the rebound program - Messages of Empowerment Productions, LLC

Transcription

THE REBOUND PROGRAM
DEKALB COUNTY (GA) JUVENILE DRUG COURT
A SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
2004-2011
Submitted to:
The DeKalb County (GA) Juvenile Drug Court
Submitted by:
Messages of Empowerment Productions, LLC
SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TEAM-MOE would like to thank all of the Rebound Program collaborators for assisting
directly or indirectly with this summative evaluation. A very special thanks is extended to
the following partners who went above and beyond in providing access to data and
documents that contributed to this report:

Walter Carmack, Assistant District Attorney Paralegal, DeKalb County
Government & President and Founder, Georgia Community Resource Center

Shunda Dean, Probation Supervisor, DeKalb County Juvenile Court

Theodore Gordon, Probation Officer, DeKalb County Juvenile Court

Bayyinah Shaheed, Counselor, Be Smart Don’t Start
We would also like to thank the Judge Linda Haynes for her support of the evaluation
process.
-2-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
II.
Special Acknowledgements
2
Table of Contents
3
Executive Summary
4
OVERVIEW OF THE REBOUND PROGRAM
7
Overview
8
Collaborating Partners
9
Rebound Program Framework
11
The Rebound Program Structure and Process
13
EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
16
Overview of Evaluation Design
17
The Logic Model
18
The Evaluation Inquiry & Analysis Methods
26
The Evaluation Data Sources
27
Data Management and Analysis Procedures
29
Program Indicators
30
III. REBOUND PROGRAM FINDINGS
33
Findings Overview
35
Year 1 Results
38
Year 2 Results
44
Year 3 Results
50
Year 4 Results
59
Year 5 Results
66
Year 6 Results
74
Year 7 Results
81
IV. CONCLUSIONS
86
Overall Conclusions
87
Recommendations
95
-3-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The overall purpose of this summative evaluation report is to highlight the findings from seven
(7) years of program implementation for DeKalb County’s Juvenile Drug Court’s Rebound
Program. The Rebound Program is designed to help adolescent participants learn to live drugfree and crime-free through early, continuous, and intense judicially supervised treatment,
mandatory periodic drug testing, and the use of appropriate sanctions and other rehabilitation
services. This summative evaluation embodies aspects from formative, process, and outcomes
evaluation frameworks, including cohort analyses and case studies to learn more about the
diversity among participating young people. In the end, the summative evaluation data can be
used to justify additional funding for effective programmatic components, request supplemental
funds to fill gaps in services, as well as to inform program improvements at the staff and
collaborative levels.
UNDERSTANDING
THE
NEED
FOR A
JUVENILE DRUG COURT
IN
DEKALB COUNTY. The DeKalb
County’s Juvenile Drug Court is one of 457 fully operational juvenile drug courts in the United
States. The pressing need for such a court in DeKalb County is substantiated in the Juvenile
Probation Department’s estimate that at least 70% of all DeKalb County’s juvenile offenders have
used alcohol and other drugs. Moreover, drug use is a key factor to other juvenile criminal
offenses, including theft and burglary. Based on these determinants of poor outcomes for youth
with substance disorders who commit crimes, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) awarded
DeKalb County’s Juvenile Court a Drug Court Planning Grant to convene and train a multidisciplinary team comprised of the Juvenile Court, the Public Defender’s Office, the District
Attorney’s Office, the DeKalb County School System, and the DeKalb Community Service Board
(CSB).
A GLIMPSE
OF THE
PROGRAMS’ PRIORITY POPULATION.
In terms of populations served,
according to the State of Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice Descriptive Statistics for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2009, 87.5% of DeKalb County juvenile offenders are African American, 78.8% are
male, and 99% are 13 years of age and up. In comparison, the mean age of the 153 juvenile
offenders served by the Rebound Program is 15, with ages ranging from 13 to 17. Ninety-five
percent of the juvenile offenders in the program are African American males from lower to middle
economic backgrounds.
-4-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
THE PROGRAMMATIC DESIGN AT A GLANCE. The Rebound Program blends best practices
in clinical intervention and court compliance to deter youth offenders from deviant criminal and
social behaviors. The program begins with an orientation, bio-physiological assessment,
psychological evaluation, and weekly court appearances. Individual treatment plans are
developed based on the assessment results. At the same time, young people are required to
meet curfew, maintain satisfactory conduct at home, school, and in the community, maintain a “B”
grade point average in school, attend school regularly, and have negative drug screens. Youth
not enrolled in school must enroll in a GED or vocational program and/or employment with no
unexcused absences. Finally, participating youth must engage in pro-social activities and perform
community service. Additional programmatic strategies include journaling, oral presentations,
and relapse planning and prevention.
EFFORTS TO EVALUATE PROGRAM RESULTS FROM 2004 – 2011. In the Spring of 2011,
The DeKalb County Juvenile Court commissioned Messages of Empowerment Productions, LLC.
(TEAM-MOE)
to evaluate the Rebound Program.
This report presents the results from a
summative evaluation of the effectiveness of the DeKalb County Juvenile Drug Court Rebound
Program. The program’s process and outcomes are judged based on the effectiveness of the
program in reducing recidivism and substance use in juveniles and ultimately developing
productive citizens in the community. A customized database was developed to manage data for
153 Rebound Program participants, including demographic and program information extracted
from client case files. DeKalb County juvenile history was collected and the data from the adult
system was accessed via the DeKalb County Online Judicial System.
Program data was
analyzed to determine the extent to which young people in the Rebound Program experienced
reductions in recidivism and substance abuse, improvements in school performance, increased
program retention and phase promotion, as well as an increase in family engagement and
involvement in the youths’ lives.
-5-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SUMMATIVE EVALUATION FINDINGS. The Rebound Program serviced 153 young people over a
seven year period. Of the 153 participants in the program, 111 (79%) were retained with 57
(38%) graduated from the program. Of these 57 graduates, 26 (46%) remained drug free and
have not reoffended since completing the program.
SUMMATIVE EVALUATION RESULTS AT A GLANCE
LEVEL OF
FAMILY
COHORT
YEARS
Aggregate
RETENTION
52 (47%)
38 Not
documented
3 NA
64 (47%)
11 Not
documented
6 NA
73 (62%)
24 Not
documented
12 NA
111 (79%)
1 Not documented
11 NA
9 (82%)
4 Not
documented
6 NA
12 (86%)
7 Not
documented
7 (37%)
2 Not
documented
14 (78%)
3 Not
documented
14 (93%)
6 NA
15 (50%)
21 (91%)
7 Not
documented
11 (58%)
11 Not
documented
14 (54%)
4 Not
documented
18 (78%)
7 Not
documented
23 (77%)
8 (32%)
19 (83%)
1 Not
documented
1 NA
5 (31%)
9 Not
documented
10 (43%)
1 Not
documented
1 NA
12 (52%)
1 Not
documented
1 NA
21 (91%)
2 NA
7 (29%)
15 (94%)
8 NA
4 (22%)
3 Not
documented
3 NA
6 (32%)
2 Not
documented
3 NA
13 (62%)
2 Not
documented
1 NA
15 (68%)
2 NA
6 (30%)
8 Not
documented
9 (38%)
2 Not
documented
2 NA
12 (75%)
10 Not
documented
2 NA
20 (74%)
1 NA
9 (64%)
1 NA
9 (64 %)
1 NA
0 (0%)
7 NA
8 (57%)
1 Not
documented
9 (90%)
5 (56%)
1 Not
documented
10 (100%)
SCHOOL/
WORK
ENGAGEMENT
(COURT,
ACTIVITIES,
HOME, SCHOOL)
153
57 (38%)
1 Not
documented
97 (88%)
15 Not
documented
28 NA
21
20092010
30
20072008
LAST DRUG
SCREEN
POSITIVE
GRADUATED
20102011
20082009
RECIDIVISM
TOTAL
NO.
25
24
8 (38%)
20062007
28
7 (25%)
16 (94%)
3 Not
documented
8 NA
20052006
15
7 (47%)
9 (82%)
4 NA
20042005
10
5 (50%)
8 (89%)
1 Not
documented
5 (50%)
-6-
I. OVERVIEW OF THE REBOUND PROGRAM
OVERVIEW OF THE REBOUND PROGRAM
BACKGROUND
OF THE
REBOUND PROGRAM. The DeKalb County Juvenile Court (DCJC)
launched the Rebound Program in 2003 with grant funding from the Bureau of Justice Assistance
(BJA). Since its inception, the Rebound Program continues to focus on early intervention as a
way to deter youthful offenders from further delinquent activities that bring harm to themselves and
to the communities they live in. Over time, the Rebound Program has emerged as intensive
behavior modification program serving primarily low-to-middle income African American males
between the ages of 14 and 16 with substance abuse issues.
The DCJC established and trained a multi-disciplinary team to serve as the core Rebound
Program Team. The team’s original members included representation from the DeKalb County
Juvenile Court, the Public Defender’s Office, the District Attorney’s Office, the DeKalb County
School System and the DeKalb Community Service Board (CSB). Although these represented
organizations have remained part of the Rebound Program’s collaborative partnership, there has
been staff turnover throughout the eight (8) years of program implementation. It is important to
note that the CSB was replaced as the treatment provider with representation from ProActive
Management Counseling (PMC), Attachment & Bonding Center of Atlanta (ABC), and The Potter’s
House.
CORE MISSION
AND
PROGRAMMATIC STRATEGY. The mission of the DeKalb County Juvenile
Drug Court Rebound Program is to utilize judicial and community-based interventions to provide
an effective response to juvenile offenders and their families, and to create safer communities by
strengthening families, reducing crime, and developing productive citizens. The Rebound Program
is an intensive behavior modification program that is divided into a five (5) phase program design,
in which participants must successfully complete each phase before transitioning to the next
phase. The participant must submit a written request to be promoted and the Drug Court Team
makes recommendations on whether the participant should be promoted to next phase. As a
requirement during the initial phase of the program, the juveniles are mandated to attend
treatment five days each week and to be present in court every Wednesday. As they matriculate
throughout the phases, they are not required to report as often. In all, the program requires
accountability and responsibility, education or employment and productivity, rehabilitation and
recovery, community service, random drug screens, and home visits.
-8-
COLLABORATIVE PARTNERS:
CORE COURT PARTNERS
The Rebound Program’s collaborative partnerships function on two distinct levels. First, there is a
steering committee that provides programmatic and policy oversight. Additionally, there is an
operations team that is responsible for programmatic implementations and reporting on youth
progress. Table No. 1 provides a snapshot of the collaborative partners and their roles and
responsibilities. Operations team members are also delineated.
TABLE NO. 1
THE REBOUND PROGRAM’S STEERING COMMITTEE
(OPERATIONS TEAM1)
TEAM MEMBER
ROLE(S) AND RESPONSIBILITY
1
Presiding Judge of the Drug Court
Program
1
Drug Court Coordinator
1
Maintain judicial and policy oversight of the program. Preside at status hearings and staffing and team meetings.
Reports directly to Director of Court Services. Attends weekly staffing and charged with oversight of the project,
including overall implementation, evaluation, and reporting.
Assistant District Attorney of DeKalb
County
Attends weekly staffing and status hearings. Acts as “gatekeeper” for eligibility screening – investigates charges and
criminal history, represents victims and recommends restitution.
Assistant Public Defender of DeKalb
County
Attends weekly staffing and status hearings. Identifies/screens candidates. Provides legal counsel, information on
program and legal impact to ensure that participants’ families make informed decisions.
1
Treatment Providers
Community Board Service 2004-2006
Odyssey Family Counseling 2006-2010
Peachford Hospital 2006-2007
Attachment & Bonding Center of Atlanta
2008-2011
ProActive Management Counseling
2008-2011
The Potter’s House 2010-2011
Oversees the implementation of the treatment services for participants, and effective interfacing between all
treatment agencies. Ensures treatment team performs all mandated functions, including weekly staffings and status
hearings.
Supervises the implementation of the treatment services for Drug Court participants, coordinates all treatment
activities. Provides weekly updates and treatment reports to the Drug Court Team. Responsible for ensuring timely
and competent clinical assessments, patient matching, outpatient treatment, weekly treatment reports, urine drug
screen, clinical case management, and relapse prevention. Attends weekly staffing and status hearing
1
Probation Officer of DeKalb County
Juvenile Court
Attends weekly staffing and status hearings. One of three designated Drug Court Case Manager/Probation Officer.
Chief Probation Officer of DeKalb County
Juvenile Court
Ensures proper interface of Probation Department and Drug Court. Provides guidance and technical assistance to
Drug Court officers. Refers and screens participants.
Evaluation Consultant from James,
Andrews & Associates 2005, 2008
In charge of evaluation, designs; instrument development or acquisition; data collection, analysis and reporting.
Director of Student Relations, DeKalb
County School System
Liaison from the school system with Drug Court. Sets up and maintains school-based services. Provides reports and
technical assistance regarding Individual Service Plan and other student developments. Provides support for
parents for school-based activities.
Director of Court Services, DeKalb
Juvenile Court
Chief administrator of juvenile court and has oversight responsibility of all the Juvenile Court programs out of the
Probation Department.
Parent Coordinator
Coordinates activities with participants and families.
Community Coordinator
Coordinates activities and program with participants in the community.
Licensed Clinician Assessment
Licenses Professional Counselor, Master Addiction Counselor to provide immediate assessment to judges for
appropriate treatment referrals for both mental health and substance abuse services and specifically the Juvenile
Drug Court.
Responsible for the organization and coordination of the Rebound Program, development of syllabus, staff
assignments, responsible for the Drug Court site, participates in staffing and status hearings.
Program Director
Group Leader and Treatment Case
Manager
Responsible for leading group, individual, and family sessions, and team meetings. Attends weekly staffings and
status hearings
-9-
COLLABORATIVE PARTNERS:
COMMUNITY PARTNERS
The Rebound Program has community partners that work in collaboration with the DeKalb County
Juvenile Court to provide additional wrap-around services using an extensive network of
organizations and services with expertise in serving high-risk youth. Table No. 2 details these
public and community-based agencies that participate in the Rebound Program through the
provision of mental health and auxiliary services to the individual youth and families.
TABLE NO. 2
ANCILLARY/SUPPORT SERVICES
PROGRAM/ORGANIZATION
SERVICE
Youth Achievement Program (YAP)
A juvenile reentry program created by Juvenile Court with education/job/career focus,
jointly funded by the County, State, and Federal governments
Georgia Community Support &
Solution (GCSS)
Support for individuals and families through crisis-integration, advocacy, and counseling
Georgia Counseling Network
Crisis intervention and counseling services (individual/group/family therapy and counseling)
GPS Monitoring Program
Allows for house arrest
Family Values
Crisis intervention through home-based counseling and other practices
Gender Specific Anger
Management Program
10-week group program to find healthy solutions for anger/rage
Georgia Parent Support Network
Provides support and resources utilization for families
Capes
Drug education based at the Juvenile Court , a joint program with Community Service
Board
SUPER (Substance Use Prevention
and Education Resource)
For tobacco and AOD
Attachment and Bonding Center of
Atlanta/Alliance for Change
Odyssey Family Counseling
-10-
THE REBOUND PROGRAM’S FRAMEWORK
The programmatic framework below provides a shared visual that depicts core components and
process flows associated with the Rebound Program. This framework is followed by a narrative
explanation of the programmatic flow.
District
Attorney
Probation
Judges
Intake
Referral of eligible
youth
PO, DA,
PD, &
TX
Public
Defender
Schools
Collection of
all court,
education,
medical, etc.
Assessment
Orientation
Court
Parents
Community
Treatment
Phase I
Probation
Phase II
Graduation
Phase III
Education
Phase IV
Phase V
Aftercare
-11-
A NARRATIVE OF THE PROGRAMMATIC FRAMEWORK
PARTICIPANT REFERRAL
AND
ELIGIBILITY REVIEW PROCESS.
The Rebound Program’s
programmatic flow begins when the District Attorney’s (DA) Office Drug Court reviews current and
past charges to determine participant eligibility based on strict Federal Drug Court eligibility
criteria. Specific criteria include: the young person must be a post adjudicated resident of DeKalb
County between the ages of 14 and 16, have no significant pattern of violence and prior sex
offenses, and admits to alcohol and drug (AOD) involvement. Referred participants are excluded
if the young person has prior adjudication of violent felony offenses, requires sex offender
management, has committed one or more of the deadly sins as outlined in Georgia Senate Bill
440 (SB 440), prior commitment to the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), and/or has an
adjudicated felony within 3 years. Moreover, the DA verifies the degree to which victims are
involved and if restitution and/or victim protection procedures are necessary.
ASSESSMENT
AND INTAKE.
Youth who clear the legal screening proceed to complete an AOD
needs assessment and take part in a home visit where Rebound Team members assess the
youth’s living environment to determine if the home is safe and is free of drugs and alcohol.
Young people deemed to be residing in “unsafe” environments are assisted with locating
alternative living accommodations prior to enrollment. The home visit also serves as an
orientation, at which time a Rebound Team member walks the youth and guardian through the
program’s rules and requirements.
In addition, required forms are completed, including the
Juvenile Automates Substance Abuse Assessment (JASAA). If deemed “clinically appropriate”
the youth will be contacted to schedule an intake appointment where the youth and guardian
meet with treatment providers to complete paperwork. Tuberculosis and Syphilis records within
the last six months are also collected. If not “clinically appropriate” the Rebound Team attempts to
make alternative treatment recommendations.
FINAL
APPROVAL.
Cases are brought before the Operations Team, which reviews each case
assessment for admission during the recruitment phase. Once the Rebound Team approves the
youth’s admission into the program, he attends court session and observe until all required
documentation has been submitted to court and the clinical assessment has been received by the
court. Also, of note, the judge is specific about behavior and appearance, especially in the
courtroom. Anyone entering the courtroom must be dressed appropriately and address everyone
with respect.
-12-
THE REBOUND PROGRAM’S STRUCTURE AND PROCESS
INITIATION
AND IMPLEMENTATION.
Upon enrollment, the individual will begin treatment services
within 24 hours. A comprehensive bio-psycho-social assessment, titled The Global Appraisal of
Individual Needs – Initial Assessment (GAIN-I), is conducted and treatment modality begins. In
the initial phase of the program, the youth are mandated to attend treatment five days each week
and present in court every Wednesday. Prior to court sessions on Wednesdays, the team holds
weekly team meetings to monitor and discuss the progression, strengths, and challenges of each
participant and future steps. The presiding judge chairs these staffing meetings and conducts
them in a round table forum. Each team member reports on specific aspects of the participant’s
behavior at home, school performance and attendance, treatment performance and attendance,
and drug test result(s). The drug court team then determines sanctions and incentives for the
immediate status hearing, reviews each participant’s case plan, addresses any other significant
issues, and schedules caucuses for those individuals or families that need individualized level of
intervention.
INTENSE MONITORING, SOCIAL,
AND
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. Also during Phase I, the DeKalb
County School System representative ensures that each participant’s school record is submitted
to the team for review. A team member calls to monitor whether the participants are maintaining
court ordered curfews and reports are also given by the parents. The youth are required to
participate in community service and pro-social activities as a way to give back to the community.
Pro-social activities include physical activity, organized sports and non-sport activities,
volunteering and religious affiliation activities. These events are held on Saturdays. The judge
and team emphasize the need to keep the youth in school, and to have activities and/or sanctions
on the weekend or when school is out. If participants are in night school they receive excused
absences from these programs and sessions.
TREATMENT INITIATION
AND IMPLEMENTATION.
As part of the treatment criteria, the participants are
required to maintain a journal and obtain a psychological evaluation. An individual treatment plan
is developed for each participant by their treatment provider which includes drug testing and
screening. The participant is expected to work the treatment plan as designed. Drug tests in
Phase I start with three or more tests per week and can increase or decrease based on test
results. When the youth seems ready to move to the next phase, they will submit a letter
-13-
requesting to advance to the next phase. The drug court team deliberates and assesses the
participant’s case and progression and decides on whether he should be promoted to the next
phase.
GENERAL CONCEPT
OF
PHASES. The first and subsequent phases are all similar in that they
require common general and treatment criteria that are monitored. These criteria include
maintaining a “B” grade point average, attending an educational program or school and/or work
everyday with constant review of school credits, maintaining satisfactory conduct in home, school
and the community, maintaining court ordered curfew, attending and participating in pro-social
activities, maintaining a journal, cooperating with drug testing and screenings, and submitting a
request to advance to next phase. Throughout the program, the team tries to hold a caucus with
each participant and their family for a more individualized approach at reaching resolutions and
mediating issues in the home life that may contribute to some of the youth’s actions.
UNDERSTANDING DISTINCT REQUIREMENTS
TO
PHASE UP. The main difference in the phases, as
the participant continues to transition from phase to phase, is that required reporting lessens. So
in Phase II, instead of attending court hearings and meetings with the Drug Court Officer every
week, they will report every two weeks. Phase II also requires participants to submit a paper on
their “Personal History and Pattern of Drug Use” and to undergo a Psychological Evaluation by
treatment provider. Phase III differs from Phase II in that it requires that participants have no
positive drug screening for 30 consecutive days and report to court hearings and meetings with
the Drug Court Officer once a month. The difference in Phase IV in comparison to the preceding
phase is that participants are only required to report to court hearings and meet with Drug Court
Officer as directed. A relapse prevention plan must be developed during treatment, participants
are to have no positive drug screenings for 60 consecutive days, and they present their “Life
Story” and an oral presentation to the court to advance to graduation. Phase V is the continuing
care plan which builds on Phase IV to require participants to have no positive screens for 75
consecutive days and a graduation presentation. Upon successful completion of the Rebound
Program and satisfaction of all other court requirements, participants will participate in the
graduation exercise and will be eligible to have their charges dismissed. The graduation is a
momentous occasion where community partners assist in preparing the young men for
graduation by providing haircuts and suits from D & K for the ceremony, if needed. Family
-14-
members are invited to the ceremony to recognize the participant’s personal achievements and
successful completion of the Rebound Program. The Rebound Team may terminate participants
from the program if their continued participation is deemed detrimental to the remaining
participants.
-15-
II. EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
OVERVIEW OF THE EVALUATION DESIGN
The DeKalb County Juvenile Drug Court commissioned Messages of Empowerment Productions,
LLC (TEAM-MOE) to conduct a secondary analysis of program data and documentation in an
effort to glean program effectiveness and lessons learned using summative evaluation model.
TEAM-MOE utilizes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s six steps for program
evaluation. These steps were applied to the Rebound Program’s evaluation approach as follows:
STEP 1: ENGAGE
THE
STAKEHOLDER:
 TEAM-MOE met with key stakeholders from the Juvenile Drug Court to learn more about the Rebound
Program and to determine a strategy for evaluation. Throughout the evaluation, the lead evaluator
attended team meetings, court sessions, a graduation ceremony, and a team retreat to observe the
program practices and to become a fully integrated member of the program team.
STEP 2: DESCRIBE THE PROGRAM
 The lead evaluator developed and modified comprehensive logic models based on program documents.
Additionally, a program service flow visual was adapted to better describe how the program’s
implementation evolved over time. The lead evaluator also constructed a program narrative to be sure
TEAM-MOE understood the core program for evaluation purposes.
STEP 3: FOCUS THE EVALUATION DESIGN
 The comprehensive logic models provided a framework for determining whether measurement of key
activities was feasible to track and define as program indicators. The outcome indicators for the
Rebound Program include: (1) retention, (2) recidivism, (3) drug use, (4) education/employment, (5)
phase promotion, and (6) family engagement. Once the indicators were identified, TEAM-MOE
developed a customized Microsoft ACCESS database to include process and outcome data, as well as a
corresponding data dictionary to define indicators and data sources.
STEP 4: GATHER CREDIBLE EVIDENCE
 Secondary data were retrieved from key Rebound Program partners. Data were sorted and entered into
the database to determine the extent to which each client's baseline, process, and outcome data were
complete enough for the evaluation process.
STEP 5: JUSTIFY EVALUATION FINDINGS
 The lead evaluator conducted process and outcome analyses, as well as a case study analysis for each
cohort and for each youth within a cohort. After completing the data analysis, TEAM-MOE identified
program successes, challenges, unintended outcomes, and ineffective program components.
STEP 6: ENSURE DATA UTILITY
 The final step in the evaluation process was to produce a summative evaluation report that includes
programmatic successes and lessons learned.
-17-
THE LOGIC MODEL AS AN EVALUATION TOOL
THE LOGIC MODEL FRAMEWORK. A logic model is a tool that describes and illustrates the logical
or causal relationships among program elements and the problem to be solved, thus defining
measurements of success. The logic model is utilized as a guide to help focus the evaluation
design, to determine the extent to which desired changes occur or do not occur and for whom, to
determine what is working and what is not working, and to determine whether or not the program
is making a difference. It also shows contributions from each partner and how the impact
depends on all contributors. A logic model is also utilized as a guide to help staff and the
funder(s) visualize the program’s purpose, resources, processes, and ultimate goals.
As the Rebound Program is a 9-12 month intensive behavior modification intervention program
divided into five phases, the logic model has been divided into the phases. The evaluation team
felt that the logic models would best be understood through the activities in each phase. This
methodology reflects the evaluator’s understanding of the phased process and assisted the team
in determining what documents would be needed to measure success. To be clear, the resources
and outcomes remain the same across phased activities; however, the activities are matched to
specific outputs for the participants. So, in essence, the logic models that are found on pages 19 25 of this report all have the same resources and outcomes, but different activities and outputs
that are catered to the specific phase of the program.
-18-
LOGIC MODEL A: PLANNING AND RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES
TABLE NO. 3
THE REBOUND PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL A: PLANNING AND RECRUITING ACTIVITIES
ISSUE:
The Juvenile Probation Department suspects that at least 70% of the juvenile offenders in DeKalb County have been involved with illegal alcohol and other drug use, and
that alcohol and other drug use is a key contributing factor to other criminal offenses (i.e., theft and burglary).
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
To utilize judicial and community based interventions to provide an effective response to youthful offenders and their families and to create
safer communities by strengthening families, reducing crime, and developing productive citizens.
RESOURCES
TRAINING AND PLANNING
 Bureau of Justice Assistance
 Georgia Office of Courts Administration
THE REBOUND DRUG COURT
TEAM
 Presiding Judge
 Drug Court Coordinator
 Assistant District Attorney of DeKalb
Co.
 Assistant Public Defender of DeKalb
Co.
 Chief Probation Officer of DeKalb
County Juvenile Court
 Director of Student Relations, DeKalb
Co. School System Representative
 Director of Court Services, DeKalb
Juvenile Court
 Parent Coordinator
 Community Representative/Coordinator
REBOUND TREATMENT TEAM
AGENCIES
Community Service Board
Peachford Hospital
Attachment & Bonding Center of
Atlanta
 ProActive Management Counseling
 Potter’s House




