|
Abstract
|
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The goal of this report by Deschenes et al. was to evaluate Michigan's Nokomis Challenge Program. The purpose of this evaluation was to compare the cost effectiveness of this program to traditional residential placements.
METHODOLOGY:
The authors planned to use an experimental design to conduct the program evaluation, but it was necessary to modify it to a quasi-experimental design. The Nokomis Challenge Program, sponsored by the Michigan Department of Social Services (DSS), was defined as an inventive correctional program for delinquent youth. This program consisted of 3 months of wilderness-based programming and residence, followed by 9 months of intense aftercare in the community. The research design included random assignment to either experimental or control groups, in addition to pre- and post-intervention measures. The sample was drawn from youth referrals by the Central Intake and Classification Assessment Unit (CICA) of the DSS Residential Care Division. The random assignment had to be modified due to a reduced intake of new cases. The new assignment procedure gave youths a 100% probability of assignment to the Nokomis experimental group, if there were beds available. Once the beds were full, youths had a 100% probability of assignment to the control group. The sample consisted of 96 youths in the experimental group and 94 youths in the comparison group.
The authors collected data from four sources: DSS official records, interviews with youths, interviews and observations with Nokomis and training school staff, and interviews with youths' families. Intake interviews were given to all youths. Two measures were used to determine the characteristics and intensity of program activities: direct observation of program activities and administration of questionnaire to both groups. Post-release behavior was measured by interviews conducted 24 months after completion of the programs and by collection and coding of official criminal history data. The authors used descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to analyze the data.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
The authors found that the only significant differences between the families in the experimental and control groups were that a higher proportion of the experimental group families had unhealthy communication and behavior control behaviors. There were no significant differences between the youths in the two groups.
AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS:
The authors recommended that an additional evaluation be conducted to compare the youths' successful completion of the community phase for the Nokomis youths versus similar youths in the comparison group. The authors suggested that cost-effectiveness of the Nokomis program should be determined by examining the total number of days in different placements.
EVALUATION:
Overall, this report presents no definitive evidence to support the Nokomis program. The abandonment of random assignment decreases the external validity of these findings. In addition, the authors admitted to losing 9 youth from the sample for refusal to participate. The issue of selection bias was not adequately addressed. The authors' conclusion emphasizes the weakness of their assessment of the Nokomis program: "If nothing else, the Nokomis program offers a unique blend of public and private agencies in providing residential and community-based services for medium and low-risk juveniles" (p. 164).
(CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado) |