears, D. P. (2003). A critique of waiver research: Critical next steps in assessing the impacts of laws for transferring juveniles to the criminal justice system. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1, 156–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204002250876
    Mears, D. P. (2005). A critical look at supermax prisons. Corrections Compendium, 30, 6-7, 45-49.
    Mears, D. P. (2006). Exploring state-level variation in juvenile incarceration rates: Symbolic threats and competing explanations. The Prison Journal, 86, 470–490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0032885506294237
    Mears, D. P. (2008). Accountability, efficiency, and effectiveness in corrections: Shining a light on the black box of prison systems. Criminology and Public Policy, 7, 143–152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00497.x
    Mears, D. P., & Castro, J. L. (2006). Wardens’ views on the wisdom of supermax prisons. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 398–431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128705279484
    Mears, D. P., & Travis, J. (2004). Youth development and reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 3–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204003260044
    Menard, S. (2002). Short- and long-term consequences of adolescent victimization. Youth Violence Research Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    Mendel, R. A. (2007). Pathways to juvenile detention reform: Vol. 14. Beyond detention: System transformation through juvenile detention reform. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
    Mihalic, S., & Irwin, K. (2003). Blueprints for violence prevention: From research to real-world settings: Factors influencing the successful replication of model programs. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1, 307–329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204003255841
    Mihalic, S., Irwin, K., Elliott, D., Fagan, A., & Hansen, D. (2001). Blueprints for violence prevention. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Miller, J. A. (2001). One of the guys: Girls, gangs and gender. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Miller, J., Ross, T., & Sturgis, C. (2005). Beyond the tunnel problem: Addressing cross-cutting issues that impact vulnerable youth. Briefing paper #2. Redirecting youth from the school-to-prison pipeline. Baltimore, MD: Youth Transition Funders Group and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.
    Miller, W. B. (1992). Crime by youth gangs and groups in the United States. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Miller, W. B. (2001). The growth of youth gang problems in the United States: 1970-1998. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.674
    Moffitt, T. E. (2007). A review of research on the taxonomy of life-course-persistent versus adolescent-limited antisocial behavior. In D.Flannery, A.Vazonsyi, & I.Waldman (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of violent behavior (pp. 49–74). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816840.004
    Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Rutter, M., & Silva, P. A. (2001). Sex differences in antisocial behavior: Conduct disorder, delinquency, and violence in the Dunedin longitudinal study. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490057
    Moon, M. M., Sundt, J. L., Cullen, F. T., & Wright, J. P. (2000). Is child saving dead? Public support for juvenile rehabilitation. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 38–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128700046001003
    Moone, J. (1994). Juvenile victimization: 1987-1992 (Fact Sheet No. 1994-17). Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Moore, E. A. (2000). Sentencing opinion:People of the State of Michigan v. Nathaniel Abraham. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 51(2), 1–11.
    Moore, J. W. (1978). Homeboys: Gangs, drugs and prison in the barrios of Los Angeles. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
    Moore, J. W. (1991). Going down to the barrio: Homeboys and homegirls in change. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
    Moore, J. W. (1998). Understanding youth street gangs: Economic restructuring and the urban underclass. In M. W.Watts (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives on youth and violence (pp. 65–78). Stamford, CT: JAI.
    Moore, J. W., & Hagedorn, J. M. (2001). Female gangs. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Moore, M. T. (2005). Murders on rise in Philadelphia. USA Today, p. 3A.
    Moore, M. T. (2007, June 18). Should kids go to court in chains?USA Today, pp. Al-2.
    Moore, S. (2007, September 30). Reporting while black. New York Times, p. WK 4.
    Morash, M. (1983). Gangs, groups, and delinquency. British Journal of Criminology, 23, 309–335.
    Morenoff, J. D., Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Neighborhood inequality, collective efficacy, and the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology, 39, 517–559. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00932.x
    Myers, D. L. (2003). The recidivism of violent youths in juvenile and adult court. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1, 79–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204002238365
    Myers, D. L., & Kiehl, K. (2001). The predispositional status of violent youthful offenders: Is there a “custody gap” in adult criminal court?Justice Research and Policy, 3, 115–143. http://dx.doi.org/10.3818/JRP.3.1.2001.115
    Naber, P. A., May, D. C., Decker, S. H., Minor, K. I., & Wells, J. B. (2006). Are there gangs in schools? Depends on whom you ask. Journal of School Violence, 5, 53–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J202v05n02_05
    Nagin, D. S., & Land, K. C. (1993). Age, criminal careers, and population heterogeneity: Specification and estimation of nonparametric, mixed Poisson model. Criminology, 31, 327–362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1993.tb01133.x
    Nagin, D. S., Piquero, A. R., Scott, E. S., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Public preferences for rehabilitation versus incarceration of juvenile offenders: Evidence from a contingent valuation study. Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 627–652. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00406.x
    National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Legal Defense and Educational Fund. (2006). The school-to-prison pipeline: Racial segregation. Baltimore, MD: Author.
    National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Principal/school disciplinarian survey on school violence, Fast Response Survey System (FRSS No. 63). Washington, DC: Author.
    National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2007. Washington, DC: Author.
    National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (1998). The Janiculum Project: Structural, procedural and programmatic recommendations for the future juvenile court. Reno, NV: Author.
    National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. (2005). Juvenile delinquency guidelines. Reno, NV: Author.
    National District Attorneys Association. (2000). Resource manual and policy positions on juvenile crime issues. Alexandria, VA: Author.
    National Institute of Justice. (2006). Drug courts: The second decade. Washington, DC: Author.
    National Research Council & Institute of Medicine. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    National Youth Gang Center. (2002a). A guide to assessing your community's youth gang problem. Tallahassee, FL: Author.
    National Youth Gang Center. (2002b). Planning for implementation. Tallahassee, FL: Author.
    North Carolina Child Advocacy Institute. (2005). One out of ten: The growing suspension crisis in North Carolina. Raleigh: Author.
    North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2008a). 2007 annual report. Raleigh: Author.
    North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2008b). Report on the treatment staffing model at youth development centers. Raleigh: Author.
    Nugent, W., Williams, M., & Umbreit, M. (2004). Participation in victim-offender mediation and the prevalence of subsequent delinquent behavior: A metaanalysis. Research on Social Work Practice, 14, 408–416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049731504265831
    Obeidallah, D. A., & Earls, F. J. (1999). Adolescent girls: The role of depression in the development of delinquency (Research Preview). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Office of Special Education Programs Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. (2004). School-wide positive behavior support: Implementers’ blueprint and self-assessment. Eugene: Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, University of Oregon.
