Study 1
A 4-year longitudinal study conducted by Jimerson and colleagues (2003) evaluated the effects of the Neighborhood Enrichment with Vision Involving Services, Treatment, and Supervision (NEW VISTAS) program. Using a quasi-experimental design, researchers compared outcomes of juveniles on probation who had completed the NEW VISTAS program with a historical, matched comparison group of similar juveniles. The program was implemented in the city of Santa Barbara, California. Youths who were between the ages of 11 and 18, and from criminally involved families with identified substance abuse problems (i.e., either the youth or someone living with the youth had a drug and/or alcohol problem) were eligible for the study. Youths were recruited mostly from probation referrals (about 87 percent), but other gateways included truancy, parole, and child welfare services (CWS). Once youths and their families were identified, comprehensive treatment plans were developed to provide services and supervision that met the individualized needs of the youths and their families. Outcome analyses focused primarily on youths.
The NEW VISTAS sample included roughly 352 youths and their families. Youth participants ranged in age from 11–18, with the majority (77 percent) between 15–17 years old. The treatment-group youth participants were 68 percent male: 81 percent were Latino American, 14 percent were European American, 3 percent were African American, and 1 percent were American Indian. About one third of youths indicated they were previously involved in a gang. Additionally, the majority (79 percent) of juveniles on probation had existing substance abuse problems. About one fourth (26 percent) of the youths lived with someone who was on probation, on parole, or incarcerated. About 86 percent of the treatment group (301 families) remained present for the first follow-up, 56 percent (206 families) completed the second follow-up, and 43 percent (152 families) completed the third and final follow-up.
To create a comparison group of similar youths, archival data from 1994–98 was retrieved from the Santa Barbara County Juvenile Probation Department to obtain a representative sample of youths receiving probation services prior to NEW VISTAS implementation (i.e., probation as usual). The pool included youths identified as having been involved in the Santa Barbara juvenile probation system during the years of 1994–98, with drug or alcohol testing as a condition of probation. A matched comparison group was drawn from the pool, consisting of 127 youths who were similar to the treatment group based on gender, ethnicity, and severity of offense. Specifically, participants in the comparison group were 68 percent male: 82 percent were Latino, 16 percent were European American, and 2 percent were African American. The ages of youths in the comparison group ranged from 11–18 years old, with the majority (70 percent) between the ages of 15 and 17. When examined at baseline, the historical comparison group was statistically similar to the NEW VISTAS group.
Data was collected through a number of sources, including the Santa Barbara Juvenile Probation Department, in addition to a variety of measures examined specifically for NEW VISTAS program evaluation. Board of Corrections (BOC) core data, demographics, and substance abuse information were collected for all NEW VISTAS families and youths. To evaluate effects on the youths, researchers examined juvenile crime rates and psychosocial functioning of youths in regard to their family/peer relationships, problem behaviors, school functioning, and mental health. Youths were measured at entry; exit; and at 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-ups. The probation department staff conducted family intake interviews, collected BOC questionnaires, and tracked families through the intervention and follow-up periods.
Chi-square tests for independence, one-way analysis of variance, and coinciding post hoc tests were used to compare the treatment group with the historical comparison group. Subgroup analyses were conducted to examine the differences between treatment group completers and noncompleters.