Administering Services for Dual System Youth: A Comparison of Processes Across Three Midwestern Jurisdictions
The existing research on youth involved in both the juvenile justice and child welfare systems has mainly focused on outcomes such as delinquent behavior, homelessness, and residential placement. These outcomes are often attributed to factors such as multiple placements and unstable environments. Ho...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2025
|
| In: |
Journal of contemporary criminal justice
Year: 2025, Volume: 41, Issue: 2, Pages: 282-310 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Keywords: |
| Summary: | The existing research on youth involved in both the juvenile justice and child welfare systems has mainly focused on outcomes such as delinquent behavior, homelessness, and residential placement. These outcomes are often attributed to factors such as multiple placements and unstable environments. However, the internal workings and delivery of services within these systems have been largely overlooked. Building on previous research, organizational theory, and the increasing focus on punishment within the criminal justice system, this current article aims to better understand how the juvenile justice and child welfare systems manage youth involved in both systems at an organizational level. Using qualitative interview and focus group data from 36 practitioners across three jurisdictions in the Midwest, this paper seeks to answer the question: What are the current organizational processes of the juvenile justice and child welfare systems in response to youth involved in both systems? The findings reveal that each jurisdiction in the study operates differently, sometimes independently, and there is wide variation in how they administer services. The article notes the vast inconsistencies in the administration of juvenile justice and child welfare across the nation, highlighting differences at the county (jurisdictional) level. In addition, the findings are consistent with previous research, showing how agencies handle youth involved in both systems by routinely forcing them to alternate institutions with little regard for the consequences. This article emphasizes the importance of conducting more research to find the best method for delivering services nationwide. Future studies could use these findings as a framework to categorize different administrative methods and use them as predictors for quantitative analyses to understand how they affect outcomes, such as recidivism, permanency, types of placement, and more. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1552-5406 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/10439862251329649 |