Presents findings from the pre-release and post-release interviews conducted with juveniles from four programs funded by the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative and comparison juveniles who did not receive services.

“The Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) funded agencies in 2003 to develop programs to improve criminal justice, employment, education, health, and housing outcomes for released prisoners...The sample included 152 juvenile males who were enrolled in SVORI programs and 185 comparison juvenile males who did not receive SVORI programming. The data presented in this report described characteristics of the respondents, as well as their experiences preconfinement, during confinement, and post-confinement. Differences between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents were presented for three purposes: to assess prerelease comparability between groups, to assess whether SVORI participation increased access to programs and services, and to assess the impact of SVORI participation on a wide range of post-release outcomes” (p.v). (Abstractor: Author).

Full publication title: Reentry Experiences of Confined Juvenile Offenders: Characteristics, Service Receipt, and Outcomes of Juvenile Male Participants in the SVORI Multi-Site Evaluation

Major Findings & Recommendations

• “Service receipt for SVORI and non-SVORI respondents was highest during confinement. Although the levels of post-release service receipt for both groups were considerably lower than their reported levels of service need, SVORI respondents generally reported higher levels of service receipt than non-SVORI respondents” ( • “SVORI respondents were significantly more likely than non-SVORI respondents to be in school 3 months after release from confinement” ( • “SVORI respondents were much more likely to have a job with benefits” 15 months after release. ( • No significant differences were found between SVORI and non-SVORI respondents in substance use, physical health, mental health, or recidivism outcomes” ( Based on these findings, the authors concluded, “it is critically important that juvenile justice practitioners and policy makers understand the wide range and degree of deficits that often characterize confined juveniles. This understanding can inform decisions about what types of services are most needed and for whom” ( (Abstractor: Author and Website Staff)