STAFF





Licenses Professional Counselor
Master Addiction Counselor
Group Leader
Program Director
Treatment Case Manager
PROGRAM RESOURCES
 CSAT GPRA Data Collection Tool
 Client identification system
 DeKalb County Juvenile Drug
Court
 Rebound Program Handbook
 Federal Drug Court Eligibility
Criteria
 Single Test Strip-Alcohol & Other
Drug Tests
 Orders/Forms
 Incentives/Sanctions
ANCILLARY/SUPPORT
SERVICES
 Young Achievement Program
 Georgia Community Support &
Solution
 Georgia Counseling Network
 Community Service Program
 GPS Monitoring Program
 Family Values
 Gender Specific Anger
Management Program
 Georgia Parent Support Network
 Capes
 SUPER (Substance Use
Prevention & Education Resource
ASSESSMENT
ACTIVITIES
PLANNING
ACTIVITIES
 Drug Court Planning
Initiative of the Bureau
of Justice Planning
 Drug Court Evaluation
Training
 Meetings (Round Table
Forum) for case
processing /progress
report
 Develop client
identification system
 Drug Court Advisory
Board meets on a
quarterly basis to review
policies and make
recommendations about
the Drug Court Program.
RECRUITMENT
ACTIVITIES
 Referrals
 Initial eligibility screening
 Review each
prospective case
assessment and make
final admission decision
as a group
OUTPUTS
PLANNING
OUTPUTS
 12 month Drug Court
Planning Initiative
 3 day Drug Court
Evaluation Training
 Weekly staff
meetings
RECRUITMENT
OUTPUTS
 All candidates
complete referral
forms
 All candidates
undergo a legal
screening
 All candidates receive
an alcohol & drug
needs assessment
 Intake appointments
for all candidates
 All candidates receive
a home visit
 Weekly case
processing
 All candidates attend
court as an observer.
OUTCOMES
REBOUND
PROGRAM
PARTICIPANT
OUTCOMES
1) Reduce recidivism
2) Improve performance in
school
3) Increase promotion to
the next phase
4) Increase retention in the
program
5) Reduced substance
abuse
6) Increase family
involvement
 The National Registry of Effective
Programs and Practices(NREPP)
created by SAMHSA
 GAIN-I version 5.3.6
 GAIN M version 5.3.5
 CYT Series
 DeKalb Community Service Board
DRUG COURT ADVISORY
BOARD
 Volunteer Representative
 Community Stakeholders
IMPACT: To reduce or eliminate substance abuse and its associated problems primarily in African American males, age 14 to 16, from lower to
middle economic backgrounds in DeKalb County
-19-
LOGIC MODEL B: REBOUND PROGRAM PHASE ONE (1) ACTIVITIES
TABLE NO. 4
THE REBOUND PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL B: PHASE I ACTIVITIES
ISSUE:
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
RESOURCES
PROGRAM RESOURCES
 Georgia Office of Courts
Administration
CSAT GPRA Data Collection Tool
Client identification system
DeKalb County Juvenile Drug Court
Rebound Program Handbook
Federal Drug Court Eligibility Criteria
Single Test Strip-Alcohol & Other Drug
Test
 Orders/Forms






TEAM
 Presiding Judge
Co.
Co.
Juvenile Court
 Community
Representative/Coordinator
AGENCIES
Peachford Hospital
Atlanta




Young Achievement Program
Georgia Community Support & Solution
Community Service Program
Family Values
Gender Specific Anger Management
Program
 Capes
 SUPER (Substance Use Prevention &
Education Resource







ASSESSMENT
 The National Registry of Effective
Programs and Practices(NREPP) created
by SAMHSA
 GAIN-I version 5.3.6
 GAIN M version 5.3.5
 CYT Series
 DeKalb Community Service Board
ACTIVITIES
PHASE I ACTIVITIES
 Orientation (youth &
family)
 Attend court hearings
 Attend meeting with
Drug Court Officer
 Attend an educational
program or school
 Review high school
credits
 Maintain court ordered
curfew
 Attend and/or participate
in pro-social activity
 Complete biopsychosocial
assessment
 Obtain Psychological
Evaluation
 Work the Individual
Treatment Plan
 Cooperate with random
drug testing and
screening
 Maintain a Journal
 Give back to the
community
 Request advance to
Phase II
 Submit weekly
Treatment Reports
 Submit weekly
Evaluation Report
OUTPUTS
PHASE I
OUTPUTS
 Signed Program
Agreement
 Weekly Treatment
Reports
 Weekly Evaluation
Report
 Weekly court
hearings
 Psychological
Evaluation Report
 Random Drug
Screenings Results
 Journal Entries
 Completed biopsychological
assessment
 Individual Treatment
Plan
 Weekly meetings
with Drug Court
Officer
 “B” average in
school
 Satisfactory conduct
in the home, school,
and community
 Letter Requesting to
be phased up
OUTCOMES
REBOUND
PROGRAM
PARTICIPANT
OUTCOMES
2) Improve
performance in
school
3) Increase promotion
to the next phase
4) Increase retention
in the program
abuse
6) Increase family
involvement
STAFF





Group Leader
Program Director
DRUG COURT ADVISORY
BOARD
IMPACT: To reduce or eliminate substance abuse and its associated problems primarily in African American males, age 14 to 16, from lower to middle
economic backgrounds in DeKalb County
-20-
LOGIC MODEL C: REBOUND PROGRAM PHASE TWO (2) ACTIVITIES
TABLE NO. 5
THE REBOUND PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL C: PHASE II ACTIVITIES
ISSUE:
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
RESOURCES
PROGRAM RESOURCES
 Georgia Office of Courts
Administration
Test
 Orders/Forms






TEAM
 Presiding Judge
Co.
Co.
Juvenile Court
 Community
Representative/Coordinator
Family Values
Program
 Capes
Education Resource







AGENCIES
Peachford Hospital
Atlanta




ASSESSMENT
STAFF





Group Leader
Program Director
Programs and Practices(NREPP) created
by SAMHSA
 CYT Series
ACTIVITIES
OUTPUTS
PHASE II
ACTIVITIES
PHASE II
OUTPUTS
 Attend court hearings
Drug Court Officer
 Attend an educational
program or school
credits
 Maintain court
ordered curfew
 Attend and/or
participate in prosocial activity
 Review Psychological
Evaluation
 Submit paper on
“Personal History and
Pattern of Drug Use”
 Random drug testing
and screening
 Maintain a Journal
community
Phase III
 Submit weekly
treatment &
evaluation report
 Weekly Treatment &
Evaluation Reports
 Biweekly court
hearings & meetings
with drug court officer
 “B” average in school
or educational program
with daily attendance
 Satisfactory conduct in
the home, school, and
community
 Journal Entries
 Papers
 Random Drug
Screenings Results
 Letter Requesting to be
phased up
OUTCOMES
REBOUND
PROGRAM
PARTICIPANT
OUTCOMES
school
the next phase
program
abuse
6) Increase family
involvement
DRUG COURT ADVISORY
BOARD
-21-
LOGIC MODEL D: REBOUND PROGRAM PHASE THREE (3) ACTIVITIES
TABLE NO. 6
THE REBOUND PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL D: PHASE III ACTIVITIES
ISSUE:
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
RESOURCES
TEAM









Presiding Judge
Assistant District Attorney of DeKalb Co.
Assistant Public Defender of DeKalb Co.
Juvenile Court
Director of Student Relations, DeKalb Co.
School System Representative
Juvenile Court
Parent Coordinator
Community Representative/Coordinator
AGENCIES






Peachford Hospital
Potter’s House
STAFF





Group Leader
Program Director
PROGRAM RESOURCES
Test
 Orders/Forms






ANCILLARY/SUPPORT
SERVICES
Solution
 Family Values
 Gender Specific Anger Management
Program
 Capes
Education Resource
ASSESSMENT
created by SAMHSA
 CYT Series
ACTIVITIES
PHASE III
ACTIVITIES
 Attend court
hearings
Drug Court Officer
 Attend an
educational
program or school
credits
 Maintain court
ordered curfew
 Attend pro-social
activity
 Review
Psychological
Evaluation
 Random drug
testing and
screening
community
Phase IV
 Submit weekly
Treatment Reports
 Submit weekly
Evaluation Report
OUTPUTS
PHASE III
OUTPUTS
 Weekly treatment
reports
 Weekly evaluation
reports
 Once a month court
hearings
 Meetings with drug
court officer as
directed
 “B” average in
school
 Daily educational
program or school
 Satisfactory conduct
and community
 Zero positive screens
for 30 consecutive
days
 Letter Requesting to
be phased up
OUTCOMES
REBOUND
PROGRAM
PARTICIPANT
OUTCOMES
school
the next phase
program
abuse
6) Increase family
involvement
DRUG COURT ADVISORY
BOARD
-22-
LOGIC MODEL E: REBOUND PROGRAM PHASE FOUR (4) ACTIVITIES
TABLE NO. 7
THE REBOUND PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL E: PHASE IV ACTIVITIES
ISSUE:
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
RESOURCES
TEAM









Presiding Judge
Juvenile Court
Director of Student Relations, DeKalb
Juvenile Court
Parent Coordinator
AGENCIES






Peachford Hospital
Potter’s House
STAFF





Group Leader
Program Director
PROGRAM RESOURCES
Test
 Orders/Forms






ANCILLARY/SUPPORT
SERVICES
Family Values
Program
 Capes
Education Resource







ASSESSMENT
created by SAMHSA
 CYT Series
ACTIVITIES
PHASE IV
ACTIVITIES
 Attend court
hearings
Drug Court Officer
 Attend an
educational
program or school
credits
 Maintain court
ordered curfew
 Attend in pro-social
activity
 Review
Psychological
Evaluation
 Develop Relapse
Prevention Plan
 Random drug test &
screening
 Present “Life Story”
 Give oral
presentation to the
court to advance to
graduation
 Submit weekly
Treatment Reports
 Submit weekly
Evaluation Report
OUTPUTS
PHASE IV
OUTPUTS
 Weekly treatment
reports
 Weekly evaluation
reports
 Court hearings as
directed
 Meetings with Drug
Court Officer as
directed
 “B” average in school
program or school
satisfactory conduct
and community
 Zero screens for 60
consecutive days
OUTCOMES
REBOUND
PROGRAM
PARTICIPANT
OUTCOMES
school
the next phase
program
abuse
6) Increase family
involvement
DRUG COURT ADVISORY
BOARD
-23-
LOGIC MODEL F: REBOUND PROGRAM PHASE FIVE (5) ACTIVITIES
TABLE NO. 8
THE REBOUND PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL F: PHASE V ACTIVITIES
ISSUE:
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
RESOURCES
TEAM









Presiding Judge
Juvenile Court
Director of Student Relations, DeKalb Co.
School System Representative
Juvenile Court
Parent Coordinator
AGENCIES






Peachford Hospital
Potter’s House
PROGRAM RESOURCES
Test
 Orders/Forms






ANCILLARY/SUPPORT
SERVICES
Solution
 Family Values
 Gender Specific Anger Management
Program
 Capes
Education Resource
ASSESSMENT
STAFF