    Olson, D. E., & Dooley, B. (2006). Gang membership and community corrections populations: Characteristics and recidivism rates relative to other offenders. In J. F.Short & L. A.Hughes (Eds.), Studying youth gangs (pp. 193–202). Lanham, MD: AltaMira.
    Olweus, D. (1991). Bully/victim problems among schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention. In D. J.Pepler & K. H.Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 441–448). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Osgood, D. W., & Anderson, A. L. (2004). Unstructured socializing and rates of delinquency. Criminology, 42, 519–550. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2004.tb00528.x
    Osher, D., Dwyer, K., & Jackson, S. (2004). Safe, supportive and successful schools: Step by step. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
    Palmer, T. (1992). The re-emergence of correctional intervention. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Papachristos, A. V. (2001). A.D., after the Disciples: The neighborhood impact of federal gang prosecution. Peotone, IL: New Chicago Schools Press.
    Papachristos, A. V., Meares, T. & Fagan, J. (2005). Attention felons: Evaluating Project Safe Neighborhoods in Chicago. Chicago: The Law School, University of Chicago.
    Parent, D., Leiter, V., Livens, L., Wentworth, D., & Stephen, K. (1994). Conditions of confinement: Juvenile detention and corrections facilities. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Patterson, G. R., Capaldi, D., & Bank, L. (1991). An early starter model for predicting delinquency. In D. J.Pepler & K. H.Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 139–168). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Payne, A. A., Gottfredson, D. C., & Gottfredson, G. D. (2003). Schools as communities: The relationships among communal school organization, student bonding and school disorder. Criminology, 41, 749–778. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2003.tb01003.x
    Petersilia, J. (1983). Racial disparities in the criminal justice system (Paper prepared for the National Institute of Corrections). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
    Petersilia, J. (2001). When prisoners return to communities: Political, economic, and social consequences. Federal Probation, (55(1), 3–8.
    Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Petersilia, J., & Turner, S. (1985). Guidelines-based justice: The implications for racial minorities. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
    Peterson, D., Miller, J., & Esbensen, F. (2001). The impact of sex composition on gangs and gang delinquency. Criminology, 39, 411–439. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00928.x
    Peterson, D., Taylor, T. J., & Esbensen, F. (2004). Gang membership and violent victimization. Justice Quarterly, 21(4), 793–815. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418820400095991
    Petrosino, A. (2005). From Martinson to meta-analysis: Research reviews and the U.S. offender treatment debate. Evaluation and Policy, 1, 149–171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/1744264053730770
    Petrosino, A., & Soydan, H. (2005). The impact of program developers as evaluators on criminal recidivism: Results from meta-analyses of experimental and quasi-experimental research. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 435–450. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11292-005-3540-8
    Petrosino, A., Turpin-Petrosino, C., & Finckenauer, J. (2000). Well-meaning programs can have harmful effects! Lessons from experiments of programs such as Scared Straight. Crime and Delinquency, 46, 354–379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128700046003006
    Pew Charitable Trusts. (2008). One in 100: Behind bars in America 2008. Washington, DC: Author.
    Phoenix Police Department. (1981). Hispanic gangs in Phoenix. Phoenix: Author.
    Pindur, W., & Elliker, J. (1999). Norfolk Juvenile Justice Recidivism Evaluation Project. Norfolk, VA: Old Dominion University.
    Pizarrro, J. M., Chermak, S. M., & Gruenewald, J. A. (2007). Juvenile “super-predators” in the news: A comparison of adult and juvenile homicides. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 14, 84–111.
    Pogarsky, G., Lizotte, A. J., & Thornberry, T. P. (2003). The delinquency of children born to young mothers: Results from the Rochester Youth Development Study. Criminology, 41(4), 1249–1286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2003.tb01019.x
    Police Executive Research Forum. (2006). Chief concerns: A gathering storm—Violent crime in America. Washington, DC: Author.
    Police Executive Research Forum. (2007). Violent crime in America: 24 months of alarming trends. Washington, DC: Author.
    Pope, C. E., & Feyerherm, W. H. (1990). Minority status and juvenile justice processing (2 parts). Criminal Justice Abstracts, 22, 327-336, 527-542.
    Pope, C. E., & Feyerherm, W. H. (1991). Minorities in the juvenile justice system. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Pratt, T. C. (2008). Rational choice theory, crime control policy, and criminological relevance. Criminology and Public Policy, 7, 43–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00489.x
    Prentky, R., & Righthand, S. (2003). Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol II (J-SOAP-II) manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Pullmann, M. D., Kerbs, J., Koroloff, N., Veach-White, E., Gaylor, R., & Sieler, D. (2006). Juvenile offenders with mental health needs: Reducing recidivism using wraparound. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 375–397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128705278632
    Puritz, P., & Scali, M. A. (1998). Beyond the walls: Improving conditions of confinement for youth in custody. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Puzzanchera, C., Stahl, A. L., Finnegan, T. A., Tierney, N., & Snyder, H. N. (2003). Juvenile court statistics: 1998. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Radelet, M. L. (1989). Executions of whites for crimes against blacks: Exceptions to the rule?Sociological Quarterly, 30, 529–544. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1989.tb01533.x
    Redondo, S., Sanchez-Meca, J., & Garrido, V. (1999). The influence of treatment programmes on the recidivism of juvenile and adult offenders: A European meta-analytic review. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 5, 251–278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10683169908401769
    Re-Entry Policy Council. (2005). Report of the Re-Entry Policy Council. Lexington, KY: Council of State Governments.
    Reeves, J. L., & Campbell, R. (1994). Cracked coverage: Television news, the anti-cocaine crusade, and the Reagan legacy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
    Regnery, A. S. (1986). A federal perspective on juvenile justice reform. Crime & Delinquency, 32, 39–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128786032001003
    Reich, K., Culross, P. L., & Behrman, R. E. (2002). Children, youth and gun violence: Analysis and recommendations. Future of Children, 12(2), 5–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1602735
    Reiss, A. J. Jr. (1988). Co-offending and criminal careers. In M.Tonry & N.Morris (Eds.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 10, pp. 117–170). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Renouf, A. G., & Harter, S. (1990). Low self-worth and anger as components of the depressive experience in young adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 2, 293–310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S095457940000078X
    Reppucci, N. D. (1999). Adolescent development and juvenile justice. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 307–326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022277809281
    Resnick, M. D., Ireland, M., & Borowsky, I. (2004). Youth violence perpetration: What protects? What predicts? Findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Journal of Adolescent Health, 35, 424.el-424.el0. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.01.011
    Ribando, C. (2005). Gangs in Central America. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
    Richart, D., Brooks, K., & Soler, M. (2003). Unintended consequences: The impact of “zero tolerance” and other exclusionary policies on Kentucky students. Washington, DC: Building Blocks for Youth.
