Study 1
Bright and colleagues (2015) conducted a quasi-experimental design study to examine the effectiveness of Family Centered Treatment (FCT). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to create statistically equivalent groups. Juveniles were considered eligible for the study if they had been recently adjudicated delinquent in the State of Maryland and were given treatment services by Family Centered Treatment (FCT) in a group home care facility. The treatment group comprised youth who received FCT between 2009 and 2013, and the control group comprised youth who received other services from group homes within the same timeframe. These groups were matched using the covariates of age, age at first delinquency complaint, race, gender, location (urban, suburban, or rural), prior adjudication for violent offenses, and number of prior placements. Both treatment and control groups had been involved in the Maryland Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) and had been adjudicated delinquent prior to receiving any services.
The study consisted of 1,246 youth who participated in FCT (treatment group) and 1,441 youth who were admitted to a group home or treatment group home (control group), for a total of 2,687 participants. The treatment group was 79 percent male, and the control group was 75 percent male. The treatment group was 67 percent Black, 27 percent white, 5 percent Hispanic, and 1 percent other. The control group was 71 percent Black, 23 percent white, 5 percent Hispanic, and 1 percent other. The average age of the treatment group was 16.6 years old, and the average age of the control group was 16.4 years old. Of the treatment group, 53 percent were from suburban, 34 percent were from rural, and 13 percent were from urban locations. Of the control group, 44 percent were from suburban, 31 percent were from rural, and 24 percent were from urban locations. In the treatment group, 36 percent of participants had a prior DJS residential placement, whereas in the control group, 44 percent of participants had a previous residential placement. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups on characteristics or demographics at baseline.
The outcomes of interest were future conviction and future incarceration. Conviction was measured by both juvenile re-adjudication and adult conviction, while incarceration accounted for both DJS commitment and incarceration in the adult system. Data for the FCT program were collected from the Institute of Family Centered Services (IFCS), which delivered FCT to treatment group youth. Youth-level information and juvenile justice outcomes were collected from the Maryland DJS, and adult criminal justice outcomes were collected from the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS).
Descriptive and bivariate analyses allowed for the characterization of the sample and assessment of baseline differences between the treatment and the control groups. Logistic regression was conducted to compare data on recidivism and incarceration rates between the FCT treatment group and group home control group. The study authors (Bright et al., 2015) conducted subgroup analyses on female youth and older youth (i.e., youth older than 16 at the beginning of treatment).