A Partnership Formation in Juvenile Justice Services to Support Youth Well-Being through Increased Family Involvement

Introduction: While the field acknowledges the importance of context in service delivery, traditional research models do not always account the nuances of the systems where they will be implemented. When addressed later in the process, issues of capacity, competing goals, and culture differences between researchers and service providers can cause tension and lead to a lack of commitment from sites. Using a partnership approach for designing and testing new interventions can lead to better uptake and sustainability of programs and practices. We will share the process of a partnership formation over 3 years to support the development, implementation, and testing of an intervention to improve youth well-being in Youth Development Centers (YDCs).

Methods: A partnership was formed between the Pennsylvania Bureau of Juvenile Justice Services, three YDCs, and university researchers to develop and test a new protocol to increase family engagement within the existing infrastructure. Working together, partners identified common barriers to family involvement and natural intervention points to enhance relationships. From there, the team created a scripted and tightly structured research-informed protocol to involve families in youth services and selected practical yet rigorous assessment procedures to monitor progress. Facility generated IDs were used to randomly assign youth at intake to “services as usual” or a “family enhanced” condition. All randomization, data collection, and service provision was done by the facilities with minimal support from university researchers.

Results: The pilot project was implemented in 17 units across three YDCs with ongoing support from university partners. Once randomization was complete and an evaluation sample established, facilities incorporated all intervention components into standard practice for all incoming youth based on state requirements; sites also continued to use most evaluation tools. Data collection is being finalized for 213 youth in the evaluation sample; qualitative reports from staff indicate that the changes in practice are improving relationships between families and the facility and between caregivers and youth. As a result of the qualitative feedback, the program is being expanded to other state YDCs.

Conclusions: Partnership development is an essential component of successful research and service improvement in real world settings. Enhancing capacity of our community partners to do research rather than relying solely university researchers to serve that role can increase community buy-in and lead to more cost-effective projects. Time and effort spent developing the partnership and working together to create a research protocol can also yield immediate service improvement and enhance sustainability efforts.