Making It Happen State Progress in Implementing Evidence-Based Programs for Delinquent Youth

• Published in: Youth violence and juvenile justice Vol. 13; no. 3; pp. 243 - 257
• Main Authors: Welsh, Brandon C., Greenwood, Peter W.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01-07-2015; Sage Publications Ltd
• Subjects: Children & youth; Families & family life; Foster care; Juvenile offenders; Psychotherapy; Recidivism; United States > US; state government; evidence-based program; delinquency prevention; implementation
• ISSN: 1541-2040; 1556-9330
• DOI: 10.1177/1541204014541708

This article explores the progress that state governments across the country are making in implementing the three most widely used evidence-based programs (EBPs) for delinquent youth: multisystemic therapy (MST), functional family therapy (FFT), and multidimensional treatment foster care (MTFC). Rather than rank states, this study was designed to help state policy makers and practitioners identify strategies and techniques that can help expand the quality and availability of EBPs in their jurisdictions. Its explicit focus on implementation was purposeful. Most states are not yet in a position to begin to assess if their expenditures on these programs are having an impact (or at least an impact statewide) on juvenile recidivism, placements in residential facilities, or other key outcomes. We found that there are five states that are making substantially greater progress in implementing these EBPs: New Mexico, Louisiana, Maine, Connecticut, and Hawaii. In addition to the highest availability of these programs, ranging from 9.4 to 13.0 therapist teams per million population, these states share a number of key features that demonstrate that direct and purposeful state action is behind the expansion of these programs. Some of these features include structured involvement of all key stakeholders, effective leaders who championed not just the programs but a culture of using research to improve practice, pilot testing of new EBPs, special funding for designated EBPs, and technical assistance to counties to help get programs off the ground. Gaps in knowledge are identified and implications for policy are discussed.