Group Leader
Program Director
created by SAMHSA
 CYT Series
ACTIVITIES
PHASE V
ACTIVITIES CONTINUING
CARE PLAN
 Attend court
hearings
Drug Court Officer
 Attend an
educational
program or school
credits
 Maintain court
ordered curfew
 Attend pro-social
activity
 Review
Psychological
Evaluation
 Develop Relapse
Prevention Plan
 Cooperate with
random drug testing
and screening
 Give graduation
presentation
 Attend Graduation
event
 Submit weekly
treatment report
 Submit weekly
evaluation report
OUTPUTS
PHASE V
OUTPUTS
 Weekly Treatment
Report
 Weekly Evaluation
Report
 Court hearings as
directed
 Meetings with Drug
Court Officer as
directed
 “B ”average in school
program or school
Satisfactory conduct
and community
 Zero screens for 75
consecutive days
 Graduation
Ceremony
OUTCOMES
REBOUND
PROGRAM
PARTICIPANT
OUTCOMES
school
the next phase
program
abuse
6) Increase family
involvement
DRUG COURT ADVISORY
BOARD
-24-
LOGIC MODEL G: REBOUND PROGRAM SERVICE CAPACITY
TABLE NO. 9
THE REBOUND PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL G: SERVICE CAPACITY BUILDING
ISSUE:
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
RESOURCES
TEAM
 Presiding Judge
Co.
Co.
Juvenile Court
 Community Representative/Coordinator
AGENCIES
Peachford Hospital
Atlanta




STAFF





Group Leader
Program Director
DRUG COURT ADVISORY
BOARD
ACTIVITIES
PROGRAM RESOURCES SERVICE CAPACITY
 CSAT GPRA Data Collection ACTIVITIES
Tool
 Client identification system
 DeKalb County Juvenile
Drug Court
 Rebound Program Handbook
 Federal Drug Court Eligibility
Criteria
 Single Test Strip-Alcohol &
Other Drug Test
 Orders/Forms
ANCILLARY/SUPPORT
SERVICES
 Young Achievement
Program
 Georgia Community Support
& Solution
 Family Values
 Gender Specific Anger
Management Program
 Georgia Parent Support
Network
 Capes
 SUPER (Substance Use
Prevention & Education
Resource
ASSESSMENT
 The National Registry of
Effective Programs and
Practices(NREPP) created
by SAMHSA
 CYT Series
 DeKalb Community Service
Board
 Provide a continuum of
care
 Provide continuous
assessment, development,
refinement/improvement of
policies, protocols &
practices.
 Heighten responsiveness &
accountability among
partner agencies in regard
to substance abuse
treatment for youth
PARTICIPANTS'
PARENTS/GUARDIAN
PROGRAM
ACTIVITIES
 Attend Parent and Teacher
Conferences
PARTICIPANTS '
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
 Administer a
comprehensive bio-psychosocial assessment before
treatment, during
treatment, and at follow-up
 Administer systematic
random drug screenings
 Provide AOD intervention
services to participants
 Provide Cannabis Youth
Treatment including
Motivational Enhancement
to participants
 Commencement
 Review of criminal records
for new charges/reoffenses
OUTPUTS
SERVICE CAPACITY
OUTPUT
 100% of participants will have
access to proposed services in
an effective & efficient manner.
 At least quarterly Regular
Executive Committee
/interagency reviews
 Successful involvement of all
partner agencies & key leaders
PARTICIPANTS'
PARENTS/GUARDIAN
PROGRAM OUTPUTS
 All (100%) Parent & Teacher
Conferences attended
PARTICIPANTS
PROGRAM OUTPUTS
 100% of participants will
complete GAIN-I prior to &
during treatment; GAIN M for
follow-up.
receive systematic random
drug screens.
receive appropriate AOD
intervention services
 At a minimum, 60% of
participants will successfully
complete and graduate from
the Program.
 At least 60% of participants will
not reoffend while participating
in the Program.
 At least 60% of participants will
not reoffend within one year of
completing the Program.
 100% of the graduates will
have enhanced
communication, conflict
management & anger
OUTCOMES
REBOUND
PROGRAM
PARTICIPANT
OUTCOMES
1) Reduce
recidivism
2) Improve
performance in
school
3) Increase
promotion to the
next phase
4) Increase
retention in the
program
5) Reduced
substance
abuse
6) Increase family
involvement
IMPACT: To reduce or eliminate substance abuse and its associated problems primarily in African American males, age 14 to 16, from lower to middle economic backgrounds in
DeKalb County
-25-
THE EVALUATION INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS METHODS
EVALUATION QUESTIONS. The evaluation questions are used as a guide in the evaluation design.
The evaluation questions that shaped this summative evaluation are listed below.

To what extent is there evidence that the Rebound Program: (a) reduce recidivism (b)
improved performance in school, (c) increased promotion to the next phase, (d)
increased retention in the program, (e) reduced substance abuse, and (f) increased
family engagement and involvement?

To what extent were planned programmatic activities actually implemented?
(Resource accountability and partner performance)

What activities were not implemented as planned and why?
(Lessons learned and project challenges)

What aspects of the Rebound Program were implemented exceptionally well, and what
factors led to such excellence in execution?
(Best practices and program achievements)

What was the overall impact of the various strategies aimed at reducing substance
abuse and its associated primary problems?
(Degree of program effect size)
Once the program’s logic models were finalized, an evaluability assessment was conducted, and
indicators selected, secondary data sources were identified based on the program’s resources,
activities, and outputs from the logic models. A data collection checklist was created listing all
types of secondary data sources and distributed to the Rebound Team to review and gain a sense
of the data needed to conduct this summative evaluation. Upon retrieval of the data, a new list
was composed outlining all data retrieved. The data were then assessed for relevancy to the
indicators selected. The secondary data retrieved were program management data produced by
the program team members for accountability purposes. Table number 10 lists some examples of
the data sources.
A mixed methods approach was taken since data retrieved were both
quantitative and qualitative. Of the secondary data collected, there was a total of 76 participants
who had evidential data to measure both the baseline assessment and outcome indicators. In
using baseline data we are able to track the change over the entire program’s timeframe and,
using outcome indicators, we are able to measure the program’s effectiveness in reaching it’s
target outcomes.
-26-
EVALUATION DATA SOURCES
A list of the Rebound Program documents utilized in this summative evaluation are presented in
Table 10.
TABLE NO. 10
REBOUND PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION
AND
DOCUMENTS/DATA SOURCES
DATA SOURCES
EVALUATION PURPOSE