    Rigby, K. (2004). Addressing bullying in schools. School Psychology International, 25, 287–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0143034304046902
    Righthand, S., & Welch, C. (2001). Juveniles who have sexually offended: A review of the professional literature. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Roberts, A., & Bender, K. (2006). Overcoming Sisyphus: Effective prediction of mental health disorders and recidivism among delinquents. Federal Probation, Special Issue: Risk Assessment, 70(September), 19–28.
    Roberts, J. V. (1992). Public opinion, crime, and criminal justice. In M. H.Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 16, pp. 99–180). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Roberts, P. G., & Stratton, L. M. (2000). The tyranny of good intentions: How prosecutors and bureaucrats are trampling the Constitution in the name of justice. Roseville, CA: Forum.
    Robinson, D. A., & Stephens, O. H. (1992). Patterns of mitigating factors in juvenile death penalty cases. Criminal Law Bulletin, 28, 246–275.
    Romano, E., Tremblay, R. E., Vitaro, F., Zoccolillo, M., & Pagani, L. (2001). Prevalence of psychiatric diagnoses and the role of perceived impairment: Findings from an adolescent community sample. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 451–461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00739
    Rosenbaum, D. P. (2007). Just say no to D.A.R.E. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 815–824. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00474.x
    Rosenberg, I. M. (1993). Leaving bad enough alone: A response to the juvenile court abolitionists. Wisconsin Law Review, 1993(1), 163–185.
    Rosenfeld, R., Fornango, R., & Baumer, E. (2005). Did Ceasefire, Compstat, and Exile reduce homicide?Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 419–449. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00310.x
    Roush, D. W. (1996a). Desktop guide to good juvenile detention practice. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Roush, D. W. (1996b). A juvenile justice perspective. In C. M.Nelson, R. B.Rutherford, & B. I.Wolford (Eds.), Comprehensive and collaborative systems that work for troubled youth: A national agenda (pp. 29–60). Richmond, KY: National Juvenile Detention Association.
    Roush, D. W., & McMillen, M. (2000). Construction, operations, and staff training for juvenile confinement facilities. Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants Program Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Roush, D. W., Miesner, L. D., & Winslow, C. M. (2002). Managing youth gang members in juvenile detention facilities. East Lansing: Center for Research and Professional Development, National Juvenile Detention Association, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University.
    Roush, D. W., Moeser, J., & Walsh, T. (2005). Reentry and removal: Implications for juvenile confinement facilities. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 56, 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.2005.tb00103.x
    Roy, S. (1995). Juvenile offenders in an electronic home detention program: A study on factors related to failure. Journal of Offender Monitoring, 8, 9–17.
    Roy, S. (1997). Five years of electronic monitoring of adults and juveniles in Lake County, Indiana. Journal of Crime and Justice, 20, 141–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.1997.9721570
    Roy, S., & Brown, M.1995. Juvenile electronic monitoring program in Lake County, Indiana: An evaluation. In J.Smykla & W.Selke (Eds.), Intermediate sanctions: Sentencing in the 1990s (pp. 21–35). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
    Rubak, S., Sandbaek, A., Lauritzen, T., & Christensen, B. (2005). Motivational interviewing: A systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of General Practice, 55, 305–312.
    Rubin, H. T. (2000). Teen Quest: Female-specific program services for Colorado's delinquent girls. Juvenile Justice Update, (5(3), 1–16.
    Rubin, H. T. (2001, December-January). Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice moves forward by moving back to the community. Juvenile Justice Update, pp. 1-2, 14-16.
    Rutter, M., Ciller, H., & Hagell, A. (1998). Antisocial behavior by young people. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Sabol, W. J., Minton, T. D., & Harrison, P. M. (2007). Prison and jail inmates at midyear 2006. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
    Sampson, R. J. (2002). The community. In J.Petersilia & J. Q.Wilson (Eds.), Crime: Public policies for crime control (pp. 225–252). Oakland, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.
    Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social-disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 774–802. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/229068
    Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1993). Crime in the making: Pathways and turning points through life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1997). A life-course theory of cumulative disadvantage and the stability of delinquency. In T. P.Thornberry (Ed.), Developmental theories of crime and delinquency (Vol. 7). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
    Sampson, R. J., & Lauritsen, J. L. (1997). Racial and ethnic disparities in crime and criminal justice in the United States. In M.Tonry (Ed.), Ethnicity, crime, and immigration: Comparative and cross-national perspectives (pp. 311–374). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2001). Disorder in urban neighborhoods: Does it lead to crime?Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5328.918
    Sanday, P. R. (1990). Fraternity gang rape: Sex, brotherhood, and privilege on campus. New York: New York University Press.
    Sarri, R., Shook, J. J., Ward, G., Creekmore, M., Albertson, C., Goodkind, S., et al. (2001). Decision making in the juvenile justice system: A comparative study in four states. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Schlosser, E. (1998, December). The prison-industrial complex. Atlantic Monthly, 282, 51–77.
    Schmidt, F. L. (1992). What do data really mean? Research findings, meta-analysis, and cumulative knowledge in psychology. American Psychologist, 47, 1173–1179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.10.1173
    Schneider, A. L. (1990). Deterrence and juvenile crime: Results from a national policy experiment. New York: Springer-Verlag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8925-5
    Schneider, A. L., & Ervin, L. (1990). Specific deterrence, rational choice, and decision heuristics: Applications in juvenile justice. Social Science Quarterly, 71, 585–601.
    Schram, P. J., & Gaines, L. K. (2005). Examining delinquent nongang members and delinquent gang members: A comparison of juvenile probationers at intake and outcomes. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3(2), 99–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204004273312
    Schumacher, M., & Kurz, G. (2000). The 8% solution: Preventing serious, repeat juvenile crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452232249
    Schwartz, I. M. (1999). Will the juvenile court system survive?Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 564, 8–184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716299564001001
    Schwartz, I. M., Weiner, N. A., & Enosh, G. (1998). Nine lives and then some: Why the juvenile court will not roll over and die. Wake Forrest Law Review, 33, 533–552.
