Juvenile justice systems are littered with good ideas struck down during the replication phase. I don’t know if we were aware of this at the outset or not, but we have invested a lot of time and effort making sure we don’t become another forgotten or bastardized idea. On the whole, our experience has been a positive one and we have learned the following lessons.

First, we understood the challenge of fidelity. At the beginning, we were insufficiently prescriptive in our approach. This may have been good for the working relationships of those delivering the service, but it wasn’t so good for the young people we were tying to help. We now have eight core strategies, well-documented and supported by clear training manuals and coaching.

Second, throughout the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative’s development, we have been modest in our claims and have built the program up stage by stage. We demonstrated results in one site and then replicated them in another. We learned what was core to the service and what was a result of local circumstances. We built up this expertise and passed it on from place to place.

Third, we never created demand we could not meet. We were certainly hoping to widen the use of JDAI to as many places as possible, but we were very careful to avoid trying to replicate the process in places that weren’t either administratively capable or sufficiently committed.
Fourth, we did smart things to support replication. The idea of “model sites” is a case in point. We set these up as “peer to peer” labs, so if you are in a state where JDAI isn’t running, and you want to see how it works, you can go to, for instance, New Jersey, view it firsthand and discuss the reforms with people doing similar jobs.

Fifth, we have attempted to strike the right balance in our communications between general interest materials that explain to decision-makers why they might invest, and very specific “how to” manuals that support the practitioners and their managers to make the most of that investment.

Sixth, when we got to the stage when we felt ready to increase scale geometrically, and where we thought JADI is being used, we made some smart choices. We decided to focus on states not localities, even though detention is primarily delivered in localities, like a county. That means that instead of focusing our scarce resources to demonstrate efficacy in a small number of the state’s counties, we stimulated others to follow. When this works well, we also help the state to develop capacities to support and sustain the work going on in the localities. From having the service statewide in just a handful of states, we now have half a dozen examples of what can be done”.

Seventh, as we developed the program and its use became more widespread, we recognized that we had to be able to both respond more efficiently to predictable needs and differently to ordinary concerns of the sites. If someone needs a risk assessment tool, for example, they shouldn’t have to rely on somebody in the Casey Foundation, which supports the initiative, rushing to the photocopier to make them a copy. That might work if you have a handful of clients, but not if you have tens or hundreds. Now, by way of example, we have the JDAI help desk, which includes an electronic library of hundreds of relevant documents that site personnel can search for by themselves.

Eighth, we have gone beyond the “coaching model”. In the early stages of a new venture, it’s great to have someone who knows the initiative well, and can visit a site repeatedly to guide the reform effort. When the program started running in more and more places, we realized this was not sustainable. Now we provide training seminars that can be replicated easily and cheaply and we’ve prepared a variety of “guides”— or do-it-yourself books—that enable sites to rely more on their own talents and capacities. The focus of the training is the things that challenge people implementing JDAI.

Ninth, we have standardized, and become more efficient with, our technical we provide. If you are working with JDAI for the first time, introducing it into a state or county, you now know the developmental milestones that have to be reached to achieve success. People want to know exactly where they stand and we can tell them.

Finally, most of us working on JDAI have worked within system and know how they work. So we have come to realize that having one’s work incorporated within a system is a way of ensuring that it is provided as a matter of course within juvenile justice. Thus, JDAI is being used to reduce something – juvenile detention – which we see as harmful. We are introducing new ways of working to reform the system.

Links
http://www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/JuvenileDetentionAlternativesInitia...