Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM)
The information in this program outline is provided by the program representative and edited by the CEBC staff. This program has been rated by the CEBC in the following Topic Areas:
Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) currently has a provisional rating for the 60 days between: May 31, 2018 and July 30, 2018. If you would like to respond to the Scientific Rating, please submit feedback via the Contact Us page.
About This Program
Target Population: A child welfare agency and juvenile justice department serving the same youth or youth at risk of becoming involved in each other’s system
For organizations that serve children ages: 11 – 17
CYPM is for child welfare agencies with youth receiving any level of services) that are at-risk for or have been referred to or become involved with the juvenile justice system and for juvenile justice departments with youth who are subsequently referred to and become involved in the child welfare system because of suspicions of abuse/neglect. CYPM is designed to create a multisystem approach to identification of youth, assessment of needs, collaborative case planning, and ongoing case management. The model is designed to provide a foundation that helps jurisdictions work collaboratively with the goals of improving system functioning and outcomes for youth. The model implements a process that seeks to reduce the number of youth who crossover between the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, the number of youth entering and reentering out-of-home care, the length of stay in out-of-home care, the use of congregate care, and the disproportionate representation of children of color. The CYPM infuses into this work values and standards; manualized practices, policies; and procedures; and quality assurance processes.
The goals of the Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) include:
- A reduction in the number of youth re-entering child welfare from juvenile justice
- A reduction in the level of penetration into the juvenile justice system by youth in foster care
- A reduction in the use of pre-adjudication detention
- A reduction in the rate of recidivism
- An increase in the use of diversion in the juvenile justice system
- An increase in interagency information sharing
The essential components of the Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) include:
- The CYPM is rooted in principles and values. These principles express the overarching values that guide all policies, programs, practices, services, and supports conducted within the practice model. The principles state:
- Youth and their family members have strengths and should be treated as unique individuals
- Systems must utilize data to make all policy and practice decisions
- Strengthening workforce efficacy and providing appropriate training to staff ensures their knowledge and capacities about newly developed processes and results in their improved ability to serve youth and families
- Seven key overarching themes permeate throughout the model’s implementation in a jurisdiction. These are:
- Family Engagement: Engaging families by building good working relationships to meet individualized goals.
- Permanency: All young people need lifelong, stable connections to others but crossover youth may be less likely to achieve this. Permanency planning must begin at the initiation of the case and be a key focus of all casework.
- Disproportionality: Children of color are overrepresented in both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, but among crossover youth this disproportionality is even greater. Focusing on key decision points can help address this issue.
- Gender: Females are a higher percentage of the crossover youth population than the juvenile justice system generally. Addressing this issue starts with looking at key decision points to assess the trend in each jurisdiction, as well as focusing on alternatives to detention.
- Information Sharing: Information Sharing is critically important and opportunities begin as soon as a young person becomes at risk of crossing over. Issues regarding how, when, and with whom information can be shared must be addressed early on and throughout the case.
- Coordinated Case Management: Providing aligned services by performing coordinated case management creates enhanced opportunities to establish common goals for a case, develop a plan to achieve these goals, identify appropriate services, and conduct ongoing assessments to ensure effectiveness.
- Funding/Resources: By understanding the resources each agency has and accessing them through good coordinated case planning, agencies can serve crossover youth more efficiently.
- CYPM Practice Elements:
- Identify youth at the earliest point possible (e.g., arrest, juvenile justice intake/detention, child welfare investigation/case substantiation)
- Ensure all parties to the case are informed of the youth having crossed over between child welfare and juvenile justice
- Collaborate to make an informed decision regarding charges that takes into account the situational context and youth’s background
- Engage in a cross-systems joint assessment and planning process (pre- and post-adjudication)
- Engage in coordinated cross-systems case management and on-going assessment of the case through its entirety
- Develop a focused and coordinated plan to ensure permanency and self-sufficiency for youth as they plan for case transition and closure
- CYPM Leadership Engagement
- Obtains commitment and support from the Lead Family Court Judge and Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice Directors
- Develops and empowers an Implementation Team (i.e., team of leaders, mid-level managers, front-line workers, youth, families, and community advocates) to support and implement the model
- Develops and implements a work plan that outlines the steps to CYPM implementation
- Develops a data team that has access to cross-system data to assist in data collection and analysis
- Implements a mechanism for quality assurance to ensure model fidelity and usage of outcome data to refine CYPM processes over time
- Supports the implementation team throughout the training and technical assistance process to ensure adequate supports are provided for implementation of the model
This is a cross-system governance structure and case management model. Therefore, there are not preset levels of engagement with families, only specified types of collaborative activities that should occur.