    Scott, E. S. (2000). Criminal responsibility in adolescence: Lessons from developmental psychology. In T.Grisso & R. G.Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on trial: A developmental perspective on juvenile justice (pp. 291–324). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Sealock, M. D., Gottfredson, D. C., & Gallagher, C. (1997). Drug treatment for juvenile offenders: Some good and bad news. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34, 210–236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427897034002003
    Shaffer, J. N., & Ruback, R. B. (2002). Violent victimization as a risk factor for violent offending among juveniles. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Shannon, L. W. (1968). Juvenile delinquency in Madison and Racine. Iowa City: University of Iowa.
    Shannon, L. W. (1988). Criminal career continuity: Its social context. New York: Human Sciences Press.
    Shannon, L. W. (1991). Changing patterns of delinquency and crime: A longitudinal study in Racine. Boulder, CO: Westview.
    Sharpe, D. (1997). Of apples and oranges, file drawers and garbage: Why validity issues in meta-analysis will not go away. Clinical Psychology Review, 17, 881–901. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7358%2897%2900056-1
    Sherman, L. W., Farrington, D. P., MacKenzie, D. L., & Welsh, B. C. (2006). Evidence based crime prevention (Rev. ed.). New York: Routledge.
    Shichor, D., & Sechrest, D. K. (Eds.). (1996). Three strikes and you're out: Vengeance as public policy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Sickmund, M., Sladkey, T., & Kang, W. (2004). Census of juveniles in residential placement databook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Simpson, D. D. (2002). A conceptual framework for transferring research to practice. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 22, 171–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0740-5472%2802%2900231-3
    Skiba, R. J., & Knesting, K. (2001). Zero tolerance, zero evidence: An analysis of school disciplinary practice. In R. J.Skiba & G. G.Noam (Eds.), Zero tolerance: Can suspension and expulsion keep schools safe? New directions for youth development (pp. 17–43). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Skiba, R. J., & Noam, G. G. (2001). Zero tolerance: Can suspension and expulsion keep schools safe? New directions for youth development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Skiba, R. J., & Peterson, R. (1999). The dark side of zero tolerance: Can punishment lead to safe schools?Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 372–376.
    Skiba, R., Reynolds, C. R., Graham, S., Sheras, P., Conoley, C., & Garcia-Vazquez, E. (2006). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
    Skogan, W. G., & Hartnett, S. M. (1997). Community policing, Chicago style. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Skogan, W. G., Hartnett, S. M., Bump, N., & Dubois, J. (2008). Evaluation of CeaseFire-Chicago: Executive summary. Chicago: Northwestern University.
    Skogan, W. G., & Steiner, L. (2004). CAPS at ten: Community policing in Chicago. Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.
    Skowyra, K., & Cocozza, J. J. (2006). A blueprint for change: A comprehensive model for the identification and treatment of youth with mental health needs in contact with the juvenile justice system. Delmar, NY: National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice.
    Smith, C. A., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., McCluskey, C. P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Weiher, A. W. (2000). The effect of early delinquency and substance use on precocious transitions to adulthood among adolescent males. In G. L.Fox & M. L.Benson (Eds.), Families, crime and criminal justice (Vol. 2, pp. 233–253). Amsterdam: JAI. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1530-3535%2800%2980014-X
    Smith, C. A., Lizotte, A. J., Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (1995). Resilient youth: Identifying factors that prevent high-risk youth from engaging in delinquency and drug use. In J.Hagan (Ed.), Delinquency in the life course (pp. 217–247). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
    Smith, C. A., & Thornberry, T. P. (1995). The relationship between childhood maltreatment and adolescent involvement in delinquency. Criminology, 33, 451–477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1995.tb01186.x
    Smith, D. A., Visher, C. A., & Davidson, L. A. (1984). Equity and discretionary justice: The influence of race on police arrest decisions. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 75, 234–249. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1143211
    Smith, W. R., & Aloisi, M. F. (1999). Prediction of recidivism among “second timers” in the juvenile justice system: Efficiency in screening chronic offenders. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 23, 201–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02887272
    Snyder, H. N. (1988). Court careers of juvenile offenders. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Snyder, H. N. (1998). Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders: An assessment of the extent of and trends in officially recognized serious criminal behavior in a delinquent population. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 428–444). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Snyder, H. N. (2000). Juvenile arrests 1999. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Snyder, H. N. (2001). Epidemiology of official offending. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 25–46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Snyder, H. N. (2006). Juvenile arrests 2004. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (1995). Juvenile offenders and victims: A national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (1999). Juvenile offenders and victims: 1999 national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2000). Challenging the myths. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, 1999 National Report Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Snyder, H. N., Sickmund, M., & Poe-Yamagata, E. (1996). Juvenile offenders and victims: 1996 update on violence. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Snyder, H. N., & Swahn, M. H. (2004). Juvenile suicides: 1981-1998. Youth Violence Research Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Soler, M. (2001). Public opinion on youth, crime, and race: A guide for advocates. Washington, DC: Building Blocks for Youth. Retrieved January 16, 2002, from http://www.buildingblocksforyouth.org/advocacyguide.html
    Solis, A., Schwartz, W, & Hinton, T. (2003). Gang Resistance Is Paramount (GRIP) program evaluation: Final report October 1, 2003. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, USC Center for Economic Development.
    Solomon, A. L., Kachnowski, V., & Bahati, A. (2005). Does parole work? Analyzing the impact of postprison supervision on rearrest outcomes. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
    Song, D. H., Naude, G. P., Gilmore, D. A., & Mongard, F. (1996). Gang warfare: The medical repercussions. Journal of Trauma, 40, 810–815. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00005373-199605000-00022
    Spergel, I. A. (1995). The youth gang problem. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Spergel, I. A. (2007). Reducing youth gang violence: The Little Village Gang Project in Chicago. Lanham, MD: AltaMira.
    Spergel, I. A., & Curry, G. D. (1990). Strategies and perceived agency effectiveness in dealing with the youth gang problem. In C. R.Huff (Ed.), Gangs in America (pp. 288–309). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452232201
    Spergel, I. A., & Curry, G. D. (1993). The National Youth Gang Survey: A research and development process. In A.Goldstein & C. R.Huff (Eds.), The gang intervention handbook (pp. 359–400). Champaign, IL: Research Press.
    Spergel, I. A., Wa, K. M., & Sosa, R. V. (2006). The comprehensive, community-wide, gang program model: Success and failure. In J. F.Short & L. A.Hughes (Eds.), Studying youth gangs (pp. 203–224). Lanham, MD: AltaMira.
