Measuring Outcomes

Desired outcomes are defined by the vision. Actual outcomes will be determined by the quality of the process -- not just what gets done, but how it is done. If the process of responding to an offender is humiliating or demeaning, the outcome is unlikely to be a respectful attitude by the offender. If the process of responding to a victim is patronizing or discounts the victim's voice, the outcome is unlikely to be the recovery of personal power. Respectful process treats each participant as equal in human dignity and in capacity to contribute to constructive solutions. Respectful process for victims facilitates the recovery of a sense of personal power. Respectful process for offenders encourages them to experience responsible use of their personal power to own their behavior, to make amends, and to help others.

Measuring outcomes is a way of checking the system -- holding the system accountable to the vision. Paying attention to what gets measured is a powerful strategy for promoting change. Line staff take their cues about what is really important from what gets measured and reported.

Guiding Questions for Measuring Outcomes for Individual Dispositions

• What is the level of victim satisfaction with the overall disposition?

• How much repair was achieved for the victim?

• How much repair was achieved for the community?

• What is the level of the juvenile's understanding of the impact of the offense on others?

• What are the measurable increases in competency for the juvenile offender?

• What bonds among victim, community members, families, and the juvenile offender have been created or strengthened?

• What positive roles in the community were created for the juvenile offender?

• Does the disposition structure the juvenile's time based on the risk to reoffend?

• Has the juvenile fulfilled the requirements of the disposition?

• Has the juvenile refrained from committing any new offenses?

• Did the disposition provide roles for community members in promoting accountability and community safety?

Guiding Questions for Measuring Outcomes for the Juvenile Justice System

• What percentage of cases provide for active victim input into the terms of the disposition?

• What percentage of cases provide for active community input into the terms of the disposition?

• What percentage of cases provide for active juvenile offender input into the terms of the disposition?

• How many community members participate in policymaking, case decisionmaking, or implementation of dispositions?

• What percentage of cases involving financial loss require payment of restitution by the juvenile?

• What percentage of restitution ordered is paid?

• What percentage of community work service is completed?

• What percentage of cases are referred to mediation/dialogue? How many mediate? How many reach agreement? What percentage of agreements are successfully fulfilled?

• What percentage of cases involve other organizations or individuals to assist in monitoring the juvenile's activities and behavior (e.g., schools, family members, recreation programs, and treatment programs)?

• What is the level of involvement of juvenile justice staff in community problem-solving efforts aimed at preventing delinquent behavior?

• What percentage of juveniles continue to volunteer at the sites where they completed their community service?

• What percentage of community service assignments involve juveniles working side by side with conventional adult volunteers?

• What level of responsibility does the community feel for addressing the problem of delinquent youth and community safety?

• Does the community have expectations for positive contributions from delinquent youth?

• Are the levels of fear in the community abating?

• What percentage of juveniles reoffend while on supervision? Within a 2-year period?

• Are resources spent in a way that supports accountability, competency development, and community safety equally?