Rebound Policies and Procedures Manual

Program management and implementation

Rebound Program Brochure/Pamphlet

Program implementation

Rebound Drug Court Treatment Program Weekly Reports

Client level data

Programs’ Referral Forms

Client level data

Juvenile History Print Outs

Client level data

School Transcripts

Client level data

Graduation Ceremony Program

Client level data

Individual Client Summary/Report

Client level data

Rebound Team Roster

Program management

Drug Court Program Recommendation

Client level data

Certificate of Phase Completion

Client level data

Treatment Providers’ End of Year Report

Client level data

Psychological Evaluation Report

Client level data

Year summary


School Attendance Inquiry Report

Client level data

Parental Rebound Feedback Form


Rebound Participant Handbook

Program

Progress Evaluation Reports/Notes

Client level data

Referral Forms

Client level data

Rebound Yearly Outline

Program management and implementation

Individual Client School Summary Update

Client level data

Drug Screening Results

Client level data

Juvenile Drug Court Agreement

Program implementation and client level data

OJS Criminal Case Detail Log/Report

Client level data

Rebound Client Summary

Client level data

JASAE Assessment

Client level data

Program Progression Report

Client level data

Written letters/papers

Client level data

Treatment Meeting Notes

Program implementation and client level data
-27-
EVALUATION DATA SOURCES
The sole source of data for this evaluation is secondary data which was retrieved from the
Probation Supervisor. The Probation Supervisor collects and composes all data that is used
throughout the program. Data collection sources are the school system, probation officer, court
sessions and hearings, treatment sessions and groups, events and activities, and counselors.
•
Over the years of the Rebound Program, forms and methods changed; however the weekly
treatment report has stayed consistent. A list of the report contents is found in Table 11.
TABLE NO. 11
REBOUND PROGRAM: JUVENILE DRUG COURT WEEKLY TREATMENT REPORT CONTENT
 Age
 Charges and Probation Updates
 Date of Birth
 Drug Test Results
 Date of referral/Start Date
 Grade Point Average
 Guardian
 Lock Up Dates
 Current Phase
 Comment Section
 School
 Graduation status (at the end of the program)
 Grade Level
 Make up days
 Number of High School Credits
 Report from treatment providers on youth from weekly
session
 Treatment Report and Wraparound (Provider &
Insurance Info, Residential Placement)
 Log of attendance for court, Saturday event, and
tutoring
 Curfew Violations
Each team member submits information based on their past week of contact with the youth and
the updates are collectively assembled on this one report which is sent out to all team members in
preparation for the upcoming weekly team meeting. So, essentially, during the meetings, they go
through the report and discuss the status of each youth and give recommendations. The probation
unit of the team is responsible for distributing the report on a weekly basis.
-28-
DATA MANAGEMENT AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
The secondary data was stored in a locked file cabinet at Messages of Empowerment
Productions, LLC headquarters office in Atlanta, GA. The first few years of program
implementation included a lot of paperwork and, as years passed, the program moved to a more
electronic documentation framework. Witnessing the transition from paper to electronic data
documentation records, the evaluator developed different databases and electronic client files in
Microsoft Excel for data storage to be consistent with the progression of the program. Microsoft
Excel was utilized because of its accessibility and user friendliness for all team members. Both
client files and databases were developed to easily assess the issue being addressed, the target
audience, and the effectiveness of the program. It was decided that a baseline and outcome
indicator, as well as, a phase database was needed for the Rebound Program to capture the
youth process from beginning to end and to paint a vivid picture of the transition or complacency
of the youth throughout the program’s journey.
Each document collected was logged and relevant information was extracted and entered into
each of the databases and client files. Data extraction and entry took place on an ongoing basis.
All electronic data that was received after the initial retrieval of documents was downloaded to the
flash drive provided by the Probation Supervisor on a weekly basis to ensure current and accurate
information on each youth. As a supplement to the databases, an indicator tool was developed
detailing how the indicators are defined, measured, and the data source. Paper documents were
scanned and stored on a password protected server at Messages of Empowerment and later
saved on the Rebound Program’s flash drive.
Analysis was conducted for the overall program as well as for each year of implementation. Using
the databases developed, data was analyzed on each of the baseline assessment indicators and
outcome indicators to assess the programs overall effectiveness. The phase database was not
analyzed but was used as a supplemental reference. As such, the analysis and results are
divided by the pragmatic year only and not by phases. Microsoft Excel functions were utilized to
obtain the mean, count, and sum of the indicators.
-29-
PROGRAM INDICATORS: BASELINE ASSESSMENT INDICATORS
Baseline indicators are utilized to assess individuals upon entry into the program to essentially
determine the success of a program. The collection of baseline date is the starting point of the
program. The following baseline assessment indicators were utilized for this summative
evaluation.
TABLE NO. 12
REBOUND PROGRAM: BASELINE ASSESSMENT INDICATORS
BASELINE
ASSESSMENT
INDICATORS
Age
DEFINITIONS
Age of youth at entry of the program
MEASUREMENT
Numerical
DATA SOURCES
Weekly Treatment report,
Referral form
1=Mother
2=Father
Parental Status
Who does the youth reside with at entry of program
3= Both,
4=Grandparent(s)
Juvenile History, Weekly
treatment report, BioPsychological Evaluation
5=Other
School Status
Is the youth in school at entry of program- this
includes GED and vocational programs
0=Not in school
Drug Screening
Did the youth test positive for drugs at entry of
program
C= Negative
What crime led to youth in court
Categorical
Offense
Mental State
State of mind at entry
1= In school
1=Positive
0=mentally stable
1= mental instability
School Transcript
Drug Screening Report
Juvenile History
JASAE assessment
-30-
PROGRAM INDICATORS: PROGRAM ACTIVITY INDICATORS
Program activities represent efforts conducted to achieve the program objectives; therefore the
program activity indicators were chosen to measure the process of the Rebound Program. The
indicators demonstrate whether the program was being implemented as it was intended. The
indicators listed in Table No. 13 represent all the activities that take place in each phase of the
program.
TABLE NO. 13
REBOUND PROGRAM: PROGRAM ACTIVITY INDICATORS
PROGRAM ACTIVITY
INDICATORS
DEFINITIONS
MEASUREMENT
DATA SOURCES
Orientation
Did the youth and family attend orientation
0=No; 1=Yes
Juvenile Drug Court Agreement and
other documents
Court Hearing
Did the youth attend court hearings held on Wednesday
0=No; 1=Yes
Weekly treatment report
Maintained Court Ordered Curfew
Did the youth abide by the court ordered curfew
Did the youth have at least a "B" average in school
coursework
0=No; 1=Yes
Weekly treatment report and/or
school transcript
Did the youth attend school on a daily basis
0=No; 1=Yes
school attendance inquiry report
Did the youth come and/or participate in Pro-Social
Activity
Did the youth get assessed for Bio-Psychological
Evaluation
0=No; 1=Yes and numeric
average/GPA
products from activity
0=No; 1=Yes
Bio-Psychological Assessment
Maintain journal
Did the youth maintain a journal
0=No; 1=Yes
Journal entries
Work Individual Plan
Did the youth work with individual plan developed for
him
0=No; 1=Yes
Weekly treatment and/or evaluation
report
Obtain Psychological Evaluation
Did the youth receive a psychological evaluation
0=No; 1=Yes
Psychological evaluation report
Drug Screening
Was the youth screened for drugs
0=No; 1+= yes positive screening;
1- negative screening
Weekly Meetings with Drug Court
Officer
Did the youth attend meetings with Drug Court Officer
0=No; 1=Yes
Community
Did the youth get involve in the community
0=No; 1=Yes; numerical number
attended
Paper (Personal Tx & Pattern of
Drug Use)
Did the youth write paper on personal history and
pattern of drug use
0=No; 1=Yes
Weekly treatment report via Pro
Social Activity
Weekly treatment report, actual
paper
Review Psychological Evaluation
Was Psychological Evaluation reviewed
0=No; 1=Yes
Maintained "B" average
Attended school daily/regularly
Pro-Social Activity
Bio-Psychological Assessment
0=No; 1=Yes
Develop Relapse Prevention Plan
Was a relapse prevention plan developed
0=No; 1=Yes
Evaluation Report, Relapse
Prevention Plan
Oral Presentation to Court
Did the youth present an oral presentation to the court
0=No; 1=Yes
Weekly Treatment Plan
Present Life Story
Did the youth present life story
0=No; 1=Yes
Weekly Treatment Plan
0=No; 1=Yes
Graduation Program, Weekly
Treatment Plan
Graduation Presentation
Did the you youth graduate from the program
-31-
PROGRAM INDICATORS: OUTCOME INDICATORS
The following outcome indicators were measured in an effort to monitor the effectiveness of the
Rebound Program, as well as, attest to the impact the program is having on the participants: (1)
Phase V Promotion - exhibits who is and is not successfully performing in the program. (2)
Retention - exhibits commitment and determination to rehabilitation. Even though promotion and
retention may seem paradoxical, this difference helps analyze dosages of treatment and can also
reveal whether trusting relationships are built. The Rebound Program is a 9-12 month intensive
behavior modification intervention program and therefore retention was adequate if the youth
participated for at least 8 months. (3) Drug Use - reduction/elimination is essentially a direct
result of the program and one of it‘s main outcome for participants. (4) Recidivism - is also a
direct result of the program and main participant outcome, in that it reveals the program
effectiveness and it’s impact on whether the participant re-offends. (5) Education/Employment is deemed as an essential and therefore required component of the program. Reducing dropout
rates and increasing productive citizens in the community reduces the chances of partaking in
criminal activities. (6) Family Engagement - which is also family involvement, exhibits the effect
of having or lacking family member(s) that advocate, support, and participate in the recovery of the
youth. Family engagement was considered adequate, if the guardian scored 80% or higher.
TABLE NO. 14
REBOUND PROGRAM: OUTCOME INDICATORS
OUTCOME
INDICATORS
Phase V
Promotion
Retention
DEFINITIONS
Did the youth graduate from the program
MEASUREMENT
DATA SOURCES
0=No, 1=Yes, 2=Certificate of
Participation. 3= Removed from
Graduation Program, Weekly Treatment
program, relocated, or referred back Report, Yearly Summary Data Report
to Juvenile Court
Did the youth remain in the program for at least 8 out of the 9-12
0=No; 1=Yes
Weekly Treatment Report
0=No, 1=Yes, numerical ratio of
positive screenings
Weekly Treatment Report, Drug Screen
Reports, EOY Report
months of the program
Drug Use
Does the youth continue to use drugs
Recidivism
Has the youth reoffended since enrollment or completion of the
program
0=No, 1=Yes
Weekly treatment report, Juvenile
History, DeKalb County Online Judicial
System (OJS) , Previous Years Drug
Court Youth Report
Education/Employment
Does the youth attend school or works
0=No, 1=Yes
School Attendance Inquiry, Weekly
Treatment Report, Yearly Summary
Data Report
Family Engagement
Does a family member attend required session and actively
participate and produce when necessary
Percentage of attendance
Parental involvement Reports, Parental
Feedback Form
-32-
III. REBOUND PROGRAM
FINDINGS
INDICATORS
OF
PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS AT A GLANCE
The following indicators highlight results achieved during the seven (7) years of the Rebound
Program. The details of these results are presented throughout this report.
TABLE NO. 15
INDICATORS OF REBOUND PROGRAM’S EFFECTIVENESS AT A GLANCE
QUANTITY
PERCENTAGE
1
NA
Number or Judges Since Program Inception
153
NA
Number of Youth Enrolled based on Eligibility Criteria
57
38%
Number of Youth who Graduated from the Program
29%
Number of Youth who Received a Certificate of Participation
146
95%
Number of African American Youth Enrolled
97
88%
Number of Youth Enrolled in school at the Conclusion of the
Program
53%
Number of Youth who did not Re-offend
62%
Number of Youth who Tested Positive for Substance Use at
the Conclusion of the Program
(1 not documented)
44
(1 not documented)
(15 not documented)
72
(11 not documented & 6
NA )
73
(24 not documented &
12 NA)
INDICATOR
-34-
REBOUND PROGRAM FINDINGS OVERVIEW
The results section will include a description of findings from data analyzed from the inception of
the Rebound Program until year seven (7) 2010-2011. The results, track program participants
from entry to completion of the Rebound Program and therefore is divided based on each
programmatic year. Data was analyzed using Microsoft Excel where averages, counts, and
percentages were determine for each indicator on an aggregate level, by each programmatic
year. Table no. 10 displays the results for the baseline assessment indicators and table no. 11
displays results from the outcome indicators. Following the tables, are yearly program
participants’ results which includes an analysis of the corresponding year’s baseline demographic
to gauge who the participants are upon entry. Details of the Rebound Program’s processes and
approaches are highlighted for the corresponding year. If a process and/or approach remains
consistent throughout subsequent years it will not be mentioned again; however if there were
additional modifications, the modification will be mentioned in the year the change occurred. The
participants key outcomes for each year is discussed as a cohort by year; however, an analysis of
each enrolled participant’s success was analyzed and is displayed to show how successful or
unsuccessful the program was for the youth. Success is measured based on the indicators in
which a point is given for each successful accomplishment or gain towards recovery and
becoming a productive citizen. A half (.50) point is given to those who did not graduate from the
Rebound Program; however, they receive a Certificate of Participation.
Year six (6) had the highest number of enrolled youth than any other year which is more than
year 1 and 2 combined, totaling 30 enrolled youth. Year six (6) matched year one (1) in that both
years had 50% of program participants graduating from the program, which is the most of all
years. These two years also reflect years in which there were the most and the least amount of
participants enrolled in the program.
Overall 62% of the participants continued to test positive for drugs by the end of the program
year, a 5% decrease from the initial drug test results taken at baseline. Rules one and two of the
Rebound Participant Handbook states that the participant will not use or possess alcohol,
tobacco or illegal drugs and that they must remain sobriety and submit to drug testing.
-35-
PARTICIPANT INDICATORS AT TIME OF ENTRY
Key demographics of the Rebound Program participants directly reflect the programs target
population, African American males between the ages of 14 to 16, with 67% of the youth being
reared in a single parent home, which most likely is between a middle to low economic class.
51% of the youth enrolled in the program arresting offense was a Violation of Georgia’s Controlled
Substance Act (VGCSA) or drug charge, which indicates that 49% of youth referred to the
program are substance abuser that partake in criminal activities.
TABLE NO. 16
PARTICIPANT’S KEY DEMOGRAPHICS AT TIME OF PROGRAM ENTRY
RACE &
COHORT
YEARS
Aggregate
2010
2011
2009
2010
2008
2009
2007
2008
2006
2007
2005
2006
2004
2005
TOTAL
NO.
AGE
AT
ENTRY
ETHNICITY
(AFRICAN
AMERICAN)
Both parents 10%
Single parent 67%
Grandparent(s) 12%
Other 2%
Mixture/Alternate 9%
Not documented 23
IS-86%
Not enrolled 14%
Not
documented 7
Both parents 14%
Mother only 57%
Grandparent(s) 19%
Alternate /Mixture 11%
IS-95%
2 Not
documented
Both parents 13%
Single parent 75%
Grandparent(s) 0%
Not documented 14
POSITIVE
“C”
DRUG
AVERAGE
SCREENING
39%
33 Not
documented
25 NA
DRUG
CHARGE
24%
IS-85%
Not Enrolled15%
3 Not
documented
43%
5 Not
documented
2 NA
50%
4 Not
documented
41%
1 Not
documented
100% AA
Both parents 4%
Single parent 78%
Grandparent(s) 9%
Not documented 2
IS-85%
Not Enrolled16%
38%
4 Not
documented
5 NA
70%
2 Not
documented
64%
AA-96%
Bi-Racial 4%
Both parents 6%
Single parent 72%
Grandparent(s) 17%
Alternate 6%
Not documented 6
IS-87%
Not Enrolled13%
1 Not
documented
64%
5 Not
documented
5 NA
81%
2 Not
documented
1 NA
57%
1 Not
documented
Both parents 15%
Mother only 54%
Grandparent(s) 15%
Other 4 %
Not documented 2
IS-89%
Not Enrolled11%
1 Not
documented
42%
5 Not
documented
4 NA
74%
9 Not
documented
AA-90%
Bi-racial -5%
Hispanic -5%
15.2
1 Not
document
ed
AA-90%
Caucasian-7%
Bi-racial -3%
15.5
SCHOOL)
LEAST A
79%
2 Not
documented
21
15.5
4 Not
document
ed
24
(IS=IN
AT
0%
14 Not
documented
1 NA
15.5
15.6
STATUS
49%
3 Not
documented
153
25
GUARDIAN
67%
26 Not
documented
1 NA
AA -95%
Caucasian -2%
Bi-racial-3%
Hispanic – 1%
30
SCHOOL
28
15.6
AA-93%
Caucasian-4%
Bi-racial -4%
15
15.6
100% AA
Both parents 13%
Single parent 73%
Grandparent(s) 7%
Mixture 7%
IS-73%
Not enrolled36%
20%
5 NA
80%
54%
2 Not
documented
10
15.4
100% AA
Mother Only 70%
Grandparent(s) 10%
Other 20%
IS-80%
Not enrolled20%
29%
2 NA
1 not
documented
60%
70%
54%
-36-
PARTICIPANT OUTCOME INDICATORS
Of the 153 participants enrolled in the Rebound Program 38% successfully graduated from the
program with 78% of the participants remaining in the program for at least 8 months. The overall
percentage of participants that were still testing positive at the end of the program is 62%.
TABLE NO. 17
PARTICIPANTS’ KEY OUTCOMES
LEVEL OF
FAMILY
COHORT
YEARS
Aggregate
RECIDIVISM
LAST DRUG
SCREEN
POSITIVE
RETENTION
52 (47%)
38 Not
documented
NA 3
64 (47%)
11 Not
documented
NA 6
73 (62%)
24 Not
documented
12 NA
111 (79%)
1 Not documented
11 NA
9 (82%)
4 Not
documented
6 NA
12 (86%)
7 Not
documented
7 (37%)
2 Not
documented
14 (78%)
3 Not
documented
14 (93%)
6 NA
TOTAL
NO.
GRADUATED
SCHOOL/
WORK
ENGAGEMENT
(COURT,
ACTIVITIES,
HOME, SCHOOL)
153
57 (38%)
1 Not
documented
97 (88%)
15 Not
documented
NA 28
8 (38%)
2010-2011
21
2009-2010
30
15 (50%)
21 (91%)
7 Not
documented
11 (58%)
11 Not
documented
14 (54%)
4 Not
documented
18 (78%)
7 Not
documented
23 (77%)
2008-2009
25
8 (32%)
19 (83%)
1 Not
documented
1 NA
5 (31%)
9 Not
documented
10 (43%)
1 Not
documented
1 NA
12 (52%)
1 Not
documented
1 NA
21 (91%)
2 NA
4 (22%)
3 Not
documented
3 NA
6 (32%)
2 Not
documented
3 NA
13 (62%)
2 Not
documented
1 NA
15 (68%)
2 NA
2007-2008
24
7 (29%)
15 (94%)
8 NA
2006-2007
28
7 (25%)
16 (94%)
3 Not
documented
8 NA
6 (30%)
8 Not
documented
9 (38%)
2 Not
documented
2 NA
12 (75%)
10 Not
documented
2 NA
20 (74%)
1 NA
2005-2006
15
7 (47%)
9 (82%)
NA 4
9 (64%)
NA 1
9 (64 %)
NA 1
0 (0%)
7 NA
8 (57%)
1 Not documented
2004-2005
10
5 (50%)
8 (89%)
1 Not
documented
5 (50%)
9 (90%)
5 (56%)
1 Not
documented
10 (100%)
-37-
YEAR 1 (2004-2005)
PROGRAM RESULTS
YEAR 1 (2004-2005):
PROGRAM PARTICIPANT AT TIME OF ENTRY
As part of the summative evaluation analysis, seven (7) baseline indicators were selected to better
understand the demographics and key characteristics of young people enrolled in the Rebound
Program. The seven (7) indicators selected to measure baseline characteristics include: age,
race, guardianship status, school status, school performance, drug screening, and drug charge
The 2004-05 cohort’s baseline measures are presented in the table below, and is
status.
compared to the aggregate baseline data across all cohorts.
TABLE NO. 18
COHORT ONE(1): KEY DEMOGRAPHICS AT TIME OF PROGRAM ENTRY
COHORT YEAR
TOTAL
NO.
AGE AT
2004 - 2005
10
15.4
ENTRY
RACE & ETHNICITY
(AFRICAN
AMERICAN)
GUARDIAN
SCHOOL STATUS
(IS=IN SCHOOL)
100% AA
Mother Only 70%
Grandparent(s)
10%
Other 20%
IS 80%
Not enrolled 20%
AT LEAST A “C”
POSITIVE DRUG
AVERAGE
SCREENING
29%
2 NA
1 not
documented)
60%
DRUG CHARGE
70%
KEY DEMOGRAPHICS. In the Spring of 2004, under the leadership of Judge Linda Haynes, the first
ten (10) young males were accepted into the Rebound Juvenile Drug Court Program. The entire
cohort was comprised of African American male juvenile offenders from DeKalb County, Georgia
with an average age of 15.4 years of age.
JUVENILE OFFENSES
AND
DRUG
USE.
Seven (7) of the 10 youth enrolled were charged with a
Violation of Georgia Controlled Substance Act (VGCSA), loitering for drugs, or a drug possession
offense. The remaining three (3) enrolled had a prior juvenile history of substance use and were
charged with other offenses such as violation of Probation (VOP), reckless conduct, and/or simple
battery or assault. At the participants’ first drug urine analysis upon enrollment into the program,
60% of them tested positive for drugs.
SCHOOL STATUS. Eight (8) out of the 10 youth were enrolled in school prior to enrollment into the
Rebound Program, with over half of the youth failing in school.
FAMILY
STATUS.
Seven (7) of the 10 participants were being raised by single mothers at time of
entry. One (1) participant lived with his grandparents and two (2) other youth lived with a nonrelative.
-39-
YEAR 1 (2004-2005):
THE
TREATMENT
PROGRAMMATIC ACTIVITIES
ASSESSMENT PROCESS.
In Year one (1) all youth were eligible to receive
Medicaid Health Coverage for treatment from DeKalb Community Service Board (CSB). CSB was
the sole treatment provider. The Georgia Community Support & Solutions and the Young
Achievement Program provided additional supportive services. The court treatment
provider
utilized the Juvenile Automated Substance Abuse Evaluation (JASAE) instrument for assessing
adolescent alcohol and other drug use behavior. The instrument is typically completed within the
participants first 30 days in the program and evaluates the adolescent alcohol and drug use
experiences, as well as attitude and life stressor’s issues to determine if, and to what degree,
problems exist in these areas. Based on the JASAE test results, recommendations for appropriate
interventions are presented. The JASAE report addresses and includes the following assessment
categories: (1) Test Taking Attitude; (2) Life Circumstance Evaluation; (3) Drinking Evaluation
Category; (4) Alcohol Addiction Evaluation; (5) Drug Use Evaluation; (6) Recommended
Interventions; (7) Important Symptoms; (8) Demographics; (9) Summary Score; and (10) BAC
and Driving Record.
THE TREATMENT PROCEDURES. The Rebound Juvenile Drug Court Program’s individual treatment
records for participating youth are maintained by the treatment provider. The treatment
representative must report weekly on each participant’s progress to date. The Drug Court’s
recommendation is completed at the end of the program and details next steps for treatment
which usually involves re-assessment to determine the appropriate level of care, educational
plans, options, and alternatives for upcoming school year or summer term. There also are
recommendations for other auxiliary services, such as individual and/or family counseling or
employment assistance. Also included is a recommendation to the court for a course of action in
terms of the young person being adjudicated, placed on probation, or termination of probation.
This document must be signed by the youth, parent, treatment representative, probation officer,
and judge.
-40-
YEAR 1 (2004-2005):
THE PRO-SOCIAL ACTIVITIES. The youth were engaged in re-enforcing, pro-social lifestyle activities
in Year one (1) which included the following activities:
 Planted a garden at the Tupac Center
 Prepared the pool and grounds at the Bransby Outdoor YMCA
 Assisted with preparation for feeding over 3,000 homeless individuals during Easter
weekend at New Birth Church
 Attended the screening of “Boys of Barack”
THE EVALUATION.
At the conclusion of Year one (1) Susan James-Andrews, MS, of James-
Andrews & Associates facilitated the Juvenile Court of DeKalb County Drug Court Quality
Enhancement Retreat in July 2005. The Rebound Team reviewed the “strengths model” and
discussed best practices from year one (1) based on parent, youth, and staff interviews.
Additionally, the team compiled information, established priorities, and discussed next steps,
including staff assignments and start dates. This evaluative process was used to improve the
subsequent years after the Rebound Program’s pilot year.
-41-
YEAR 1 (2004-2005):
PROGRAM PARTICIPANT RESULTS
TABLE NO. 19
COHORT ONE(1): OUTCOMES BY KEY INDICATORS (AGGREGATE)
COHORT
YEARS
TOTAL
NO.
GRADUATED
SCHOOL/ WORK
LEVEL OF FAMILY
ENGAGEMENT
RECIDIVISM
LAST DRUG
SCREEN POSITIVE
RETENTION
2004-2005
10
5 (50%)
8 (89%)
1 Not documented
5 (50%)
9 (90%)
5 (56%)
1 Not documented
10 (100%)
TABLE NO. 20
COHORT ONE(1): OUTCOMES BY KEY INDICATORS (INDIVIDUAL)
Graduate
Status
School/
Work
Family Engaged
Recidivism
Last Drug Screen
Retention
Success Rating
15TA0127892004
Graduate
Yes
100%
Yes
Positive
Yes
4/6
15TA0707882004
Certificate of
Participation
Yes
100%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
16BB0302892004
Graduate
No
100%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3/6
15XG0713882004
Certificate of
Participation
Yes
75%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/6
16AJ0710882004
Graduate
No
85%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3/6
15MM0504882004
Certificate of
Participation
No
25%
Yes
Negative
Yes
2.5/6
16FM1221872004
Certificate of
Participation
75%
Yes
Negative
Yes
3.5/6
16AM0315882004
Graduate
70%
Yes
Negative
Yes
3/6
15KS0404892004
Graduate
Yes
85%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
15RW0730882004
Certificate of
Participation
-
50%
1
-
Yes
1.5/4
Client ID
Yes
No
-42-
YEAR 1 (2004-2005):
A NARRATIVE DISCUSSION
OF THE
PROGRAM RESULTS. In year one (1) the Rebound Program had
a 50% graduation rate and a 100% program completion rate. Five (5) of the program participants
went on to complete the Aftercare Program from the CSB.
SCHOOL BEHAVIOR
AND
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE.
At the end of the program the aggregate
number of school suspension days decreased from 51 days to 29 days. Youth continuing to
struggle with school behavior and/or academic performance in traditional public schools were
given the opportunity to enroll in alternative educational programs, including Youth Challenge, Job
Corp, and the Youth Achievement Program. By the end of the program, four (4) had an “A, B, or
C” average, three (3) participants were failing, and one (1) was enlisted in Youth Challenge.
JUVENILE OFFENSES
AND
DRUG USE RESULTS.
The total number of adjudicated drug related
charges prior to enrollment into the Rebound program
was 8, which decrease to 6 after