    Spohn, C., Gruhl, J., & Welch, S. (1987). The impact of the ethnicity and gender of defendants on the decision to reject or dismiss felony charges. Criminology, 25, 175–191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1987.tb00794.x
    Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. (2002). The effect of imprisonment on recidivism rates of felony offenders: A focus on drug offenders. Criminology, 40, 329–357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2002.tb00959.x
    Stahl, A. L. (2001). Delinquency cases in juvenile court, 1998. Fact Sheet #2001-31. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Stahl, A. L., Puzzanchera, C., Livsey, S., Sladky, A., Finnegan, T. A., Tierney, N., et al. (2007). Juvenile court statistics: 2003-2004. Pittsburgh: National Center for Juvenile Justice.
    Stanfield, R. (2000). Pathways to juvenile detention reform: Overview. The JDAI story: Building a better detention system. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
    Starbuck, D., Howell, J. C., & Lindquist, D. J. (2001). Hybrid and other modern gangsJuvenile Justice Bulletin, Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Stattin, H., & Magnusson, D. (1991). Stability and change in criminal behaviour up to age 30. British Journal of Criminology, 31, 327–346.
    Steffensmeier, D., Schwartz, J., Zhong, H., & Ackerman, J. (2005). An assessment of recent trends in girls’ violence using diverse longitudinal sources: Is the gender gap closing?Criminology, 43, 355–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0011-1348.2005.00011.x
    Steinberg, L. (2002). The juvenile psychopath: Fads, fiction, and facts. In National Institute of Justice, Perspectives on crime and justice: 2000-2001 lecture series (Vol. V). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
    Steinberg, L., Chung, H. L., & Little, M. (2004). Reentry of young offenders from the justice system: A developmental perspective. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 21–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204003260045
    Steinhart, D. (2000). Pathways to juvenile detention reform: Vol. 1. Planning for juvenile detention reforms. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
    Stephens, R. L., Holden, E. W., & Hernandez, M. (2004). System-of-care practice review scores as predictors of behavioral symptomatology and functional impairment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 13, 179–191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:JCFS.0000015706.77407.cb
    Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Loeber, R. (2002). Lost opportunities for intervention: Undetected markers for the development of serious juvenile delinquency. Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 12, 69–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cbm.487
    Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Zhang, Q., Van Kammen, W. B., & Maguin, E. (1993). The double edge of protective and risk factors for delinquency: Interactions and developmental patterns. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 683–701. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0954579400006234
    Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Stallings, R., & Lacourse, E. (2008). Desistance from and persistence in offending. In R.Loeber, D. P.Farrington, M.Stouthamer-Loeber, & H. R.White (Eds.), Violence and serious theft: Development and prediction from childhood to adulthood (pp. 269–306). New York: Routledge.
    Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Van Kammen, W. B., & Zhang, Q. (1995). Uninterrupted delinquent careers: The timing of parental help-seeking and juvenile court contact. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 4, 236–251.
    Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Wei, E., Farrington, D. P., & Wikstrom, P. H. (2002). Risk and promotive effects in the explanation of persistent serious delinquency in boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70, 111–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.70.1.111
    Stretesky, P. B., & Pogrebin, M. R. (2007). Gang-related gun violence: Socialization, identity, and self. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 36, 85–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0891241606287416
    Stroul, B. A., & Friedman, R. (1986). A system of care for severely emotionally disturbed youth. Washington, DC: Georgetown University, Child and Adolescent Service System Program Technical Assistance Center.
    Styve, G. J., MacKenzie, D. L., & Cover, A. R. (2000). Perceived conditions of confinement: A national evaluation of juvenile boot camps and traditional facilities. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 297–308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005532004014
    Tanenhaus, D. S. (2004). Juvenile justice in the making. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Task Force on Community Preventive Services. (2007). Recommendation against policies facilitating the transfer of juveniles from juvenile to adult justice systems for the purpose of reducing violence. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32(4 Suppl. 1), 5–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2006.12.004
    Taylor, T. J. (2008). The boulevard ain't safe for your kids: Youth gang membership and violent victimization. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24(2), 125–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1043986208315476
    Teplin, L. A., Abram, K. M., McClelland, G. M., Dulcan, M. K., & Washburn, J. J. (2006). Psychiatric disorders of youth in detention. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Thaker, S., Steckler, A., Sanchez, V., Khatapoush, S., Rose, J., & Hallfors, D. D. (2007, July 16). Program characteristics and organizational factors affecting the implementation of a school-based indicated prevention program. Health Education Research.
    Thompkins, D. E. (2000). School violence: Gangs and a culture of fear. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 567, 54–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716200567001005
    Thornberry, T. P. (1998). Membership in youth gangs and involvement in serious and violent offending. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 147–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Thornberry, T. P. (2005). Explaining multiple patterns of offending across the life course and across generations. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 602, 156–195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716205280641
    Thornberry, T. P., Huizinga, D., & Loeber, R. (1995). The prevention of serious delinquency and violence: Implications from the Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency. In J. C.Howell, B.Krisberg, J. D.Hawkins, & J. J.Wilson (Eds.), A sourcebook: Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders (pp. 213–237). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Thornberry, T. P., Huizinga, D., & Loeber, R. (2004). The causes and correlates studies: Findings and policy implications. Juvenile Justice, 10(1), 3–19.
    Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2000). The self-report method for measuring delinquency and crime. In D.Duffee (Ed.), Criminal justice 2000 (pp. 33–84). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, the National Institute of Justice.
    Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2001). The development of delinquency: An interactional perspective. In S. O.White (Ed.), Handbook of youth and justice (pp. 289–305). New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1289-9_15
    Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2003). Taking stock of delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
    Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2005). Applying interactional theory to the explanation of continuity and change in antisocial behavior. In D. P.Farrington (Ed.), Integrated developmental and life-course theories of offending (pp. 183–210). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
    Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., & Chard-Wierschem, D. (1993). The role of juvenile gangs in facilitating delinquent behavior. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 55–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427893030001005
    Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Smith, C. A., & Tobin, K. (2003). Gangs and delinquency in developmental perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Thornberry, T. P., Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Farnworth, M., & Jang, S. J. (1994). Delinquent peers, beliefs, and delinquent behavior: A longitudinal test of interactional theory. Criminology, 32, 601–637. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1994.tb01146.x
    Thornberry, T. P., Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Smith, C. A., & Porter, P. K. (2003). Causes and consequences of delinquency: Findings from the Rochester Youth Development Study. In T. P.Thornberry & M. D.Krohn (Eds.), Taking stock of delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies (pp. 11–46). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47945-1_2
    Thornberry, T. P., & Porter, P. K. (2001). Advantages of longitudinal research designs in studying gang behavior. In M. W.Klein, H.-J.Kerner, C. L.Maxson, & E. G. M.Weitekamp (Eds.), The Eurogang paradox: Street gangs and youth groups in the U.S. and Europe (pp. 59–78). Amsterdam: Kluwer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0882-2_4
    Thornberry, T. P., Smith, C. A., Rivera, C., Huizinga, D., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1999). Family disruption and delinquency. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Thornburgh, N. (2006, April 17). Dropout nation. Time, pp. 31–40.
