Criminology Research Council grant ; (3/75)
This project involved the development of a methodology for the evaluation of community based treatment programs for adolescent offenders. As such, methodological questions associated with the effectiveness and value of evaluation methods were confronted and traditional assumptions about methodology were questioned.
In this context an experimental approach using random allocation of experimental and control subjects between community based and institutional based services was initially proposed. As the literature was explored and the problems of actually implementing the study were considered, the researchers became aware of difficulties intrinsic to the experimental approach, such as the ethical problems of random allocation in a welfare service, and the problem of controlling variables such as length of stay, community interaction, and program stability in an open system.
It was decided consequently, to develop a methodology for studying the organisation, and as part of that methodology to study the functioning of individual Community Treatment Programs but within the context of the juvenile justice system of Victoria. The document outlining this methodology is entitled 'A Methodology for Organisational Analysis'. This includes: (1) a network analysis of the Juvenile Justice sub-systems in Victoria (i.e., Police, Courts, Social Welfare Department). (2) examples of methodology to estimate costs of processing an individual at different points in the system. (3) development of indicators of progress within each sub-system (i.e., statements of desirable outcomes at different points of intervention within the system).
The synthesis of this material was intended to provide the basis for the decision-making needed in program policy review and formulation. It was not expected to give precise answers but at least to focus clearly on options. The proposal in its present form is seen by the Department as an important basis for studying the system and particular programs within it. As such, it represents substantial progress in the development of an evaluative methodology.