The authors evaluated Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act–funded programs in Los Angeles that work with at-promise youth (i.e., youth at risk of justice-system involvement). The programs, based in public housing sites and public parks, promote positive youth development and deter youth from engaging in delinquent behavior. The authors identify facilitators and barriers to program implementation and recommend ways to improve program outcomes.

Evaluation of Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act–Funded Programs for At-Promise Youth In Los Angeles County

Laura Whitaker, Alexandra Mendoza-Graf, Tara Laila Blagg, Curtis Smith IV, Nastassia Reed, Sierra Smucker, Aarya Suryavanshi, Susan Turner, Stephanie Brooks Holliday

ResearchPublished Jan 6, 2025

At-promise youth, who are youth at risk of becoming involved with the juvenile justice system, are often most at risk of engaging in dangerous or delinquent behavior after school hours, in the evenings, and on weekends. Living in an unsafe community, particularly a community with gang and drug activity, exacerbates these risks. How, then, can local governments help at-promise youth minimize these risks while giving youth opportunities to thrive?

The Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA) provides counties with funding to support programs that have proven their effectiveness in curbing crime among at-promise youth and youth currently involved in the juvenile justice system. In Los Angeles County, JJCPA funding supports several programs that work with at-promise youth and focus on mitigating the aforementioned risks.

In this report, the authors present their evaluation of JJCPA-funded programs operated by five departments or agencies in Los Angeles County or the City of Los Angeles. The authors interviewed staff members from each of the programs and reviewed program data from 2019 through 2023 to identify facilitators and barriers to program implementation. Part of a series of evaluation reports for JJCPA-funded programs in the Los Angeles area, this report presents findings and recommendations for the programs of interest.

Key Findings

  • The evaluated programs make programming available after school, in the evenings, and on weekends, and programming primarily occurs in public parks or public housing complexes.
  • The programs provide mentorship, skill building, and access to resources and activities that youth might not otherwise have.
  • The programs largely serve Black and Hispanic youth ages ten to 18 who live in disadvantaged neighborhoods or neighborhoods with high levels of gang or other illegal activity.
  • Many factors have facilitated the programs' implementation, such as structured programming frameworks, program staff's ability to tailor services to youth's needs and interests, and many staff members' personal connection to the local communities that they serve.
  • Program staff also face several implementation challenges: limited funding and staffing shortages; difficulties engaging with youth, safely transporting youth to the programs, and building trust with youth; and a lack of services that better address the needs of the marginalized youth that programs serve.

Recommendations

  • Provide additional and flexible funding to support new activities or allow programs to address logistical barriers to youth participation, such as a lack of transportation to program sites.
  • Additional funding could allow programs to add more staff capacity by increasing the number of staff in existing positions or creating new roles (e.g., a case manager).
  • Hiring staff from the local communities the programs serve would improve client and community engagement. Programs should also ensure that staff have sufficient access to professional-development opportunities and training.
  • Programs should tailor or augment the programming to meet the diverse local population's needs, such as by translating program materials in languages besides English and hiring staff members who speak those other languages.
  • Programs looking to improve on their existing data collection can consult the JJCPA data collection toolkit, which RAND developed specifically to support programs in collecting data relevant to an evaluation.

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: Los Angeles County Probation Department
  • Publisher: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Web-Only
  • Year: 2025
  • Pages: 75
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RRA3217-4
  • Document Number: RR-A3217-4

Citation

RAND Style Manual

Whitaker, Laura, Alexandra Mendoza-Graf, Tara Laila Blagg, Curtis Smith IV, Nastassia Reed, Sierra Smucker, Aarya Suryavanshi, Susan Turner, and Stephanie Brooks Holliday, Evaluation of Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act–Funded Programs for At-Promise Youth In Los Angeles County, RAND Corporation, RR-A3217-4, 2025. As of May 1, 2025: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3217-4.html

Chicago Manual of Style

Whitaker, Laura, Alexandra Mendoza-Graf, Tara Laila Blagg, Curtis Smith IV, Nastassia Reed, Sierra Smucker, Aarya Suryavanshi, Susan Turner, and Stephanie Brooks Holliday, Evaluation of Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act–Funded Programs for At-Promise Youth In Los Angeles County. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2025. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3217-4.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

This research was sponsored by the Los Angeles County Probation Department and conducted within the Justice Policy Program of RAND Social and Economic Well-Being.

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.