    Thrasher, F. M. (1927). The gang: A study of 1,313 gangs in Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Thrasher, F. M. (1936). The boys’ club and juvenile delinquency. American Journal of Sociology, 41, 66–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/217331
    Tiet, Q. Q., & Huizinga, D. (2002). Dimensions of the construct of resilience and adaptation among inner-city youth. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17, 260–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0743558402173003
    Tiet, Q. Q., Wasserman, G. A., Loeber, R., McReynolds, L. S., & Miller, L. S. (2001). Developmental and sex differences in types of conduct problems. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 10, 181–197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1016637702525
    Tita, G., Riley, K. J., & Greenwood, P. (2003). From Boston to Boyle Heights: The process and prospects of a “pulling levers” strategy in a Los Angeles barrio. In S. H.Decker (Ed.), Policing gangs and youth violence (pp. 102–130). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
    Titus, J. J. (2005). Juvenile transfers as ritual sacrifice: Legally constructing the child scapegoat. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3, 116–132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204004273313
    Toch, H. (2007). Sequestering gang members, burning witches, and subverting due process. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 274–288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093854806296663
    Tolan, P. H., & Gorman-Smith, D. (1998). Development of serious and violent offending careers. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions (pp. 68–85). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243740
    Tolan, P. H., Gorman-Smith, D., & Loeber, R. (2000). Developmental timing of onsets of disruptive behaviors and later delinquency of inner-city youth. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 9, 203–330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1009471021975
    Tonry, M. (1994a). Malign neglect: Race, crime, and punishment in America. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Tonry, M. (1994b). Racial politics, racial disparities, and the war on crime. Crime & Delinquency, 40, 475–494. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128794040004001
    Tonry, M. (1999a). Community penalties in the United States. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 7(1), 5–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008755227099
    Tonry, M. (1999b). The fragmentation of sentencing and corrections in America: Sentencing and corrections issues for the 21st century (Research in Brief, Papers from the Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Tonry, M. (1999c). Parochialism in U.S. sentencing policy. Crime & Delinquency, 45, 48–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128799045001003
    Tonry, M. (2007). Treating juveniles as adult criminals: An iatrogenic violence prevention strategy if ever there was one. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32(4 Suppl. 1), 3–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2006.12.025
    Torbet, P. M. (1999). Holding juvenile offenders accountable: Programming needs of juvenile probation departments. Pittsburgh: National Center for Juvenile Justice.
    Torbet, P. M., & Szymanski, L. (1998). State legislative responses to violent juvenile crime: 1996-1997 update. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Tracy, P. E., & Kempf-Leonard, K. (1998). Sanctioning serious juvenile offenders: A review of alternative models. In W.Laufer & F.Adler (Eds.), Advances in criminological theory (pp. 135–171). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
    Travis, J. (2005). But they all come back: Facing the problem of prisoner reentry. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
    Travis, J., & Petersilia, J. (2001). Reentry reconsidered: A new look at an old question. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 291–313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128701047003001
    Tremblay, R. E. (2003). Why socialization fails: The case of chronic physical aggression. In B. B.Lahey, T. E.Moffitt, & A.Caspi (Eds.), Causes of conduct disorder and juvenile delinquency (pp. 182–224). New York: Guilford.
    Tremblay, R. E., Masse, L., Pagani, L., & Vitaro, F. (1996). From childhood physical aggression to adolescent maladjustment: The Montreal Prevention Experiment. In R. D.Peters & R. J.McMahon (Eds.), Preventing childhood disorders, substance abuse, and delinquency (pp. 268–298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Triplett, W. (2004). Gang crisis. The Congressional Quarterly Researcher, 14(18), 421–444.
    Trulson, C. R., Marquart, J. W., Mullings, J. L., & Caeti, T. J. (2007). In between adolescence and adulthood: Recidivism outcomes for a cohort of state delinquents. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3, 355–377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541204005278802
    Trulson, C., Triplett, R., & Snell, C. (2001). Social control in a school setting: Evaluating a school-based boot camp. Crime and Delinquency, 47(4), 573–609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128701047004005
    Turner, S., Schroeder, A., Lane, J., & Petersilia, J. R. (2001). Evaluation of the South Oxnard Challenge Project, 1997-2001. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
    Tyler, J. L., Ziedenberg, J., & Lotke, E. (2006). Cost effective corrections: The fiscal architecture of rational juvenile justice systems. Washington, DC: The Justice Policy Institute.
    Tyler, K. A., & Bersani, B. E. (2008). A longitudinal study of early adolescent precursors to running away. Journal of Early Adolescence, 28, 230–251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272431607313592
    Tyler, K. A., Hoyt, D. R., & Whitbeck, L. B. (2000). The effects of early sexual abuse on later sexual victimization among female homeless and runaway adolescents. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 235–250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/088626000015003001
    Umbreit, M. S., Coates, R., & Vos, B. (2002). The impact of restorative justice conferencing: A review of 63 empirical studies in 5 countries. St. Paul, MN: Center for Restorative Justice & Peacemaking.
    U.S. Department of Education. (2003). Office of Civil Rights elementary and secondary survey: 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights.
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999). Mental health: A report of the surgeon general. Rockville, MD: Author.
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001). Youth violence: A report of the surgeon general. Rockville, MD: Author.
    U.S. Department of Justice. (2007). Department of Justice activities under the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act: Fiscal year 2006. Washington, DC: Office of the Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice.
    U.S. General Accounting Office. (2002). Gun control: Opportunities to close loopholes in the national instant criminal background check system. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
    U.S. General Accounting Office. (2005). Gun control and terrorism: FBI could better manage firearm-related background checks involving terrorist watch list records. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
    Uviller, H. R. (1999). The tilted playing field: Is criminal justice unfair?New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    Valdez, A. (2000). Mara Salvatrucha: A South American import. Yaphank, NY: National Alliance of Gang Investigators’ Associations, http://www.nagia.org/Gang%20Articles/Mara%20Salvatrucha.htm
    Valdez, A. (2007). Gangs: A guide to understanding street gangs (
    5th ed.
    ). San Clemente, CA: LawTech.
