Designing case management systems in juvenile justice contexts

Elizabeth Moore

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This paper applies principles, dimensions and functions of case management models adopted in the community care sector to juvenile justice intervention. Consecutive ideological shifts in the official response to juvenile offending began with the separation in the early 20th century of juvenile offenders from adult criminal courts and corrections programmes. The result has been changes in the emphasis on welfare, justice, crime prevention and restorative justice principles in models of intervention. The 1970's 'nothing works' literature in corrections brought into question the rehabilitative efficacy of the welfare approach to intervention with both adults and juveniles. It provided a rationale for 'just deserts' thinking and an emphasis on surveillance programmes, and subsequently for strategies to divert selected offenders from formal intervention. The more recent 'What Works?' literature sheds optimism over the effectiveness of rehabilitative interventions that aim to reduce juvenile recidivism. Contemporary juvenile justice systems consist of a complex mix of primary, secondary and tertiary interventions. Practitioner decisions about whether and how to intervene with an individual offender are increasingly based on the application of pre-tested 'risk' and 'criminogenic needs' assessment instruments developed to provide a foundation for planned intervention and measurable outcomes. This practice context, marked by specialized assessment instruments and a complex mix of specialised interventions, calls for an overarching and systematic approach to intervention. While case management systems have not attracted a great deal of attention from juvenile justice researchers and administrators, examples drawn from the literature demonstrate the applicability of 'minimal', 'coordination' and 'comprehensive' models of case management, evident in the community care sector, to the juvenile justice context. Ozanne's (1990) dimensions of case management provide a usframework to assist system design.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3-9
Number of pages7
JournalAustralian Journal of Case Management
Volume6
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2004

Fingerprint

case management
justice
offender
welfare
juvenile offender
crime prevention
optimism
desert
community
surveillance

Cite this

@article{a8860884900840c9876645f3b3d5191a,
title = "Designing case management systems in juvenile justice contexts",
abstract = "This paper applies principles, dimensions and functions of case management models adopted in the community care sector to juvenile justice intervention. Consecutive ideological shifts in the official response to juvenile offending began with the separation in the early 20th century of juvenile offenders from adult criminal courts and corrections programmes. The result has been changes in the emphasis on welfare, justice, crime prevention and restorative justice principles in models of intervention. The 1970's 'nothing works' literature in corrections brought into question the rehabilitative efficacy of the welfare approach to intervention with both adults and juveniles. It provided a rationale for 'just deserts' thinking and an emphasis on surveillance programmes, and subsequently for strategies to divert selected offenders from formal intervention. The more recent 'What Works?' literature sheds optimism over the effectiveness of rehabilitative interventions that aim to reduce juvenile recidivism. Contemporary juvenile justice systems consist of a complex mix of primary, secondary and tertiary interventions. Practitioner decisions about whether and how to intervene with an individual offender are increasingly based on the application of pre-tested 'risk' and 'criminogenic needs' assessment instruments developed to provide a foundation for planned intervention and measurable outcomes. This practice context, marked by specialized assessment instruments and a complex mix of specialised interventions, calls for an overarching and systematic approach to intervention. While case management systems have not attracted a great deal of attention from juvenile justice researchers and administrators, examples drawn from the literature demonstrate the applicability of 'minimal', 'coordination' and 'comprehensive' models of case management, evident in the community care sector, to the juvenile justice context. Ozanne's (1990) dimensions of case management provide a usframework to assist system design.",
author = "Elizabeth Moore",
note = "Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: Journal title (773t) = Australian Journal of Case Management. ISSNs: 1832-6773;",
year = "2004",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "3--9",
journal = "Australian Journal of Case Management",
issn = "1832-6773",
number = "2",

}

Designing case management systems in juvenile justice contexts. / Moore, Elizabeth.

In: Australian Journal of Case Management, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2004, p. 3-9.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Designing case management systems in juvenile justice contexts

AU - Moore, Elizabeth

N1 - Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: Journal title (773t) = Australian Journal of Case Management. ISSNs: 1832-6773;

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - This paper applies principles, dimensions and functions of case management models adopted in the community care sector to juvenile justice intervention. Consecutive ideological shifts in the official response to juvenile offending began with the separation in the early 20th century of juvenile offenders from adult criminal courts and corrections programmes. The result has been changes in the emphasis on welfare, justice, crime prevention and restorative justice principles in models of intervention. The 1970's 'nothing works' literature in corrections brought into question the rehabilitative efficacy of the welfare approach to intervention with both adults and juveniles. It provided a rationale for 'just deserts' thinking and an emphasis on surveillance programmes, and subsequently for strategies to divert selected offenders from formal intervention. The more recent 'What Works?' literature sheds optimism over the effectiveness of rehabilitative interventions that aim to reduce juvenile recidivism. Contemporary juvenile justice systems consist of a complex mix of primary, secondary and tertiary interventions. Practitioner decisions about whether and how to intervene with an individual offender are increasingly based on the application of pre-tested 'risk' and 'criminogenic needs' assessment instruments developed to provide a foundation for planned intervention and measurable outcomes. This practice context, marked by specialized assessment instruments and a complex mix of specialised interventions, calls for an overarching and systematic approach to intervention. While case management systems have not attracted a great deal of attention from juvenile justice researchers and administrators, examples drawn from the literature demonstrate the applicability of 'minimal', 'coordination' and 'comprehensive' models of case management, evident in the community care sector, to the juvenile justice context. Ozanne's (1990) dimensions of case management provide a usframework to assist system design.

AB - This paper applies principles, dimensions and functions of case management models adopted in the community care sector to juvenile justice intervention. Consecutive ideological shifts in the official response to juvenile offending began with the separation in the early 20th century of juvenile offenders from adult criminal courts and corrections programmes. The result has been changes in the emphasis on welfare, justice, crime prevention and restorative justice principles in models of intervention. The 1970's 'nothing works' literature in corrections brought into question the rehabilitative efficacy of the welfare approach to intervention with both adults and juveniles. It provided a rationale for 'just deserts' thinking and an emphasis on surveillance programmes, and subsequently for strategies to divert selected offenders from formal intervention. The more recent 'What Works?' literature sheds optimism over the effectiveness of rehabilitative interventions that aim to reduce juvenile recidivism. Contemporary juvenile justice systems consist of a complex mix of primary, secondary and tertiary interventions. Practitioner decisions about whether and how to intervene with an individual offender are increasingly based on the application of pre-tested 'risk' and 'criminogenic needs' assessment instruments developed to provide a foundation for planned intervention and measurable outcomes. This practice context, marked by specialized assessment instruments and a complex mix of specialised interventions, calls for an overarching and systematic approach to intervention. While case management systems have not attracted a great deal of attention from juvenile justice researchers and administrators, examples drawn from the literature demonstrate the applicability of 'minimal', 'coordination' and 'comprehensive' models of case management, evident in the community care sector, to the juvenile justice context. Ozanne's (1990) dimensions of case management provide a usframework to assist system design.

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 3

EP - 9

JO - Australian Journal of Case Management

JF - Australian Journal of Case Management

SN - 1832-6773

IS - 2

ER -