This case study report highlights Idaho’s youth assessment centers. Our case study report highlights the implementation and processes of three assessment centers in Idaho: The Bridge in Ada County (county-run), The Village in Bannock County (county-run), and The Anchor, serving Valley, Adams, Washington and Boise Counties (nonprofit). Each of our case studies provides the purpose and goals, implementation, referral pathways, services, partnerships, barriers and facilitators to successful implementation, and outcomes for each assessment center.
Why This Matters
Juvenile justice system involvement can be harmful to young people, and it is not an effective strategy to reduce future offending and improve outcomes. Alternatively, community-based prevention, deflection, and diversion strategies have shown promise in reducing youth contact with the system and courts, reducing future system involvement, and promoting positive youth outcomes. Assessment centers provide a single point of contact that identifies the root causes of concerning behavior and connects young people and families to individualized services and supports in the community.
Key Takeaways
Assessment centers hold immense promise to decarcerate young people for status offenses. The separation of assessment centers allows young people and families to identify and address needs early on before juvenile justice involvement and gain access to resources in the community.
Our research indicated differences between the assessment centers regarding their services offered, partnerships, implementation, and outcomes. These differences align with the differences in the characteristics of the communities they serve and the adaptation of each assessment center to fit the needs of those communities.
All three assessment centers emphasized the utility of the National Assessment Center Association (NAC) framework and resources for successful implementation. The case study sites’ approaches differed, demonstrating the value of the NAC as a framework rather than a stringent model, cognizant that communities can differ and assessment centers should be adapted to each community’s composition and needs.
Across all three case study sites, staff and partners noted the importance of complementary partnerships with organizations that come into contact with young people, including law enforcement (especially school resource officers), schools, hospitals, and mental health providers. Close collaborations and ongoing communication help build community awareness of resource centers to increase referrals and allows for greater trust from partners to continue engagement with assessment centers.
How We Did It
This analysis draws from programmatic/document reviews, site visits, and in-person/virtual semistructured interviews with 42 participants reflecting program leadership, program staff, program partners, criminal legal system actors, and youth participants and caregivers. More information about the study design is available in the appendix.
