This guide outlines a new way of thinking about juvenile probation term lengths and termination processes and provides research-informed guidance for term structure to promote youth success. Probation terms should be only as long as is necessary to connect youth with any needed supports and services in their communities and should be designed to minimize disruption to young people’s lives and development.
This approach asserts that the vast majority of youth probation terms can be completed in six months or less. In the long run, probation agencies should be working to bolster and reinforce community capacity to meet the needs of youth and their caregivers, and to promote public safety without relying on the juvenile justice system and its associated risks for youth.
In this approach, the probation officer provides a time-limited bridge toward longer-term, community-based solutions rather than being the change agent or solution for the youth. This has important implications for the length of probation terms. When the primary aim of probation is to link youth with community resources to support healthy development, longer terms are not necessary because the goal is not to fully address the youth’s needs or achieve rehabilitation goals during the probation term. Rather, the goal is to work together to map the supports and resources that can help them move forward.
The framework is structured around three phases. With the appropriate structures and supports, the vast majority of youth can accomplish all three phases in six months or less, and much faster in many cases. Tracking data on term length disaggregated by race and ethnicity is key to measuring implementation progress.
Longer periods of time on juvenile probation are no more effective than shorter ones in achieving positive outcomes for young people. Though there is no national standard for the length of juvenile probation terms, the vast majority of youth probation terms can be completed in six months or less. Juvenile probation terms should be only as long as is necessary to connect youth with any needed supports and services in their communities and should be designed to minimize disruption to young people’s lives and development.
In this approach, the probation officer provides a time-limited bridge toward longer-term, community-based solutions rather than being the change agent or solution for the youth. This has important implications for the length of probation terms. When the primary aim of probation is to link youth with community resources to support healthy development, longer terms are not necessary because the goal is not to fully address the youth’s needs or achieve rehabilitation goals during the probation term. Rather, the goal is to work together to map the supports and resources that can help them move forward.