    Vaughn, J. (1989). A survey of juvenile electronic monitoring and home confinement programs. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 40(4), 1–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.1989.tb00661.x
    Venkatesh, S. A. (1996). The gang and the community. In C. R.Huff (Ed.), Gangs in America (
    2nd ed.
    , pp. 241–256). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452232201
    Veneziano, C., & Veneziano, L. (2002). Adolescent sex offenders: A review of the literature. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, 3, 247–260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1524838002237329
    Vigil, J. D. (2002). A rainbow of gangs: Street cultures in the mega-city. Austin: University of Texas Press.
    Villalva, M. (2000, February 8). Parental survey reveals “clear” fear: Violence against, or by, their child. USA Today, pp. 8D, 10D.
    Villarruel, F. A., & Walker, N. E. (2002). Donde esta la justicia? A call to action on behalf of Latino and Latina youth in the U.S. justice system. Washington, DC: Building Blocks for Youth.
    Violence Policy Center. (2007). Drive-by America. Washington, DC: Author.
    Violent and irrational—and that's just the policy. (1996, June 8). Economist, pp. 23–25.
    Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice. (2005). Juvenile recidivism in Virginia. Department of Juvenile Justice Research Quarterly, III, 1–12.
    Waber, D. P., De Moor, C., Forbes, P. W., Almli, C. R., Botteron, K. N., Leonard, G., et al. (2007). The NIH MRI study of normal brain development: Performance of a population based sample of healthy children aged 6 to 18 years on a neuropsychological battery. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1355617707070841
    Warr, M. (2002). Companions in crime: The social aspects of criminal conduct. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803956
    Washington State Institute for Public Policy. (2002). Washington State's implementation of aggression replacement training for juvenile offenders: Preliminary findings. Olympia: Author.
    Washington State Institute for Public Policy. (2004). Washington State's family integrated transitions program for juvenile offenders: Outcome evaluation and benefit-cost analysis. Olympia: Author.
    Wasserman, G. A., Ko, S. J., & Jensen, P. (2002). Guidelines for child and adolescent mental health referral. New York: Columbia University, Center for the Promotion of Mental Health in Juvenile Justice. Retrieved May 6, 2002, from http://www.promotementalhealth.org
    Wasserman, G. A., Ko, S. J., & McReynolds, L. S. (2004). Assessing the mental health status of youth in juvenile justice settings. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Wasserman, G. A., McReynolds, L. S., Lucas, C., Fisher, P., & Santos, L. (2002). The Voice DISC-IV with incarcerated youth: Prevalence of disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 41, 314–321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200203000-00011
    Wasserman, G. A., & Seracini, A. M. (2001). Risk factors and interventions. In R.Loeber & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs (pp. 165–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452229089
    Weisel, D. L. (2002). The evolution of street gangs: An examination of form and variation. In W.Reed & S.Decker (Eds.), Responding to gangs: Evaluation and research (pp. 25–65). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Weisel, D. L. (2004). Graffiti. Problem-oriented guides for police. Problem-Specific Guides Series. Guide No. 9. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
    Weisel, D. L., & Howell, J. C. (2007). Comprehensive gang assessment: A report to the Durham Police Department and Durham County Sheriff's Office. Durham, NC: Durham Police Department.
    Weiss, B., Caron, A., Ball, S., Tapp, J., Johnson, M., & Weisz, J. R. (2005). Iatrogenic effects of group treatment for antisocial youth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1036–1044. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1036
    Weisz, J., Sandler, I., Durlak, J., & Anton, B. (2005). Promoting and protecting youth mental health through evidence-based prevention and treatment. American Psychologist, 60, 628–648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.628
    Weitekamp, E. G. M. (2001). Gangs in Europe: Assessments at the millennium. In M. W.Klein, H.-J.Kerner, C. L.Maxson, & E. G. M.Weitekamp (Eds.), The Eurogang paradox: Street gangs and youth groups in the U.S. and Europe (pp. 309–324). Amsterdam: Kluwer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0882-2_24
    Weitekamp, E. G. M., Kerner, H.-J., Schindler, V., & Schubert, A. (1995). On the “dangerousness” of chronic/habitual offenders: A re-analysis of the 1945 Philadelphia birth cohort data. Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention, 4, 159–175.
    Weithorn, L. A. (1988). Mental hospitalization of troublesome youth: An analysis of skyrocketing admission rates. Stanford Law Review, 40, 773–838. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1228816
    Wellford, C., Pepper, J. V., & Petrie, C. (2005). Firearms and violence: A critical review. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
    Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2006). Evidence-based crime prevention. In B. C.Welsh & D. P.Farrington (Eds.), Preventing crime: What works for children, offenders, victims, and places (pp. 1–17). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4244-2_1
    Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2007). Save children from a life of crime. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 871–880. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00465.x
    Weston, D. A. (1969). Fines, imprisonment, and the poor: Thirty dollars or thirty days. California Law Review, 57, 778–821. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3479718
    Whitbeck, L. B., Hoyt, D. R., & Yoder, K. A. (1999). A risk-amplification model of victimization and depressive symptoms among runaway and homeless adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 273–296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022891802943
    Widom, C. S., & Maxfield, M. G. (2001). An update on the “cycle of violence” (Research in Brief). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
    Wiebe, D. J., Meeker, J. W., & Vila, B. (1999). Hourly trends of gang crime incidents, 1995-1998. Irvine: University of California, Focused Research Group on Gangs.
    Wiebush, R. G. (2000). Risk assessment and classification for serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
    Wiebush, R. G. (Ed.). (2002). Graduated sanctions for juvenile offenders: A program model and planning guide. Oakland, CA: National Council on Crime and Delinquency and National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.
    Wiebush, R. G., Baird, C., Krisberg, B., & Onek, D. (1995). Risk assessment and classification for serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. In J. C.Howell, B.Krisberg, J. D.Hawkins, & J. J.Wilson (Eds.), A sourcebook: Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders (pp. 171–212). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Wiebush, R. G., Johnson, K., & Wagner, D. (1997). Development of an empirically-based risk assessment instrument and placement recommendation matrix for the Maryland Department of Juvenile Justice. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
    Wiebush, R. G., Wagner, D., & Erlich, J. (1999). Development of an empirically-based assessment instrument for the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
    Wiebush, R. G., Wagner, D., McNulty, B., Wang, Y., & Le, T. N. (2005). Implementation and outcome of evaluation of the intensive aftercare program. Final Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Wiebush, R. G., Wagner, D., Prestine, R., & Baird, C. (1992). The impact of electronic monitoring on juvenile recidivism: Results of an experimental test in the Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court. Madison, WI: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
    Williams, K., Curry, G. D., & Cohen, M. (2002). Gang prevention programs for female adolescents: An evaluation. In W. L.Reed & S. H.Decker (Eds.), Responding to gangs: Evaluation and research (pp. 225–263). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
    Willing, R., & Fields, G. (1999, December 20). Geography of the death penalty. USA Today, pp. 1A, 6A.