enrollment. One (1) was placed in residential treatment , and 1 was indicted on adult charges and
terminated from the aftercare program to serve a 15 year prison sentence.
FAMILY ENGAGEMENT RESULTS. There were five (5) parents/guardians who were documented as
“engaged” in the Rebound Program. Family engagement is measured among parent/guardian(s)
participating in the following four (4) areas: (1) attendance at mandatory court hearings, (2)
attendance of treatment sessions and parent/teacher conferences, (3) having a positive attitude
towards the program and supporting the child through the process, and (4) completing all required
documentations in a timely mannerly.
A CASE STUDY
OF THE
MOST SUCCESSFUL PARTICIPANT
IN
COHORT ONE (1). As of 2011, only one
participant from the first cohort had not re-offended since completion of the program in 2005. At
the end of the program, this participant had scored 6 out of 6 indicators of program and he had a
negative drug screening at the time he graduated from the program with his last drug screen being
negative. The participant had some challenges transitioning back into a traditional public school
from the DeKalb Alternative School. He eventually enrolled in DeKalb County’s “open campus”.
A CASE STUDY
OF THE
LEAST SUCCESSFUL PARTICIPANT
IN
COHORT ONE (1). The youth with the
lowest rankings on the program indicators (1.5 out of 6) currently is incarcerated serving a 15 year
prison sentence for aggravated assault and armed robbery. The participant had an extensive
juvenile history that began in 2002. Prior to the Rebound Program, this youth participated in other
diversion programs. He continued to obtain charges while in the Rebound Program. The
participant’s father was deceased.
-43-
YEAR 2 (2005-2006)
PROGRAM RESULTS
YEAR 2 (2005-2006): PROGRAM PARTICIPANT AT TIME OF ENTRY
status.
The 2005-06 cohort’s baseline measures are presented in the table below, and is
TABLE NO. 21
COHORT TWO (2): KEY DEMOGRAPHICS AT TIME OF PROGRAM ENTRY
COHORT
YEAR
TOTAL NO.
2005
2006
15
RACE &
ETHNICITY
(AFRICAN
AMERICAN)
AGE AT
ENTRY
15.6
GUARDIAN
Both parents
13%
Single parent
73%
Grandparent(s)
7%
Mixture 7%
100% AA
SCHOOL STATUS
(IS=IN SCHOOL)
IS 73%
Not enrolled
36%
AT LEAST A “C”
POSITIVE DRUG
AVERAGE
SCREENING
20%
5 NA
80%
DRUG
CHARGE
54%
2 Not
documented
KEY DEMOGRAPHICS. In September of 2005, fifteen (15) additional youth were enrolled in the
program. 100% of the offenders were African American males with an average age of 15.6.
JUVENILE OFFENSES
AND
DRUG
USE.
80% of the participants tested positive for drug use upon
enrollment into the program.
SCHOOL STATUS. At the time of enrollment, 9 of the 10 males attending school were failing.
FAMILY
STATUS.
73% of the youth lived with a single parent, with one participant being in the
custody of his father.
-45-
YEAR 2 (2005-2006):
BUILDING PROGRAMMATIC INFRASTRUCTURE.
Starting in year two (2), more programmatic
developments had taken place based on it’s first year of program implementation. The program
had developed both a Participant Handbook and a Policies and Procedures Manual for the
program. These two documents were developed as a guide to the framework of the Rebound
Program which helps not only the consumer but others that are not a part of the Rebound Team
to have an idea of what the program is essentially about from beginning to end. They also can be
utilized by team members and new partners as a point of reference. An excel database file was
created also in year 2 as a summary/overview of the programmatic year. Program forms and
agreements were developed and utilized upon entry into the program. In year two, staff
committed to completing the “rebound client summary” as a way to better account for school
grades, attendance, any infractions, the ratio of positive drug screenings and program absences.
This form also summarized the school incident history and transcripts for the programmatic year.
IMPROVED EFFORTS
TO
MONITOR PARTICIPANT PROGRESSION.
For year two (2), the Rebound
Program implemented the “program progression report” to detail participants’ phase progression,
document treatment meetings and court hearings. With a high concern of youth participants’ poor
academic performance, a “client-school summary update” was created to monitor each
participant’s disciplinary actions, attendance, and grades for the school term in semesters.
-46-
YEAR 2 (2005-2006):
THE TREATMENT PROCEDURES. For year two (2), the Rebound Program began systemically
recording treatment for program participants in record form.
The required, reporting team
members included treatment providers, partnering supportive-services agencies, school system
representatives, and probation officers to provide these weekly reports. Probation officers also,
merged weekly reports to include participants’ school status, treatment information, drug
screening results, curfew violations, and comments. CSB remained on board as the sole
substance treatment provider, in which all youth were eligible to receive Medicaid Health
Coverage for treatment from CSB. Treatment took place 6 days a week with a participant having
to attend a minimum of 5 days a week during Phase I, a minimum of 4 days a week in Phase II, a
minimum of 3 days a week in Phase III, a minimum of 2 days a week in Phase IV, and a
minimum of 1 day a week for Phase V. Also as part of treatment the youth had a 12 Step Support
Group Introduction that took place in Phase I and the group was held continuously throughout
the remaining phases.
PRO-SOCIAL ACTIVITIES. The youth were engaged in re-enforcing pro-social lifestyle activities in
Year 2 which included the following activities:
 Planted a garden at the Tupac Center
 Prepared the pool and grounds at the Bransby Outdoor YMCA
 Assisted with preparation for feeding over 3,000 homeless individuals during Easter
weekend at New Birth Church
 Attended the screening of “Boys of Barack”
 Attended the Bill Pickett Rodeo
 Learned film making through Youth Alliance Digital Arts and Sciences
 Learned teambuilding and playing together at Center Court Recreational Complex,
 T.I.M.E Program
 Gordon College Trip
 Thinking for a Cause
-47-
YEAR 2 (2005-2006):
TABLE NO. 22
YEAR 2 COHORT KEY INDICATOR OUTCOMES BY CLIENT ID
COHORT
YEARS
TOTAL
NO.
GRADUATED
SCHOOL/ WORK
LEVEL OF FAMILY
ENGAGEMENT
RECIDIVISM
LAST DRUG
SCREEN POSITIVE
RETENTION
2005-2006
15
7 (47%)
9 (82%)
NA 4
9 (64%)
NA 1
9 (64 %)
NA 1
0 (0%) 7 NA
6 (50%) 1 Not
documented
TABLE NO. 23
YEAR 2 COHORT (2): OUTCOMES BY KEY INDICATORS (INDIVIDUAL)
GRADUATE
STATUS
SCHOOL/
WORK
FAMILY ENGAGED
RECIDIVISM
LAST DRUG
SCREEN
RETENTION
SUCCESS RATING
16VA0907892005
Graduate
Yes
100%
Yes
Negative
1
5/6
16JB0928892005
Graduate
Referred back to the
Court
Court
Released from
program
Yes
80%
Yes
Negative
1
5/6
NA
80%
Yes
NA
0
No
75%
Yes
NA
0
NA
NA
No
NA
0
Yes
100%
No
Negative
1
15JC0710902005
Graduate
Released from
program
NA
75%
Yes
NA
0
15DC0203902005
Graduate
Yes
100%
No
Negative
1
6/6
16LG1229882005
Graduate
Court
Referred back to
Court
Yes
80%
Yes
Negative
1
5/6
Yes
100%
Yes
residential
-
No
75%
NA
NA
0
Graduate
Court
Yes
75%
Yes
Negative
1
NA
70%
No
NA
0
Graduate
Court
Yes
100%
No
Negative
1
Yes
80%
Yes
Negative
1
CLIENT ID
15RC0213902005
16JC0828892005
16LC0327892005
16DC0305892005
15JJ1204892005
16JP0811892005
14MP0217912005
17KS0826882005
15WS0215902005
16BS0212892005
1/4
0/5
1/3
6/6
0/4
2.5/5
0/4
4/6
1/4
6/6
4/6
-48-
YEAR 2 (2005-2006):
SUMMARY
OF
PROGRAM OUTCOMES. In Year 2, of the 15 youth in the Rebound Program, seven
(7) graduated, one (1) juvenile was charged and indicted on adult charges and terminated from
the program, and six (6) youth were referred back to Juvenile Court because criteria
specifications were not met for the Rebound Program. These six (6) youth were classified as
adjudicated delinquents. Of the 8 participant that remained in the program for at least 9 months,
100% had negative drug screen results at there last drug screening. Treatment providers and the
Rebound Team worked intensely to reduce substance use among participants.
On the other hand, 36% of the graduates have not re-offended since graduation in comparison to
a team goal of 60%. 75% of the participants were documented as being an “engaged family” with
a benchmark rating of 80%. A review of the evidence revealed that in general, parents were
highly involved in the program and its processes.
By the end of the program 5 of the 8
participants were still failing school, and 1 decided to enroll in Gateway to College Academy, a
DeKalb County Charter School working in collaboration with the Georgia Perimeter College to
assist youth in obtaining a high school diploma.
SUMMARY
OF
TRENDS
AMONG
SUCCESSFUL PARTICIPANTS
IN
COHORT TWO (2). Each of the 3
successful participants all had 100% of family engagement in the program. All had different
experiences with phasing up, attendance, and behavior issues; however a common issue among
all 3 were repeated curfew violations.
A CASE STUDY OF
AN
UNSUCCESSFUL PARTICIPANT
IN
COHORT TWO (2). The youth that was not as
successful had done exceptionally well in school while attending Project Destiny earning a 93.5
grade average for the first semester. The youth did not report back to school for the second
semester and was not able to return since he missed so many days. The school officials required
a mandatory conference with a parent prior to re-instating the youth, which did not occur. The
participant associated his increased anger with his mother’s boyfriend’s repeated threats to kick
him out of the home. When the mother obtained her own apartment and the potential threat from
the boyfriend was removed, the youth’s behavior also improved. However the youth did not reenroll in school and was removed from the program in March after being detained. The youth
later committed felony burglary, armed robbery, and aggravated assault crimes, and is currently
locked up at Augusta State Medical Prison.
-49-
YEAR 3 (2006-2007)
PROGRAM RESULTS
YEAR 3 (2006-2007): PROGRAM PARTICIPANT AT TIME OF ENTRY
The 2006-07 cohort’s baseline measure are presented in the table below, and is
status.
TABLE NO. 24
COHORT THREE (3): KEY DEMOGRAPHICS AT TIME OF PROGRAM ENTRY
COHORT
YEAR
TOTAL
NO.
2006-2007
RACE &
ETHNICITY
(AFRICAN
AMERICAN)
AGE AT
ENTRY
28
AA-93%
Caucasian-4%
Bi-racial -4%
15.6
GUARDIAN
SCHOOL STATUS
(IS=IN SCHOOL)
AT LEAST A “C”
POSITIVE DRUG
AVERAGE
SCREENING
Both parents 15%
Mother only 54%
Grandparent(s) 15%
Other 4 %
Not documented 2
IS 89%
Not Enrolled 11%
Not documented 1
42%
5 Not documented
4 NA
74%
9 Not documented
DRUG
CHARGE
54%
KEY DEMOGRAPHICS. In November 2006, twenty-eight youth were enrolled in the program. The
racial make-up consisted of 93% African American, 4% Caucasian, and 4% Bi-racial youth that
were in the program.
JUVENILE OFFENSES
AND
DRUG
USE.
The following is a list of offenses youth were charged with
upon being referred to the program: burglary, criminal trespassing, obstruction of an officer, theft,
VGCSA, and VOP. 54% of the participants committed drug charges with 74% of the participants
testing positive for drugs upon enrollment based on their initial drug screening test being positive.
SCHOOL STATUS. The majority (89%) of the youth were in school upon entering the program and
42% had at least a “C” average at that time.
FAMILY
STATUS.
54% of the youth in this cohort were living with single mothers, and 15% resided
in two-parent households. There was a 2% increase from the previous year in the amount of
two-parent households, yet family engagement was only at 30% which was lower than the
aggregate of 47%.
-51-
YEAR 3 (2006-2007):
PROGRAM RESULTS
TABLE NO. 25
YEAR 3 PROGRAM DELIVERY SUMMARY
GUEST
SPEAKERS
Innovative Junior
Training &
Development
Center, Inc—
Alfredia Cox
Mr. Bob
Pickens—National
Football League
Retired Players
Association
Lester Wright—
GED Program
Stone Mountain
HS
No Junk
Productions Food
For Your SoulIndia Hines
TREATMENT
PROVIDERS
WRAP
AROUND
SERVICES
PROGRAMS
PARTNERS
PARENT
SUPPORT
Peachford
Hospital
Georgia
Community
Solutions and
Support
Thinking For A
Change—DeKalb
Juvenile Court
Next Step Youth
Sports Campus
Mrs. Jones—
Volunteer
Odysseysliding scale for
payment
Advantage
Counseling
Hands on Atlanta
Attachment &
Bonding Center
Of Atlanta, LLC
(ABC)
Center Court—
Fitness Training
Hands on Atlanta-Youth Day—
Volunteerism Day
Kennedy MS
Mr. Lewis –
Transportatio
n/Volunteer
Construction 101
Department of
Labor
Mrs. Salcedo
ROTC—Stone
Mountain HS
-
Atlanta Center
For Wellness,
LLC-Substance
Abuse
TreatmentProchaska’s
Stages of
Change Model
Center Court
Ms. Fisher—
Volunteer
-
Alliance For
Change
Through
Treatment
(ACT)
-
-
Teen Challenge
USA --- Tyrone
Lucas
-
-
-
Miller Grove HS
Barbering
Program
-
-
-
-
-
Bransby YMCA
-
Teen Health
DeKalb WorkForce
-52-
YEAR 3 (2006-2007):
PROGRAM RESULTS
TREATMENT TEAM MEMBER
CHANGES.
In November 2006, treatment services were provided by
Peachford Hospital and Odyssey Family Counseling Center. The DeKalb CSB converted to a fee
for service payment for court services/criminal justice programs and no longer accepts insurance.
Peachford Hospital only accepted Amerigroup Medicaid and certain private insurances such as
Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) and Kaiser. Therefore, Peachford was able to provide services to
7 participants and the remainder sought treatment at Odyssey which had a sliding fee scale for
payment of services. These changes in service providers motivated the team to seek additional
service providers and partners. To improve program implementation the Team reviewed the
phase process and made changes based on their new treatment providers. CSB required the
youth attend treatment six days a week; however, Peachford Hospital had a Partial Day Treatment
Plan (PHP) or Intensive Outpatient Services which required the participants to attend a minimum
of 5 treatment sessions per week for Phase I and decreasing as the youth matriculate throughout
the phases. Psychological evaluations were made part of the treatment criteria for Phase I and in
Phase II it was reviewed with both the child and the parent/guardian.
BUILDING PROGRAMMATIC INFRASTRUCTURE. With the induction of the new treatment providers,
Phase I went from ranging between eight to twelve weeks to being twelve weeks and Phase IV
went from twelve weeks to ranging from eight to twelve weeks. The Rebound Team decided that
they would begin reviewing the participants high school credits, as this became very important for
youth who were trying to enroll into alternative education programs that required a certain number
of high school credits. The team also worked with Educate America!, to link eligible participants
with academic challenges, interim eligibilities under the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act) and IEP (Individualized Education Program) services. Although the partnership
did not last, a valuable DCSS representative is now a part of the Rebound Team. It took the first
few months to get the participants enrolled into treatment programs, baseline assessments
completed, and details of insurance and fees worked out. The Polices and Procedures Manual
parental section was updated to require parents to attend all school conferences and the service
flow chart included parents and the community as part of the education process. They developed
steps for entry into the Rebound Program and looked at alternative placements for participants
besides RYDC. The team implemented certificates of completion that were given to the
participants when they completed a phase, which served to motivate and praise the participants
-53-
YEAR 3 (2006-2007):
PROGRAM RESULTS
for their successes. In addition to the certificates, the collection of phasing up letters from the
participant were also added to the phase process. These letter were written to the team explaining
the participant’s commitment and readiness to move to the next phase. The participants were also
responsible for other written assignments throughout the program. The Rebound Program Team
began to collect more treatment data for each participant such as psychological evaluation and
study reports, JASAE summary assessments, and behavioral contracts. Peachford, GCSS,
Odyssey and Advantage all submit weekly reports to the court updating the team on the youth that
include issues, treatment plans, comprehensive drug screening results, appointments, and a
comprehensive update on the participant.
-54-
YEAR 3 (2006-2007):
TABLE NO. 26
COHORT
YEARS
2006-2007
TOTAL
NO.
28
GRADUATED
SCHOOL/ WORK
LEVEL OF FAMILY
ENGAGEMENT
RECIDIVISM
LAST DRUG
SCREEN
POSITIVE
RETENTION
7 (25%)
16 (94%)
3 Not documented
8 NA
6 (30%)
8 Not documented
9 (38%)
2 Not documented
2 NA
12 (75%)
10 Not
documented
2 NA
20 (74%) 1 NA
TABLE NO. 27
GRADUATE
STATUS
SCHOOL/
WORK
FAMILY ENGAGED
RECIDIVISM
LAST DRUG
SCREEN
RETENTION
SUCCESS RATING
17JB0525892006
Certificate of Participation
Yes
75%
No
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
15GB0426912006
Yes
78%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/6
16PB0626902006
Graduate
Yes
75%
No
Negative
Yes
5/6
15CC1230902006
Yes
80%
No
Positive
Yes
4.5/6
16EC1127892006
Graduate
Yes
83%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
15AD0323912006
NA
75%
No
Positive
Yes
2.5/5
15EV0317912006
Refer back to Court-DJJ
NA
75%
No
Positive
No
1/5
15BF0107912006
Yes
80%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
15RF0107912006
Yes
80%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
16RF0510902006
Yes
70%
No
-
Yes
3.5/5
16KG0401902006
Graduate
Yes
75%
No
-
Yes
4/5
16AG1117892006
Yes
75%
Yes
-
Yes
2.5/5
16TH0604902006
Yes
70%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/5
16GH0303902006
Yes
90%
No
Positive
Yes
4.5/6
15BJ0525912006
NA
-
NA
-
No
0/2
16CL0109902006
No
60%
No
Positive
Yes
2.5/6
16MM0620902006
Yes
75%
No
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
15TN0506912006
NA
-
Yes
-
No
0/3
16TP0416902006
Graduate
-
-
No
-
Yes
3/3
16XP0425902006
-
-
No
-
Yes
2.5/3
17AS0427892006
Graduate
Yes
100%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
16OW0402902006
Graduate
Yes
70%
No
Negative
Yes
5/6
14FW0309922006
NA
50%
Yes
-
No
0/4
15RW1125902006
Graduate
Yes
70%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3/6
CLIENT ID
15MG0109912006
Released to Probation
-
-
NA
-
NA
0/1
17MT0427892006
NA
-
Yes
-
No
0/3
14CT0113922006
Removed from Program
NA
-
-
NA
No
0/2
16JT1208902006
NA
-
-
NA
No
0/2
-55-
YEAR 3 (2006-2007):
OF THE
PROGRAM RESULTS. In year three (3), seven (7) youth graduated
from the program, thirteen (13) received certificates of participation, two (2) were removed from
the program due to noncompliance, five (5) were referred back to Juvenile court in which four (4)
were committed to DJJ and one
(1) relocated to another state and was therefore put on
probation. The overall retention for Year 3 was 74%.
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT THREE (3).
One of the successful
participants in this cohort was referred to the Rebound Program at the age of 17 due to VOP
charges. His prior charge was theft, of which he claims he was guilty by association. The
participant was raised by his Caucasian mother in a predominately black community; however he
attended private school until he reached high school where the racial identity issue surfaced. The
youth is accustomed to abandonment, which he experienced from his father, as well as a male
mentor. The participants abandonment and racial identity issues lead to the youth’s
transformation which resulted in a strained relationship with his mother, adaptive behavior to his
new accepting counterparts, and drug use. He created a façade to mask his feeling of anger and
dejection. Also, feelings of victimization, failure to take responsibility for his actions, a troubled
family life, and legal problems caused enragement and overreactions. Based on the treatment
and services provided by the Rebound Program the youth was able to realize that smoking
marijuana is a problem from him and contributes to a lot of the problems in his life. The program
has since helped him to reduce the frequency of his smoking but, he has not abstained from drug
use completely and states “quitting is not easy”; however his last drug screening was negative.
He received substance abuse treatment, as well as counseling, and maintained a fast food job
while in the program. The participant did not get into any legal troubles or have any school
suspensions while in the program. The participant’s grades improved his to a “B” average during
his last semester and he went on to earn his high school diploma. The intervening of the
Rebound Program with its consistency of treatment from Odyssey and counseling from GCSS, as
well as the team and parental involvement, contributed heavily to the youth’s success.
-56-
YEAR 3 (2006-2007):
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT THREE (3). The next successful
participant for this cohort is a 16 years of age at enrollment and, even though he did not receive a
perfect success ranking due to parental involvement, his success is worth highlighting as he was
the first participant to make it to Phase IV of the program. He was able to obtain and keep a parttime job at a fast-food restaurant and was home schooled while in the program. The participant
was enrolled into the program due to marijuana usage, VOP, and criminal trespassing. The
participant had prior arrest for VGCSA, fleeing/eluding the police, driving without a license,
violating curfew, and runaway which is a pattern of evasion. The participant had three school
suspensions after enrollment into the intensive behavior modification program, and was
eventually removed from the public school system and place in home school to eliminate
behavioral problems and drug usage. Through treatment, it was discovered that the participant’s
parents were at odds, and the father was not in his life. To modify the participant’s behavior, a
behavioral contract was created and signed, restricting the participant’s past behaviors and
setting rules to assist in behavioral improvement in the home, as well as school. He was
prescribed antidepressants, which he did not willingly admit to taking. Initially failing in the DCSS,
the participant was able to obtain an A/B average in home school the last semester in the
program.
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT THREE (3). The third successful case
for this cohort was a 16 year old African American participant with prior arrests for disorderly
conduct and theft. At time of entry, the treatment provider noticed “intellectual and emotional
issues” and had the participant evaluated. It was determined that the participant suffered from
severe levels of anxiety, depression, and anger. At the time, the youth was living with his father
who was reported for physically abusing the participant when he was 11. The participant
mentioned having suicidal ideation when he thinks that “no one wants (him) or care" or when he
gets angry with his dad. Based on his comments towards the father and the comments form the
mother, the participant's treatment transitioned to MST with social support in both the mom and
father’s home. This participant was failing school, and was suspended nine times. He earned an
overall 80 average in summer school, and acknowledged the need for a tutor. The participant had
no positive drug screens for the last 8 months. He admitted to drinking alcohol and smoking
cigarettes. He works with his mother occasionally doing screen printing.
-57-
YEAR 3 (2006-2007):
A CASE STUDY
OF AN
IN
COHORT THREE (3). The not as successful
participant was 15 years old at enrollment and younger than all the successful youth. The
participant received treatment services at Odyssey, which were partially successful do to the lack
of contact since the individual was detained for some time. Alliance provided counseling services
to the participant while detained. The participant’s unproductive and unmotivated character
contributed to his unsuccessfulness in life and in the program, and he was eventually committed
to DJJ. The participant became non-compliant with the program, as well as the mother having
resentment and lack of faith in the program stating the program has increased the participant’s
negative behavior. Before entering the program the participant had nineteen school suspensions
and eleven after being enrolled in the program. The participant was not in school and had to
repeat the ninth grade due to being expelled for truancy and marijuana possession at the school.
This participant had 3 prior drug charges before enrolling into the program. The participant came
to the program with problems complying with rules and regulations at home and school and the
usage of marijuana three to four times a week. The program sought to get the participant enrolled
in a GED/Vocational Rehabilitation program, or Warren Tech. The team also had the youth reside
in a group home for thirty days to help facilitate treatment and reduce the constant detainments
by changing the participant's environment. With the help of the Rebound Program the participant
has attended school more regularly and even though the program provided a tutor, the participant
still did not complete homework. It was discovered from the participant's psychological evaluation
that the participant had unresolved and unaddressed issues in life , such as difficulties relating to
the mother’s boyfriend, stress due to father’s recently being hospitalized for medical issue, the
parents separating two years prior causing withdrawal from parents and isolation, and the
tendency to ruminate over past events.
-58-
YEAR 4 (2007-2008)
PROGRAM RESULTS
YEAR 4 (2007-2008):
status.
TABLE NO. 28
RACE &
COHORT
YEARS
2007 - 2008
TOTAL
NO.
24
AGE AT
ETHNICITY
ENTRY
(AFRICAN
AMERICAN)
15.5
AA-96%
Bi-Racial 4%
GUARDIAN
SCHOOL STATUS
(IS=IN SCHOOL)
Both parents 6%
Single parent 72%
Grandparent(s) 17%
Alternate 6%
Not documented 6
IS 87%
Not Enrolled
13%
1 Not
documented
AT LEAST A “C”
POSITIVE DRUG
AVERAGE
SCREENING
64%
5 Not
documented
5 NA
81%
2 Not
documented
1 NA
DRUG
CHARGE
57%
1 Not
documented
KEY DEMOGRAPHICS. In October 2007, twenty-four youth were enrolled in the program with 96%
being African American and 4% Bi-racial.
JUVENILE OFFENSES
AND
DRUG
USE.
Upon enrollment in the program, 81% of the participants
tested positive for drugs at their initial screening; which is the highest of all the other cohorts.
Some of the participant’s initial drug screens came back with marijuana, cocaine, and meth. So,
not only did they have the highest percentage of positive screenings but, they were also using
more serious drugs, with marijuana probably being a gateway drug.
SCHOOL STATUS. 87% of the participants were in school at time of enrollment and 64% of the
youth enrolled in school had at least a “C “ average upon entry into the program, which was the
highest amount of all years
FAMILY STATUS. Guardians of the participant consisted of 17% grandparents, 72% single parents,
and 6% lived with both parents.
-60-
YEAR 4 (2007-2008):
CHANGE
IN
TREATMENT PROVIDERS.
The Rebound Team elected to end its partnership with
Peachford Hospital for Year 4. Treatment was provided by the two remaining providers Atlanta
Center for Family Wellness and Odyssey. GCSS also provided counseling and wraparound
services.
THE PRO-SOCIAL ACTIVITIES. The youth engaged in the following pro-social activities for 2007 –
2008:

Center Court

Bransby YMCA

Tupac Amaru Shakur Center for the Arts

Viewed the series of Jim Crow

Attended Atlanta Hawks Basketball Game

DeKalb Workforce

Culture Life Coaching – Dr. Tartt, Ph.D.

ROTC – Stone Mountain High School

12 Things Every Black Boy Needs To Know – Redan Trotti Library
-61-
YEAR 4 (2007-2008):
P.ROGRAMMATIC CHANGES. The Rebound Program embraced some programmatic changes in
year four (4). First, the weekly treatment report was revised to include more demographic and
tracking information, such as program start date, participant’s age, and lock up dates. Odyssey,
GCSS, and Alliance were responsible for sending weekly updates to probation officers to populate
the weekly treatment report. The Rebound Team developed, implemented, and stored
orientation and treatment intake forms which included an “Information Processing Characteristics
Screening” instrument used to assess underline issues at baseline. Other changes included a
quarterly drug court recommendation plan for relapse prevention and intervention This change
enhanced the individualized treatment planning process. In addition, participants were now
responsible for completing an autobiography or life story. A program brochure was created as a
short tangible informative visual overview of the program. Also, school reports were generated to
include grades, behavior, and attendance for each participant. Finally, the Rebound Program and
the Youth Achievement Program (YAP) had a joint graduation/recognition ceremony at the end of
the programmatic year.
TABLE NO. 29
REBOUND PROGRAM FORMS
 Parent-Guardian Acknowledgement From
 Juvenile Drug Court Q & A Sheet
 Rebound Program Criteria Handout
 Drug Court Waiver of Rights Form
 Drug Court Pre-Disposition Agreement
 Drug Court Request for Leave
 Drug Court Order Terminating Supervision
 Drug Court Screen and Analysis Consent
 Project Workforce Rebound participant agreement
 Drug Court Stipulated Order
-62-
YEAR 4 (2007-2008):
OF THE
PROGRAM RESULTS. At the end of Year 4, the program
graduated seven (7) youth in which one (1) was referred to DFCS for residential placement, six
(6) received certificates of participation, six (6) were referred back to Juvenile Court in which one
(1) had a pending adult charge, four (4) youth were placed on formal probation, and one(1) was
referred to the Youth Challenge Program. There were a total of 2 adjudicated drug related
charges after enrollment in the program in which there were 9 prior to enrollment.By the end of
the program 94% of youth were enrolled in school/ workforce and only 4 youth were failing, 7 had
a “A, B, & C” average, 1 youth was enrolled in Youth Challenge and 1 in Job Corps, and 5 of the
previously failing youth were now preparing for the GED test. The total number of days of school
suspension decreased by 44% by the end of the program indicating less infractions or less
severe infractions in the school and overall improvement in school behavior. 68% of the
participants have not reoffended; however 62% were still using drugs at the end of the program
based on their last drug screening. Overall, 22% of participants’ families were engaged in the
program and the youth success at the 80% level. This was the least amount of parental
engagement throughout the seven years of implementation. It would be interesting to interview
these parents/guardians to expound on why they participate so little in the program.
CASE STUDIES
OF
IN
COHORT FOUR (4). Both the successful and
unsuccessful participant were 16 year old African American males being raised by a single
mother. The successful participant started the program and treatment mid-December and had
reached phase IV within 5 months. The participant received treatment from Odyssey and
counseling from GCSS. By his second month in the program he had made up his mind to stop
smoking marijuana and was able to abstain from the drug, thereafter realizing he is accountable
for all his actions and decisions. The participant was always passing in school, entering the
program with a ”C” average and had a “B” average by the end of the program. Since enrolling in
the program the participant had earned 3 referrals, 5 unexcused absences, 7 out of school
suspensions and 1 in school suspension, and 14 unexcused tardies. The participant expressed
the desire to play basketball and to obtain a scholarship to college.
-63-
YEAR 4 (2007-2008):
TABLE NO. 30
YEAR 4 COHORT KEY INDICATOR OUTCOMES
COHORT
YEARS
2007-2008
TOTAL
NO.
24
GRADUATED
SCHOOL/ W ORK
LEVEL OF FAMILY
ENGAGEMENT
RECIDIVISM
LAST DRUG
SCREEN POSITIVE
RETENTION
7 (29%)
15 (94%)
8 NA
4 (22%)
3 Not
documented
3 NA
6 (32%)
2 Not
documented
3 NA
13 (62%)
2 Not
documented
1 NA
15 (68%)
2 NA
TABLE NO. 31
Client ID
Graduate
Status
School/
Work
Family
Engaged
Recidivism
Last Drug
Screen
Retention
Success Rating
15BB1209912007
NA
-
-
-
NA
0/1
15AC0211922007
Yes
90%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
15BC0406922007
Yes
70%
No
Negative
Yes
4/6
16AC0516912007
NA
-
No
Negative
No
2/4
16TD1120902007
Graduate
Yes
65%
No
Negative
Yes
5/6
16CF0304912007
Yes
75%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/6
17RH0724902007
NA
80%
-
-
No
1/3
Yes
75%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2/6
Graduate
No
40%
No
Negative
Yes
4/6
17TH0504902007
Graduate
Yes
65%
No
Negative
Yes
5/6
16JJ0304912007
Yes
75%
No
Negative
Yes
4.5/6
16GJ0214912007
Referred back to Court-DJJ
NA
70%
Yes
Positive
No
0/5
15PJ0627922007
Graduate
NA
75%
No
Negative
Yes
4/5
17BK1005902007
Yes
75%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/6
15VK0425922007
Graduate
Yes
70%
No
Negative
Yes
5/6
16RL0514912007
Graduate
Yes
-
No
Negative
Yes
5/5
14EM0215932007
15GH0110922007 Referred back to Court-DJJ
15DH1018912007
Yes
75%
No
Negative
Yes
4.5/6
16KR1023902007 Referred back to Court-DJJ
NA
NA
NA
NA
No
0/2
14RS0529932007
Referred back to Court-DJJ
NA
NA
Yes
Positive
No
0/4
15BS0414922007
Yes
80%
No
Negative
Yes
5.5/6
15TW1220912007
Yes
70%
No
Negative
No
3/6
15YW0403922007
NA
90%
NA
NA
NA
1/2
16JD1216902007
Yes
NA
NA
NA
NA
1/2
14JW1015922007
Graduate
Yes
75%
No
Negative
-
4/6
-64-
YEAR 4 (2007-2008):
CASE STUDIES
OF
UNSUCCESSFUL PARTICIPANTS
IN
COHORT FOUR (4). The unsuccessful
participant was referred to the program in August 2007 and was not new to the juvenile justice
system. His first encounter with the law was in 2004 and amongst other offenses he later
received a truancy charge for not attending school. The participant had not been attending school
and had a myriad of school offense on his student incident history, as well as, 17 unexcused
absences, 3 out school suspensions, 4 in school suspensions, and 21 unexcused tardies. Since
enrollment, the participant had 2 referrals in which he received 25 from 2004 until enrollment. The
participant received treatment from Alliance for Change Through Treatment. The Mother lost her
job from Delta early in the program which made the youth depressed and began to seek
employment. The family did not receive counseling even though the child has anger towards his
parents for allowing him to witness the abuse of his mother by the father. The parents are
currently divorced due to the father’s abusiveness. The participant was initially failing in school
upon entry into the program and the Team’s school representative helped to get the youth
enrolled in YAP to obtain his GED. The participant seemed to be heading down the right path by
attending an audition with Nickelodeon and getting tutored. However, the participant did not take
advantage of the opportunity, and instead worked with his mother at their new mechanic shop in
Atlanta. The neighborhood was not a conducive environment for a participant of a substance
abuse treatment program and ensued with more involvement with the law. In addition to the
pending charge for driving without a license, the participant was arrested on adult murder and
aggravated assault charges which was changed to an affray charge which he attests innocence.
The participant was still awaiting his court hearing for the charges by the end of the programs
cycle; but stated he wanted to continue with the Rebound Program.
-65-
YEAR 5 (2008-2009)
PROGRAM RESULTS
YEAR 5 (2008-2009):
status.
TABLE NO. 32
PARTICIPANT’S KEY DEMOGRAPHICS
COHORT
YEARS
2008 - 2009
TOTAL
NO.
25
TIME OF PROGRAM ENTRY
AGE AT
RACE &
ENTRY
ETHNICITY
STATUS
(AFRICAN
AMERICAN)
SCHOOL)
15.6
100% AA
GUARDIAN
AT
SCHOOL
AT LEAST A
“C” AVERAGE
(IS=IN
Both parents 4%
Single parent 78%
Grandparent(s) 9%
Not documented 2
IS 85%
Not Enrolled
16%
POSITIVE
DRUG
DRUG
CHARGE
SCREENING
38%
4 Not
documented
5 NA
70%
2 Not
documented
64%
KEY DEMOGRAPHICS. In November 2008, twenty-five, African American juvenile offenders enrolled
in the program. Of the 25 enrollees, .
JUVENILE OFFENSES
AND
DRUG
USE.
70% tested positive for drugs at their initial screening and
64% most recent offense was a drug charge.
SCHOOL STATUS. 85% of the participants were already enrolled in school and 38% had at least a
“C” average.
FAMILY
STATUS.
78% of the participants resided in a single-parent household. While only 4%
resided in a household with both parents.
-67-
YEAR 5 (2008-2009):
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
PROGRAMMATIC ENHANCEMENTS. In preparation for Year 5, the Rebound Drug Court looked to
improve their program by developing a program in partnership with Dr. Wilson owner of the
Family Wellness Center of Atlanta to provide intensive behavior modifications to males needing
basic life skills to function in the community as productive citizens. The team also researched
ways to improve or modify the delivery of their current incentives and sanctions and the
development of new incentives and sanctions. Research was also conducted on mental health
needs involved with the Juvenile Justice System and psychiatric residential treatment facilities.
New partners were sought and brought in the program. The team was also concerned with
current drug testing and screening so they researched new screenings and ways to better
facilitate screenings while maintaining the integrity of the process and detecting adulteration.
Majority of the treatment was provided by Attachment and Bonding Center of Atlanta; however,
the addition of Pro-Active Management Consulting and Odyssey Family Counseling Center also
provided treatment, counseling, and drug screenings. w participants for drug screening and
treatment. As a way to enhance overall administrative of the program the Rebound team updated
its key partner rooster, as well as began to systemically operate meetings using an agenda that
included details about next steps that needed immediate attention.
NEW PRO-SOCIAL ACTIVITIES PROGRAM PARTNERS. The program also gained new partnerships.
Some of the new partnerships and pro-social activities for the 2008 – 2009 that the participants
were to participate in are listed below:













Bransby YMCA
ROTC – Stone Mountain High School
Hands On Atlanta
Kidz 4 Money
Summer Camping Excursion – High Falls State Park
Town Hall Meeting
DeKalb County Fire Rescue – Youth Day Program
Rivers Alive Clean Up
Let Us Make Man Conference
Career Panel Seminar – UGA Alumni
GA Department of Corrections – “Choose Freedom”
Life’s True North – Teen Prevention Camp, Jessup, GA
Habitat for Humanity – UGA Alumni
-68-
YEAR 5 (2008-2009):
TABLE NO. 33
COHORT
YEARS
TOTAL
NO.
GRADUATED
SCHOOL/ W ORK
2008-2009
25
8 (32%)
19 (83%)
1 Not
documented 1
NA
LEVEL OF FAMILY
ENGAGEMENT
5 (31%)
9 Not
documented
RECIDIVISM
LAST DRUG
SCREEN POSITIVE
10 (43%)
1 Not
documented
1 NA
12 (52%)
1 Not
documented
1 NA
RETENTION
21 (91%)
2 NA
TABLE NO. 34
Client ID
Graduate
Status
School/
Work
Family
Engaged
Recidivism
Last Drug
Screen
Retention
Success
Rating
14DB0730932008
Graduate
Yes
100%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
15LB0313932008
No
-
Yes
Negative
Yes
2/5
16DB0601922008
Refer back to Courtrelocated
Yes
-
Yes
Positive
NA
1/5
15KC072892008
Graduate
Yes
70%
No
Negative
Yes
5/6
17JF0401912008
Yes
68%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2/6
15AF0927922008
Yes
73%
-
Positive
Yes
2.5/5
16TG1015912008
Referred back to the Court
Yes
40%
No
Positive
Yes
3/6
16SH0301922008
Yes
70%
No
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
15DH0516932008
NA
Yes
-
No
0/3
16BM1128912008
Yes
75%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/6
16SS0214922008
Graduate
Yes
75%
Yes
Negative
Yes
4/6
16DS1221912008
Refer back to Court-case
closed
Yes
70%
NA
Positive
NA
1/4
17KS0107932008
Yes
85%
Yes
Negative
Yes
4.5/6
16SS1217912008
Graduate
Yes
70%
No
Positive
Yes
4/6
14DT0902932008
Graduate
Yes
90%
Yes
Negative
Yes
5/6
16CT0521922008
Referred back to the Court
-
-
Yes
NA
No
0/3
16SW0417932008
Yes
70%
No
Negative
Yes
4.5/6
15PW1118922008
Graduate
Yes
100%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
16SW1011912008
No
70%
Yes
Negative
Y0es
2.5/6
15IG0208932008
Graduate
Yes
80%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
16MH0405922008
Graduate
Yes
-
No
Negative
Yes
5/5
15RK0324932008
No
-
No
Positive
Yes
2.5/5
15TM0930922008
Yes
-
No
Positive
Yes
3.5/5
14BW1110932008
Yes
-
No
Positive
Yes
3.5/5
17TS0810912008
No
-
No
Positive
Yes
2.5/5
-69-
YEAR 5 (2008-2009):
OF THE
PROGRAM RESULTS. By the end of the program, 83% of the
participants were in some form of school or alternative educational program, in which 9
participants were failing school, 6 had an “A, B, & C average, 4 were preparing for GED testing
and 1 participant received their GED, and 1 in Youth Challenge Academy. There was a total of 3
adjudicated drug related charges after enrollment into the program in comparison to 13 charges
prior to enrollment and a total recidivism rate of 43% which is close to the aggregate recidivism
rate. School days missed due to school suspension decreased by 61%, indicating not only a
reduction in school infractions, but a reduction in less severe infractions. This cohort consisted of
juvenile offenders that had charges for carrying a weapon to school, criminal trespassing on
school property, and disrupting public school.
Upon completion of Year 5, eight (8) youth graduated from the program, ten (10) received
certificates of participation, four (4) were referred back to Juvenile Court, one (1) was committed
to DJJ, one (1) placed on formal probation and one (1) was removed from the program in its last
months for pending adult drug charges because he recently turned 18. The total adjudicated drug
related charges prior to enrollment was 13 and the total after enrollment was 3. There are gradual
improvements in the participants for instance there was almost an 18% decrease in substance
use. The goal of the program is to reduce or eliminate substance abuse in which in turn will
reduce criminal activity and this has been exemplified with this cohort. A total of 18 completed the
program and 4 were recidivists, give a rate of 22%.
-70-
YEAR 5 (2008-2009):
A COMPARISON
OF THE
UNSUCCESSFUL
AND
IN
COHORT FIVE (5). Year
5 cohort had three (3) participants to excel in the program earning the highest success ranking of
6. Most of the youth who had set goals in their life succeeded in the Rebound Program because
the program provides morale and support and encourages the youth to overcome substance
abuse by intervening in every aspect of their life. All of the participants, both the most successful
and the least successful were referred to the Rebound Program due to recent VGCSA charge.
Another commonality of the participants was school, either they were not attending, had
behavioral issues at school, or their attitudes towards school.
A CASE STUDY
OF A
SUCCESSFUL PARTICIPANT
IN
COHORT FIVE (5).
The first successful
participant is a 14 year old African American male raised in a household with both parents and 7
sisters. He smoked with at least one of his sisters. He attended Georgia State University and
earned a business degree and became a real estate agent. At home there were few if any
problems and he could be categorized as a good kid in the home setting. The youth participated
in the Intensive Behavior Modification Program (IBM) prior to the start of the Rebound Program, in
which he was accustomed to the team and style of program. Alliance provided treatment services
to the participant. And thorough treatment it was discovered that the participant was affiliated
with a gang that constantly had the participant involved in altercations that involved guns. The
participants interactions with the gang decreased once enrolled in the intensive program. The
participants other issues were with his behavior and attendance at school. The participant
finished the program with a “C” average due to the programs intervening and providing tutorial
and the parent becoming involved in the child’s schools productivity. Marijuana usage and the
ability to quit was not a major issue for the participant because he never had a positive drug
screening throughout his tenure in the program.
-71-
YEAR 5 (2008-2009):
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT FIVE (5). The second successful
participant is a 15 year old African American male that lived with his mother. The participant
participated in the IBM program upon entry into Rebound. He too had an idea of what the
Rebound Program would be like. The participant was failing in school at baseline and was
referred to the program for getting caught with possessing marijuana at school. The principal
monitored the participant and his behavior closely and reported on his behavior to the Team.
While in the program the participant was suspended for drinking alcohol on the school’s
premises. During his suspension the participant did not always go to treatment and omitted the
school incident to his treatment provider to which the mother also acted as an enabler. His
mother would report that the participant was doing well at home. The mother was having financial
issues and their home was foreclosed on and there were no lights/electricity in the home. His
home situation may have had an affect on the participant acting out. The youth went to a tutorial
program to help with academics. However, his behavioral issues resulted in a lock-up for being
suspended, and the Judge required him to complete a written assignment.
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT FIVE (5).
The third successful
participant was a 15 year old African American male who resided with his grandparents, but had
contact with his biological mother and three (3) sisters on a daily basis. The grandparent
considered their grandson a good kid who made a careless mistake. This was displayed by the
youth’s positive attitude towards the program and the ability to maintain drug free as he worked
towards phasing up. The participant also participated in IBM prior to the start of the rebound
program. Alliance provided treatment services for the participant. The participant was known for
acting out in school and on one occasion while in the program, the participant brought pills to
school in attempt to distribute them as if he were selling drugs. Based on the participant’s
behavior, he was never able to focus on academics, which resulted in him being 16 in middle
school. The school wanted to promote him on to high school, however the Rebound Team
intervened and had the participant transferred to DeKalb Transitional Academy where he did well
and earned his promotion.
-72-
YEAR 5 (2008-2009):
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT FIVE (5). The least successful
participant was the oldest of the entire cohort at time of entry. He was a 17 year old African
American male enrolled in the program due to VGCSA charge. The participant lived in an
apartment with his mother, older brother and sister. The participant began with all negative drug
screens and was described by his Alliance treatment provider as “humble and really sincere
about making the right decisions and avoiding conflict.” The only issue was that he was not in
school and he was more concerned about finding a job to assist his mother in paying bills. He
admitted to selling drugs as a product of his poor environment. Knowing the participants situation
and background, the Team assisted the participant in enrolling in DeKalb Workforce to get a GED
and find a job. Things were promising for the participant and the family moved to a better
neighborhood. Then the youth started testing positive for marijuana and missing meetings and
appointments with probation officer or treatment sessions or late to report. There was no phone
to contact the mother and they eventually moved into a hotel. The participant was arrested for
possession of marijuana, giving a false name, and manufacture/purchase/sell of marijuana
charges. The mother could not afford to bail him out and the participant did not want to be bailed
out to cause more of a financial burden on the mother. After the participant was released from
jailed he continued to smoke marijuana which disqualified him from graduating from the program.
The participant was eventually removed from the program when he turned 18 years of age. This
participant did not succeed because he could not gain the morale to stay away from criminal
activity and seek another way of life to assist his family through hard times.
-73-
YEAR 6 (2009-2010)
PROGRAM RESULTS
YEAR 6 (2009-2010):
As part of the summative evaluation analysis, seven (70 baseline indicators were selected to
better understand the demographics and key characteristics of young people enrolled in the
Rebound Program. The seven (7) indicators selected to measure baseline characteristics include:
age, race, guardianship status, school status, school performance, drug screening, and drug
charge status. The 2009-10 cohort’s baseline measure are presented in the table below, and is
TABLE NO. 35
RACE &
COHORT YEARS
2009 - 2010
TOTAL
NO.
30
AGE AT
ETHNICITY
ENTRY
(AFRICAN
AMERICAN)
15.2
1 Not documented
AA-90%
Caucasian-7%
Bi-racial -3%
GUARDIAN
SCHOOL STATUS
(IS=IN SCHOOL)
AT LEAST A “C”
POSITIVE DRUG
AVERAGE
SCREENING
Both parents 13%
Single parent 75%
Grandparent(s) 0%
Other13%
IS 85%
Not Enrolled
15%
43%
5 Not
documented
3 Not documented
2 NA
Not documented 14
DRUG CHARGE
50%
41%
4 Not documented
1 Not documented
KEY DEMOGRAPHICS. In year six (6), thirty youth were enrolled into the Rebound Program. This
was the largest cohort throughout the seven years of implementation. 90% of the youth enrolled
were African American, 7% Caucasian, and 3% indicated they were bi-racial.
JUVENILE OFFENSES
AND
DRUG
USE.
Half of the participants tested positive for substance use
upon entering the program, with 41% of all participants entering the program due to a recent drug
charge. Other juvenile offense charges included disorderly conduct, violation of probation, theft,
burglary, criminal trespassing, simple battery, and carrying a concealed weapon to school.
SCHOOL STATUS. Of the 30 young people enrolled in cohort six (6), 85% were attending school,
with 43% of those enrolled having at least a C average.
FAMILY
STATUS.
Single parents made up majority of the household types with 22 of the 30 young
people living with one parent, with 4 young people residing with both parents. Another 4
participants had alternative living arrangements outside of family.
-75-
YEAR 6 (2009-2010):
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES PARTICIPANT RESULTS
PROGRAMMATIC CHANGES. Programmatic modifications in cohort year six (6) included adding
community service and pro-social activities to the weekly treatment reports. In an attempt to
enhance compliance, program participants received a letter reminding them of the required
scheduled probation, program, and/or court appointments. The letter also reinforced the
consequences for non-compliance, and participant were asked to sign acknowledging reception
and intent to comply. The Rebound Program began distributing a program newsletter in
September 2009.
ENHANCED TREATMENT PROVIDER REPORTING. In 2009-2010 substance abuse treatment services
were provided by Attachment and Bonding Center of Atlanta (ABC) – Alliance Through Change
and Treatment, Pro-Active Management Consulting, and Odyssey Family. All treatment providers
were required to submit a weekly progress evaluation form documenting 1) current goals and
objectives during the evaluation period, 2) achievements, 3) accomplishment and responsibilities,
4) contact, 4) strengths, 5) areas for development, 6) education and career development plans,
as well as 6) goals and objectives for the next evaluating period. The goals and objectives were
checked for compatibility with a participant’s phase, as well as their individualized treatment plan.
REBOUND TEAM ACTIVITY. During this program year, the Rebound Team researched the key
components of a juvenile drug court.
PRO-SOCIAL
ACTIVITIES.
Select pro-social activities for cohort six (60 are listed below.
 The Bransby YMCA
 Tupac Center
 The Next Level
 Kidz 4 Money
-76-
YEAR 6 (2009-2010):
OF THE
PROGRAM RESULTS. For Year six (6) cohort of 30 participants,
there was a 50% graduation rate, and a 63% program completion rate. Of the 15 youth who
graduated from the program, one (1) went on to attend Job Corp, four (4) received certificates of
participation, one (1) was relocated out of state, two (2) were committed to DJJ, one (1) case was
closed, one (1) was on runaway status, two (2) were removed from the program, and four (4)
were referred back to Juvenile Court and put on Probation (3 in DeKalb and 1 in Gwinnett
County). Of those that completed the program 20% abstained from drug usage and did not
reoffend. Overall, 78% of the participants tested positive for drugs at the end of the program.
Even though only 38% reoffended, there remains a large number of participants still engaging in
drug use, which suggests that additional programmatic approaches may be necessary to help the
young men abstain from drug use. Further analysis needs to be done on effective substance
abuse programs and interventions for similar populations in similar communities aimed at
modifying behavior within a 9-12 month time frame.
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT SIX (6). This first case study highlights
the issues and indicators for one successful participant who was a 14 year old African American
male residing with his mother and her boyfriend. The participant was referred to the program for a
burglary charge. Treatment provided by Alliance helped the participant and his mother enhance
their communication, and later sessions highlighted improved communications with the mother’s
boyfriend. Through treatment the participant admitted to being angry because of his father’s
broken promises. There were also unresolved issues regarding a younger brother that he nor the
mother had contact with and how it has affected him. The Rebound Program provided the mother
with a MARTA card to assist with transportation to required sessions and meetings. The
participant tested negative for drugs throughout the program. The participant’s grades fluctuated
over the programmatic timeline, however, by the end of the program the participant had a “C”
average and was promoted to the next grade level.
-77-
YEAR 6 (2009-2010):
.
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT SIX (6). This session profiles another
participant rated to be successful for this cohort.
This participant is a 16 year old African
American male who lives with a mother which scored a very high family engagement score. The
participant was referred to the program for Violation of the Georgia Controlled Substance Act,
known as a VGCSA charge, when the participant tested positive for drugs. Treatment was
provided by Alliance and the participant tested negative for drugs by the end of the program. The
participant discussed collegiate goals and a desire to participate in football and track. The
participant was part of the individualize educational program for children with learning disabilities,
where he maintained a “B/C” average when transferred to Solid Foundation. However, when the
participant transitioned back into his former school he failed all his classes and had to attend
summer school to in an attempt to graduate on time. This participant was the only one among the
“successful ones” to have experienced “lock up” as a sanction for not following the rules.
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT SIX (6). The third successful participant
for this cohort is a 14 year old African American male who alternates between living with his
mother, a blended family, and his grandparents. This participant was referred to the program for
VGCSA and obstruction charges. The participant came to the attention of the court when he was
involved in a car accident leaving school allegedly to distribute and use marijuana. Through
treatment services provided by Pro-Active Management (PMC), he opened up to discuss his
inactive status in a gang he joined when he was 12 so that someone would have his back. The
participant admitted to smoking marijuana to feel happy and its relaxing nature; however from the
beginning of treatment he was open to an alternative. As a child, the participant was mad with his
mother for “taking his father away” when his parents divorced when he was two. The parents
divorced because the father physically abused the mother. His father currently has cancer and
resides with the grandparents. He considered accepting probation over the Rebound program, but
stated that he liked the group and poetry aspect of the program. The participant talked of his love
for his grandparents, being good in math and art, and aspiring to be an electrician, artist,
musician, or barber. At some point , the participant lost interest in the things he enjoyed, however
by the end of the program the participant had an “A/B” average and stopped smoking marijuana.
The participant did begin smoking cigarettes by the end of the program as an alternative.
-78-
YEAR 6 (2009-2010):
A CASE STUDY
OF AN
IN
COHORT SIX (6). The least successful
participant was a 15 year old African American male enrolled due to a VGCSA charge who lived
with his father and uncle at the time of enrollment. The participant received treatment from
Alliance and discussed a desire to “do better.” However, the participant was repeatedly assesses
as having a “bad or negative attitude” and was not in school. He was ordered to reside in a group
home for 30 days, where he went AWOL in which a warrant was issued for his arrest. The
participant’s father spoke with him during his time on the run, but did not assist the Rebound
Program in locating him. Furthermore, the father denounced the Rebound Program and stopped
attending meetings. The youth was detained and revealed that he had impregnated a 20-year old
woman.
-79-
YEAR 6 (2009-2010):
TABLE NO. 36
Cohort Years
Total No.
Graduated
School/ Work
Level of Family
Engagement
Recidivism
Last Drug Screen
Positive
Retention
2009-2010
30
15 (50%)
21 (91%)
7 Not documented
11 (58%)
11 Not documented
14 (54%)
4 Not documented
18 (78%)
7 Not documented
23 (77%)
TABLE NO. 37
Year 6 Cohort Key Indicator Outcomes by Client ID
Recidivism
Last Drug
Screen
Retention
Success
Rating
85%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
-
Yes
-
No
0/3
Yes
75%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3/6
Yes
70%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/6
removed
-
-
No
-
No
1/3
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/5
Graduate
Status
School/
Work
Family
Engaged
16CB1017922009
Graduate
Yes
16CB0227932009
removed
-
15DB0716932009
Graduate
16SB0406932009
15JD0523942009
Client ID
14CG0125962009
Yes
-
Graduate
Yes
100%
No
Positive
Yes
5/6
15IJ1214932009
No
75%
Yes
Positive
Yes
1.5/6
14SJ0111952009
Graduate
Yes
70%
No
Positive
Yes
4/6
16JM0503932009
probation
-
-
-
-
No
0/2
15CO0716932009
Graduate
Yes
65-70%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3/6
15MT0802932009
Graduate
Yes
100%
Yes
Positive
Yes
4/6
16CW0718922009
Graduate
Yes
No
Negative
Yes
5/5
15KW0820932009
closed
Yes
45%
No
Positive
Yes
3/6
16GA0225932009
Graduate
-
85%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3/6
14JC0815952009
Graduate
Yes
65%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3/6
16CG1010922009
Graduate
Yes
95%
Yes
Positive
Yes
4/6
16WJ0723932009
Graduate
Yes
80%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
16JM0705932009
closed
0
80%
No
Negative
Yes
4/6
14ZM0623952009
Graduate
Yes
90%
No
Positive
Yes
5/6
15TM0413942009
Graduate
Yes
90%
No
Positive
Yes
5/6
15BL1216932009
djj
Yes
60%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2/6
Yes
Positive
Yes
2/6
16CG1013922009
-
-
16XB0420932009
closed
Yes
14BD0102952009
Graduate
Yes
90%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
16MH0705932009
Graduate
Yes
80%
No
Positive
Yes
5/6
14WB1214942009
djj
Yes
-
Yes
-
No
1/4
16VT0305932009
Yes
-
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/5
15MC0117942009
probation
-
-
-
-
No
0/2
probation
-
-
-
-
No
0/2
probation
-
-
-
-
No
0/2
15GM0903932009
-80-
YEAR 7 (2010-2011)
PROGRAM RESULTS
YEAR 7 (2010-2011):
As part of the summative evaluation analysis, seven (70 baseline indicators were selected to
better understand the demographics and key characteristics of young people enrolled in the
Rebound Program. The seven (7) indicators selected to measure baseline characteristics include:
age, race, guardianship status, school status, school performance, drug screening, and drug
charge status. The 2010-11 cohort’s baseline measure are presented in the table below, and is
TABLE NO. 38
RACE &
COHORT YEARS
2010 - 2011
TOTAL
NO.
AGE AT
ETHNICITY
ENTRY
(AFRICAN
AMERICAN)
21
15.5
AA-90%
Hispanic -5%
Bi-racial -5%
4 Not documented
KEY DEMOGRAPHICS.
GUARDIAN
Both parents 14%
Mother only 57%
Grandparent(s) 19%
Other 11%
SCHOOL STATUS
(IS=IN SCHOOL)
IS 95%
2 Not documented
AT LEAST A “C”
POSITIVE DRUG
AVERAGE
SCREENING
DRUG
CHARGE
79%
24%
0%
14 Not documented
1 NA
2 Not documented
In year seven (7), over thirty juvenile offenders were referred to the
Rebound Program and after initial assessment and review by the team, twenty-one (21) youth
were enrolled. Among the twenty-one (21) participants, 90% were African Americans, 5% were
Hispanic, and 5% bi-racial.
JUVENILE OFFENSES
AND
DRUG
USE.
Four (4) out of five young people enrolled (79%) tested
positive for drugs; and another one (1) out of five (24%) had a drug charge at time of enrollment.
SCHOOL STATUS. At time of program entry 95 % of the participants were in school, however none
of them had a C or above average. It is important to note this was the highest number of
participants enrolled in school at time of entry.
FAMILY
STATUS.
Youth entering the program had very diverse family and guardianship
arrangements. There were three (3) who lived with both parents, 12 lived with single mothers, four
(4) resided with grandparents, and two (2) others had alternative living conditions.
-82-
YEAR 7 (2010-2011):
IMPROVED EFFORTS
TO
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
DOCUMENT
AND
OBTAIN PROGRAMMATIC FEEDBACK. In year seven (7) the
Rebound Team began to store data electronically as a way to begin “institutionalizing” data
management. In addition, Rebound staff implemented a phone-based parental feedback process
with thirteen parents associated with the year seven (7) cohort completing.
Ms. Bayyinah
Shaheed, a Rebound Team member and counselor and founder of Be Smart! Don’t Start!, Inc.,
conducted the phone-based interviews. Common themes among participating parents included
the need for: (1) more parenting class, (2) continuum of service upon program completion, and (3)
more stringent and different types of sanctions for continued drug use in particular.
TEAM-BUILDING RETREAT
AMONG
KEY PARTNERS. The Rebound Team had a team building retreat
in the Summer of 2011 at Stone Mountain Park. Select agenda items included reviewing the past
year of services, and assuring congruence amongst team members on the mission, goals, vision,
processes and key components of the Rebound Program and Team. There was also a discussion
on what programmatic changes, including new partnerships, enhanced policies and procedural
details. Recommended changes in governing policies and procedure guidelines were prepared
to be discussed during the next scheduled Drug Advisory Board Meeting. Also discussed were
the parental feedback which centered on increased family caucuses, and additional individual
level components and counseling for youth with unique needs and the need for a more efficient