    Wilson, D. B., Gottfredson, D. C., & Najaka, S. S. (2001). School-based prevention of problem behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17, 247–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1011050217296
    Wilson, D. B., MacKenzie, D. L., & Mitchell, F. N. (2005). Effects of correctional boot camps on offending. A Campbell Collaboration systematic review, available at http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/frontend2.asp?ID=34
    Wilson, J. J. (2000, July 14). Remarks made at BARJ Special Emphasis States Roundtable, San Diego, CA.
    Wilson, J. J., & Howell, J. C. (1993). A comprehensive strategy for serious, violent and chronic juvenile offenders. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Wilson, J. Q. (1995). Crime and public policy. In J. Q.Wilson & J.Petersilia (Eds.), Crime (pp. 489–507). San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
    Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982, March). Broken windows. Atlantic Monthly, 249, 29–38.
    Wilson, S. J., & Lipsey, M. W. (2000). Wilderness challenge programs for delinquent youth: A meta-analysis of outcome evaluations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 23, 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189%2899%2900040-3
    Wilson, S. J., & Lipsey, M. W. (2007). School-based interventions for aggressive and disruptive behavior: Update of a meta-analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 33(Supplement), S130-S143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2007.04.011
    Wilson, S. J., Lipsey, M. W., & Derzon, J. H. (2003). The effects of school-based intervention programs on aggressive behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 136–149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.71.1.136
    Wilson, S. J., Lipsey, M. W., & Soydan, H. (2003). Are mainstream programs for juvenile delinquency less effective with minority youth than majority youth? A metaanalysis of outcomes. Research on Social Work Practice, 13, 3–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049731502238754
    Wolfgang, M. E., Figlio, R. M., & Sellin, T. (1972). Delinquency in a birth cohort. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Woodward, L. J., & Fergusson, D. M. (2000). Childhood and adolescent predictors of physical assault: A prospective longitudinal study. Criminology, 38, 233–262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2000.tb00889.x
    Wooldredge, J. D. (1988). Differentiating the effects of juvenile court sentences on eliminating recidivism. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 25, 264–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427888025003004
    Wright, J. D. (2006). The constitutional failure of gang databases. Stanford Journal of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, 2, 115–142.
    Wright, B. R. E., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Paternoster, R. (2004). Does the perceived risk of punishment deter criminally prone individuals? Rational choice, self-control, and crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41, 180–213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022427803260263
    Wu, B. (2000). Determinants of public opinion toward juvenile waiver decisions. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 51(1), 9–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-6988.2000.tb00014.x
    Wyrick, P. (2006). Gang prevention: How to make the “front end” of your anti-gang effort work. United States Attorneys’ Bulletin, 54, 52–60.
    Wyrick, P. A., & Howell, J. C. (2004). Strategic risk-based response to youth gangs. Juvenile Justice, 10, 20–29.
    Young, D., Moline, K., Farrell, J., & Bierie, D. (2006). Best implementation practices: Disseminating new assessment technologies in a juvenile justice agency. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 135–158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128705281752
    Zaczor, B. (2002, September 8). Boys’ case revives Fla. trial law debate. News and Observer (Raleigh, NC), p. 7A.
    Zahn, M. (2007). Girls study group. Presentation at the 12th National Workshop on Adult and Juvenile Female Offenders, Baltimore, MD, October 23.
    Zatz, M. S. (1987). Chicano youth gangs and crime: The creation of moral panic. Contemporary Crises, 11, 129–158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00728588
    Zavlek, S. (2005). Planning community-based facilities for violent juvenile offenders as part of a system of graduated sanctions. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Zelman, M. (2006). Criminal justice system reform and wrongful conviction: A research agenda. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17, 468–492. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0887403406292740
    Zimmerman, C. R., Hendrix, G., Moeser, J., & Roush, D. W. (2004). Desktop guide to reentry for juvenile confinement facilities. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    Zimring, F. E. (1996, August 19). Crying wolf over teen demons. Los Angeles Times, p. B5.
    Zimring, F. E. (1998a). American youth violence. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Zimring, F. E. (1998b). Toward a jurisprudence of youth violence. In M.Tonry & M. H.Moore (Eds.), Youth violence (pp. 477–501). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Zimring, F. E. (1999). The executioner's dissonant song: On capital punishment and American legal values. In A.Sarat (Ed.), The killing state: Capital punishment in law, politics, and culture (pp. 137–147). New York: Oxford University Press.
    Zimring, F. E. (2000). The punitive necessity of waiver. In J.Fagan & F. E.Zimring (Eds.), The changing borders of juvenile justice: Transfer of adolescents to the criminal court (pp. 207–226). Chicago: University of Chicago.
    Zimring, F. E. (2002). The common thread: Diversion in the jurisprudence of juvenile courts. In M. K.Rosenheim, F. E.Zimring, D. S.Tanenhaus, & B.Dohrn (Eds.), A century of juvenile justice (pp. 142–157). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Zimring, F. E. (2007). Protect individual punishment decisions from mandatory penalties. Criminology and Public Policy, 6, 881–886. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2007.00468.x
    Zimring, F. E., & Fagan, J. (2000). The search for causes in an era of crime declines: Some lessons from the study of New York City homicide. Crime & Delinquency, 46, 446–456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011128700046004002
    Zimring, F. E., & Hawkins, G. J. (1973). Deterrence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    About the Author

    James C. (Buddy) Howell, PhD, worked at the federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) in the U.S. Department of Justice for 21 years, mostly as director of research and program development. He was also director of the National Institute of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and deputy administrator of OJJDP. He currently is senior research associate with the National Youth Gang Center in Tallahassee, Florida, and special advisor to the Life History Research Program at the University of Pittsburgh. He is an associate editor of the journal Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, author of the book Juvenile Justice and Youth Violence (Sage), and lead editor of A Sourcebook: Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders (Sage). Some of his more than 70 published works have appeared in Crime & Delinquency, Criminology, the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, and Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice. Dr. Howell is very active in helping states and localities reform their juvenile justice systems and use evidence-based programs and in working with these entities to address youth gang problems in a balanced approach.


    • Loading...
Back to Top

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website