drug testing process.
CHANGES
IN
CASE MANAGEMENT, REPORTING,
AND
REVIEW. In year seven (7), the Juvenile Drug
Court changed it case management process in that different groups of youth were required to
report to court on different days. Case management caucuses were held at least once with every
enrolled participant.
SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT. Substance abuse treatment was provided by the ABC/Alliance
for Change, Potter’s House, and Pro-Active Management Consulting.
PRO-SOCIAL
ACTIVITIES.
Pro-social activities for this cohort included a camping and fishing trip, as
well as participation in sessions led by Next Level, Fire Explorer Program, and CARES.
-83-
YEAR 7 (2010-2011):
TABLE NO. 39
COHORT SEVEN (7): OUTCOMES BY KEY INDICATORS (AGGREGATE)
Cohort Years
Total No.
Graduated
School/ Work
2010-2011
21
8 (38%)
9 (82%)
4 Not documented
6 NA
Level of Family
Engagement
Recidivism
Last Drug Screen
Positive
Retention
12 (86%)
7 Not documented
7 (37%)
2 Not documented
14 (78%)
3 Not documented
14 (93%)
6 NA
TABLE NO. 40
COHORT SEVEN (7): OUTCOMES BY KEY INDICATORS (INDIVIDUAL)
Client ID
Graduate
Status
School/
Work
17RJ0602932010
Graduate
Yes
15XJ1004942010
16AP1030932010
Graduate
15AS0817942010
Family
Engaged
Recidivism
80%
No
Yes
75%
No
85%/90%
No
15AA0725942010
Graduate
13DH1220962010
17DK0709932010
16JS0424942010
Last Drug
Screen
Retention
Success
Rating
Positive
Yes
5/6
No
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
No
Negative
Yes
5/6
100%
Yes
Positive
Yes
2.5/6
-
85%
No
Positive
Yes
4/5
-
100%
No
Positive
Yes
3.5/5
Graduate
-
100%/90%
No
Negative
Yes
5/5
Graduate
Yes
100%
No
Positive
Yes
5/6
16DT0111942010
Graduate
Yes
100%
No
Positive
Yes
5/6
16TW0215942010
-
75%
No
Positive
Yes
2.5/5
16JB0419942010
Yes
100%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
14DD1108952010
Yes
85%
Yes
Positive
Yes
3.5/6
17JN0524932010
Graduate
Yes
85%
No
Positive
Yes
5/6
14JP0917952010
Graduate
Yes
90%
No
Negative
Yes
6/6
16HB1005932010
NA
-
No
-
NA
1/2
15OJ0629942010
Removed from the Program
NA
-
-
Positive
NA
0/2
17AW0206932010
Referred Back Court
NA
-
Yes
-
NA
0/2
15AF0403952010
Referred Back Court-DJJ
NA
-
Yes
Positive
NA
0/3
16CD0617942010
Removed from the Program
NA
-
Yes
-
NA
0/2
15RF0106952010
Referred Back Court-DJJ
Yes
-
Yes
Negative
No
2/5
16CP0804932010
Removed from Program-Closed
Case
NA
0/2
NA
-
-
Positive
-84-
YEAR 7 (2010-2011):
OF THE
PROGRAM RESULTS. At the end of the programmatic year, 8
youth graduated from the program, 6 received certificates of participation, 3 were referred back to
Juvenile Court in which 2 were committed to DJJ, and 4 were removed from the program in which
2 were on runaway status, 1 case was closed, and 1 was locked up for new charges. 12 (86%)
parents/guardians of the youth participants actively participated in the Rebound Program which is
approximately a 30% increase from Year 2, which has the second highest amount of parent
participants. The retention rate was 93% with a graduation rate of 38% and completion rate of
67%. 78% still remained to test positive at the end of the program and recidivism was less than
40%; therefore not reaching the goal of having at least 60% of the youth to not reoffend.
A CASE STUDY
OF A
IN
COHORT SEVEN (7). The most successful
participant in cohort seven (7) was a 14 year old African American male who resided with his
mother and stepfather. The participant was referred to the Rebound Program for a VGCSA
charge. A friend asked him to hold some marijuana for them and he was expelled from middle
school and charged with attempting to sell/distribute drugs in a school zone. Treatment was
provided by PMC, where the participant acknowledged the fact that he hangs with the wrong
crowd which originated when his parents separated. At the time of separation, the participant
lived in South Carolina with his father, who the mother alleges physically, emotionally, and
possibly sexually abused the participant. The participant was sent to Georgia to live with mother
because he did not get along with step mother. The participant was diagnosed and treated for
ADHD where he assessed to be aggressive and minimized problems. The participants has
improved in the home and school environment and continued to test negative throughout the
program. A tutorial was provided by the program to assist the youth in passing classes.
A CASE STUDY
OF AN
IN
COHORT SEVEN (7). An unsuccessful
participant was a 15 year old African American male that lived with his grandmother. The Potter’s
House provided treatment; however, the participant’s progression throughout the program
fluctuated in that he would have periods of improvement, but reverted back to diluents behavior.
The participant was expelled from Solid Foundation for fighting. The participant refused to take his
medication. The participant was labeled as “manipulative” in justifying his actions. The participant
ended the program with a certificate of participation.
-85-
IV. CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS: OVERALL
THE PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH. The DeKalb County Juvenile Court Rebound Program provides
an intensive behavior modification intervention program utilizing a comprehensive team approach
to substance abuse among juvenile offenders. A dedicated team of professionals representing
key stakeholders in the community works closely together to help juvenile offenders with
substance abuse issues begin recovery, improve social functioning in school and at home, and
cease criminal activity. Based on the DeKalb County’s population distribution, the Rebound
Program has effectively served 95% of African American juvenile offenders referred to the
program since its inception. Additionally, there is sufficient programmatic evidence to conclude
that the Rebound Program successfully partnered with diverse community-based organizations to
provide an array of services and opportunities for social enhancement for young people in the
program. Programmatic trend data suggests that partnerships strengthened over time as the
Rebound Program team appears to have quality improvements and self-evaluation as a part of its
standard operating procedures. Such a strong programmatic approach resulted in participants
reducing drug use by 5%. Overall the program has 47% recidivism rate, which is very close to
the goal of 60% of it’s participants not reoffended. Sixty-six percent of the participants actually
completed the program with 38% achieving the outcomes needed to be declared as a “program
graduate.”
SUBSTANCE
USE AND
TREATMENT. For the population served, marijuana was the primary drug of
choice, with some participants testing positive for other drugs. Data analysis revealed that some
young people were ashamed to admit they were taking antidepressants, but remained accepting
of marijuana to self-medicate. Clearly, this issue reflects work that needs to be done in the
community as a whole to reduce the stigma and shame associated with mental health treatment
and to educate young people on the harm associated with using marijuana as self-medication.
THE NEED
FOR A
STRONGER AFTER CARE COMPONENT. The Rebound Program works intensely
with enrolled participants for a nine to twelve month long program. The data on recidivism after
graduation suggests that young people need to remain connected to the discipline of compliance
and care for longer periods of time. Adolescents responses to recovery in general is different from
that of adults in that youth require a lot of reinforcement and constant structure and direction to
remain in compliance with treatment mandates. There is a great concern in particular for young
people who transition back into high-risk homes and begin re-associating with high-risk peers.
-87-
CONCLUSIONS: PROGRAM RESOURCES
COLLABORATIVE PARTNERSHIPS.
The Rebound Drug Court Team is a multi-faceted team.
Program documentation indicates that there is consistency in goals and strategies among
collaborating partners. The team approach is effective in providing comprehensive services and
treatment to the participants and their families by building partnerships within the community in an
effort to provide access to recreations opportunities, educational programs, community service
work, and financial assistance.
Most important, there is sufficient data to conclude that the
presiding Judge has demonstrated a balanced approach to “sanctions and service”.
This
approach has resulted in her being respected among parents and staff associated with the
Rebound Team.
SANCTIONS. Sanctions are used by the Rebound Team to increase compliance with treatment and
other rules that juvenile offenders are required to follow, including school attendance and curfew.
Parents from cohort seven (7) expressed concerns that sanctions were not used effectively with
some 39% believing that the sanctions should be tougher. In essence, parents confided that
young people viewed weekend lock up “as a joke”. Stronger sanctions present as a problem on
some level and will require the Rebound team to be more creative with sanctions. While the court
would like to do the “unexpected” in terms of tougher sanctions, the core of the program is to
serve as an alternative to jail. Thus, weekend and holiday lockup is enforced to accommodate
school attendance as educational attainment is a key indicator of participant success. Typical
sanction guidelines are presented in Table no. 41.
TABLE NO. 41
SANCTIONS
SCHOOL SUSPENSION
Report to Probation Officers at 9 am to spend
the whole day
Community Service
Reduce curfew time
SCHOOL VIOLATION
Write a book report (Ex: Georgia high school
dropout rate or limited career options without
HS diploma or GED)
Reduce curfew time
Electronic Monitor
House arrest without electronic monitor
Monitor with 3 page report
Additional thirty minutes to an hour added to
study time
Reduce curfew with completion of 3-5 page
essay
CURFEW VIOLATION
STUDY LOG VIOLATION
-88-
CONCLUSIONS: PROGRAM RESOURCES
THE TREATMENT TEAM. The Rebound Team prioritizes the treatment process and has continued
to work with providers who are able to service young people with varying access to healthcare
insurance. The main challenge is access to residential treatment beds for this population. Future
fundraising and program enhancement should center on filling this gap in treatment service.
There remains some administrative activities involved in securing medical insurance that involves
parental/guardian involvement to complete paperwork and provide financial disclosures. To the
Rebound Program’s credit, ineffective treatment providers were released from the partnership
and, as of this summative evaluation, the current list of treatment providers appear to be effective
in reaching, retaining, and changing the behaviors of this population.
THE DRUG COURT ADVISORY BOARD. The Drug Court Advisory Board and the Rebound Drug
Court Team are comprised of the same individuals. Currently, the Board meets as issues arise.
Based on best practices, the Board might consider including past participants and parents of past
participants and schedule regular meetings with sufficient documentation of attendance and
discussions.
Agenda items for recurring meetings might include discussions about program
recommendations, conduct internal quality assurance checks, review program policies and
procedures, documents, and forms, update materials to reflect current program procedures, and
discuss next steps and the future of the Rebound Program.
TRAININGS. Training and team-building retreats are part of the model. Recent examples include
staff having attended the Georgia Drug, DUI and Mental Health Conference in the Summer 2011,
as well as convening a Drug Court Team retreat. Such activities enhance knowledge and
strengthen the team’s capacity to achieve is collective goals.
-89-
CONCLUSIONS: PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
REFERRALS. The referral process is the first activity and process in the program. Therefore data
collection at this point is essential. An accurate account of the process and capturing every
referred youth’s baseline data is essential to understanding the program. There are referral forms
for the Rebound Program and the treatment and auxiliary agencies; however, in the later years
these forms were not included in the clients file. The programs provide tailored interventions to
the complex and varied needs of the participants and their families via individualized
comprehensive treatment plans. There appears to be a relationship between early assessment
and access to treatment and successful graduation among participants who received a
comprehensive bio-psycho-social assessment immediately upon entry.
CASE PROCESSING. The Rebound Team conducts weekly team meetings for case processing.
During this time each member reports on individual participants. Incentives and sanctions are
determined, family caucuses are scheduled as necessary, and recommendations are made on
next steps for each individual. This activity is key to the program and contributes to the continued
cohesiveness of the team.
PARENTING CLASS. Based on the 2011 parental feedback, the overall satisfaction rating for the
parenting class was a 4.25 (out of 5.0). Among the parents completing the feedback process,
38% expressed a desire for more parental classes. Parents were concerned with the high rates of
staff turnover at the Potter’s House because it interfered with receiving adequate and consistent
treatment.
.
-90-
CONCLUSIONS: PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
THE PHASE APPROACH. From an evaluation standpoint, all activities associated with each phase
should have direct outputs for enhanced accountability and reporting. These re-occurring
activities include monitoring, parental/guardian reports, school report review, probation officer
check-ins, and random curfew check calls, treatment, pro-social activities, court hearings, and
drug screenings. In the past year, a majority of the data is captured on the weekly treatment
report form, which is key in building evaluation capacity. However, to better capture the activities
completed and by whom, attendance sheet need to be collected for all mandatory appearances,
including court , treatment, or pro-social activity, and then entered into a database for tracking
and reporting. This process will assist with knowing when a participant is due for phase
promotion. The maintenance of a “treatment journal”, is an essential data collection method and
can be useful in assessing progression on a day-to-day basis. This data can be kept in the
participant’s file and referenced as part of the continued assessment process.
GRADUATION. Upon successful completion of the Rebound Program and satisfaction of all other
court requirements, participants are eligible for graduation and to have criminal charges
dismissed. Graduation ceremonies are held for the participants to be recognized in front of their
families .
PHASE V. Phase V activities were not assessed as part of the summative evaluation due to lack
of information and data as required for evaluation purposes. Aftercare is critical to the
participant’s longer term success, this special attention is needed to document the activities and
progression of young people in this phase. Additionally, there needs to be clarification on when
phase V begins, and who can participate in the aftercare program. There is concern among some
parents that cases are being closed without proper after care planning.
-91-
CONCLUSIONS: PROGRAM OUTPUTS
ATTENDANCE. Attendance at various programmatic components is a key process indicator that
helps predict overall programmatic success with high attendance being directly related to high
rates of completion/graduation. However, for the Rebound Program, attendance logs were not
collected systemically for the majority of the program activities and court hearings and sessions.
Some efforts to record attendance included making notes in client treatment reports. Additionally,
attendance was taken for many of the community or pro-social programs.
SCHOOL. Transcripts, student inquiry, incident history, and attendance query are part of the
school monitoring process. There are special times when process notes are taken due to a visit
at the school. Adequate data collection and reporting methods are in place to monitor school
performance and behavior. The school system team representative has made it easy for youth to
enroll into schools once expelled or facilitating a transfer to a more conducive school environment
for select youth. Some criminal charges were committed on school grounds. 86 % of the youth
are enrolled in school upon entering the program and 61% have least than a “C” average. The
participants have very low GPA’s and therefore the team continues to prioritize partnering with
diverse programs to assist those youth who have met the requirements to obtain a GED, attend
Youth Challenge Academy or other academy programs, or DeKalb Workforce Development.
TEAM MEETINGS.
Weekly Drug Court Team meetings are held before court sessions on
Wednesdays. For evaluation and documentation purposes, these meetings should have a written
agenda even if the items are same from week to week.
TREATMENT.
All participants completed a comprehensive bio-psycho-social assessment.
Random drug screens were conducted among all participants receiving substance abuse
intervention services. The team reached a 38% program completion/graduation rate. Of those
completing the program, 53% have not reoffended to date.
-92-
CONCLUSIONS: OUTCOMES
RETENTION. Keeping participants in the Rebound Program is an essential and crucial element to
recovery. If the participant is removed from the program, they usually do not continue to receive
treatment, which reduces the likelihood of success. Some participant receive visits by counselors
while detained. Nevertheless, not everyone remains in the program for various reasons. Some
participants need to be removed from the program and adjudicated, others are released to be
placed in a more intensive residential treatment program. Since the inception of the program, 153
youth were referred to the program, 48 were released from the program because of indictment on
new charges, not meeting criteria specification for the Rebound Program, or case closed. In these
cases the juvenile is referred back to Juvenile court where other actions are put in place such as
being committed to DFCS or DJJ, put on probation, and or relocated to a different state or county.
The overall retention rate is 79%.
RECIDIVISM. Recidivism is one of the key indicators used to judge the effectiveness of criminal
justice-based programs. Therefore, recidivism is one of the primary performance measurements
for the Rebound Program. Only 64 participants were rearrested or adjudicated for a new charge
during or after the program. The programs goal of at least 60% of program participants not
committing a re-offense was not met; however it was close at 53%.
DRUG USE. The Rebound Team provide recovery-oriented therapy to their participants and
employ frequent drug screenings to determine participant progress and/or relapse. Many of the
resources of the DeKalb County Juvenile Drug Court Rebound Program focus on reducing the
use of AOD among its participants. Since its inception, 100% of the program participants received
systematic random drug screens with a total of 73 participants who remain to have positive drug
screen results at the end of the program. The tests were positive for several drugs such as
cocaine, amphetamines, marijuana, methamphetamines, and opiates; however marijuana was
the most popular drug of choice. Treatment providers have brought the topic of new drug testing
kits up for discussion due to the occasional tests being identified as diluted. The cost
effectiveness of the new drug test is being researched to delineate the issue.
-93-
CONCLUSIONS: OUTCOMES
PHASE PROMOTIONS. A promotion to the next phase indicates that the participant is performing
successfully in the program where a certificates of completion are awarded for each completed
phase. A total of 57 participants successfully graduated from the Rebound Program and 44
received certificates of participation for their efforts in the program and continued on to aftercare
where they are eligible to graduate with the upcoming cohort based on their ability to stay drug
free.
EDUCATION. Education is strongly emphasized by the Rebound Program. 88% of the participants
remained in school during the program. This includes participation in alternative education
programs such as Faith Academy Home School, Department of Labor, DeKalb Workforce, Open
Campus and Gateway. The Judge monitors progress closely, and requires that participants
maintain a study log. One goal for the team is to reduce the high school dropout rate among its
participants, which has shown to be positively and linearly related to employment earnings. By
the end of the program the percentage of youth that were in school increased by 2%. A total of
20% of the participants pursued alternative education and job workforce programs. Either school
or working was a daily required term of the program.
FAMILY ENGAGEMENT
AND INVOLVEMENT.
Parental involvement is mandatory for the Rebound
Program where parent(s)/guardian(s) are required to attend and participate in select sessions
with their adolescents, attend all parent and teacher conferences, and participate and cooperate
with any other services deemed necessary by the team. Despite mandatory involvement for
parents, the overall level of family engagement is 47% for all participants since the program
began.
-94-
RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
CONTINUE
TO BUILD
EVALUATION CAPACITY. In an effort to build evaluation capacity among all
Rebound Program Partners, we recommend an evaluation workshop. Such a workshop would
address the value of evaluation, discuss best practices in juvenile drug court program reporting,
review program indicators and measures, review logic models and matching activities with
outcomes, discuss strategies for institutionalizing data collection, assist with data collection tools
development and utilization, and how to manage and store data for evaluation purposes.
BUILD
UPON THE CASE STUDY ANALYSIS.
Individual participant data was used to build a case study
framework to determine the most successful and lease successful participants. The evaluation
team recommends conducting in person interviews away from the court with 10 successful and
10 unsuccessful participants Knowledge gleaned from these interviews can provide details on
how to strengthen very effective program components. To the extent possible, parents of
successful and unsuccessful participants should be interviewed separate from their child.
IN-DEPTH
INTERVIEWS WITH
REBOUND PROGRAM TEAM MEMBERS. Individual team member
interviews and interviews with partners would be beneficial to the overall effectiveness of the
program. In particular, such interviews may help tease out underlying issues as to why the
programmatic effect does not last for longer periods of time after program completion.
DEVELOP
A MORE STRUCTURED APPROACH TO AFTERCARE AND RELAPSE PREVENTION.
A definite
and comprehensive aftercare program following treatment completion is needed. In some years
participants who did not meet the requirements for graduation were allowed to remain in the
program.
ESTABLISH
PROGRAM CAPACITY LIMITS TO INCREASE PROGRAM INTENSITY.
The number of youth
enrolled each year fluctuated and there were no guidelines on “program capacity.” By having a
capacity limit for the program allows the team and especially the treatment providers, to focus an
adequate amount of time on treating and engaging each participant, while limiting paperwork for
each additional participant beyond “capacity.”
-95-
RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THE SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
CREATE
A SEPARATE HANDBOOK FOR PARENTS TO OUTLINE THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES.
The program is
making progress towards parental/family engagement. Currently, parent(s)/guardian(s) have a
section in the program handbook that discuss their responsibilities. There should be a separate
handbook for parents to include an overview of the program, all the treatment providers, and the
supporting service agencies. It should include in detail all their responsibilities, a key contact list,
a calendar or schedule for all meetings, hearings, sessions, and activities indicating who must
attend.
INVEST
IN A
SHARED PROGRAM DATABASE SYSTEM. The drug court team could benefit from the
implementation of a database that can be accessed by all team members. The database will be
updated regularly and includes all participant past and present records to help monitor and
evaluate the program.
-96-
We give voice to vulnerable people everywhere
MESSAGES
OF
EMPOWERMENT PRODUCTIONS, LLC
3355 Lenox Road * Suite 730 * Atlanta, GA 30326
(678) 510-1719 * www.team-moe.com

the rebound program - Messages of Empowerment Productions, LLC

Transcription

Similar documents

Atlantis Hotel Dubia HSA Club.ai

Team Offense Instruction and 3 on 3 Games Free Reversible Jersey

Columbus KKC Flyer 2013 - Columbus Cocker Rescue!

SMOKENDERS ENROLMENT FORM

Columbus KKC Flyer 2016_3

More effective short term therapy Better pain and fall management

Michael Pachelo

Math Tier 2

flexible spending account enrollment form

Winter Registration.xlsx