Once the model is implemented, it is expected to be used on a continual basis.
This program is typically conducted in a(n):
- Department of Social Services
- Juvenile detention/justice facility
This program does not include a homework component.
Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) does not have materials available in a language other than English.
Resources Needed to Run Program
The typical resources for implementing the program are:
The model works within the existing resources of a community. During the implementation phase, meeting space, AV, and laptops are required to support the implementation team meetings on model development. Once model implementation occurs space is needed for family/worker meetings or co-located staff (co-location of staff varies by jurisdiction).
Minimum Provider Qualifications
The model is implemented in the context of an entire county and involves entities from multiple youth serving organizations. All educational requirements are those set by the agencies and departments for staff assuming those positions.
Education and Training Resources
There is a manual that describes how to implement this program, and there is training available for this program.
- Macon Stewart
phone: (202) 687-4942
Training is obtained:
On-site in the identified community
Number of days/hours:
The model framework consists of training/technical assistance to be provided to the identified jurisdiction for 12-18 months to prepare for model implementation.
Since Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) is rated on the Scientific Rating Scale, information was requested from the program representative on available pre-implementation assessments, implementation tools, and/or fidelity measures.
Show implementation information...
There are pre-implementation materials to measure organizational or provider readiness for Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) as listed below:
The participating jurisdiction is provided a Gap Analysis tool for completion prior to technical assistance being provided. This tool is used to assess the jurisdictions current capacity to serve the target population in comparison to what the model recommends. The tool covers the key domains needed to support system integration. This document is not available in the public domain. Inquiries regarding the tool can be submitted to Macon Stewart via email at email@example.com.
Formal Support for Implementation
There is formal support available for implementation of Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) as listed below:
As previously noted, the Georgetown University Center for Juvenile Reform provides training and technical assistance (TTA) to communities for a minimum of 12-18 months to assist in training the community on the model and to support development of local manuals, policies, etc. to support model implementation. The TTA also includes a data component that assists in data collection and analysis of findings to assess the models impact.
There are fidelity measures for Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) as listed below:
The CYPM research toolkit supports jurisdictions in understanding how their systems serve crossover youth prior to the model's implementation and assessing how the site is impacting system- and youth-level outcomes after implementation. In addition to system- and youth-level outcomes, the research toolkit provides insight into a system's adherence to the CYPM. To assess a jurisdiction's fidelity to the model, an evaluation workgroup reviews case files to identify whether or not the practices prescribed in the CYPM were utilized. These practices include a multidisciplinary teaming process, joint assessments, and coordinated case planning. Who participated in the practices and at what stage in the case the practices occurred are also captured. This information is incorporated into the broader process and outcomes evaluation contained in the toolkit. The CYPM research toolkit is not publicly available for distribution. Information can be requested by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
Implementation Guides or Manuals
There are implementation guides or manuals for Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) as listed below:
The CYPM abbreviated guide identified the necessary systemic changes required within a youth serving to improve outcomes for the targeted population. It condenses the information provided in the full CYPM guide and is more focused on the practice elements that a jurisdiction elements as part of the model. The abbreviated guide can be found at: cjjr.georgetown.edu/our-work/crossover-youth-practice-model
Research on How to Implement the Program
Research has not been conducted on how to implement Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM).
Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research
This program is rated a "3 - Promising Research Evidence" on the Scientific Rating Scale based on the published, peer-reviewed research available. The practice must have at least one study utilizing some form of control (e.g., untreated group, placebo group, matched wait list study) establishing the practice's benefit over the placebo, or found it to be comparable to or better than an appropriate comparison practice. Please see the Scientific Rating Scale for more information.
Child Welfare Outcome: Child/Family Well-Being
Haight, W., Bidwell, L., Seok Choi, W., & Cho, M. (2016). An evaluation of the Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM): Recidivism outcomes for maltreated youth involved in the juvenile justice system. Child and Youth Services Review, 65, 78-85. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.03.025
Type of Study: Pretest-posttest design with matched comparison groups
Number of Participants: 5,075
- Age — 10-17 years
- Race/Ethnicity — 75% African American
- Gender — 54% Male
- Status — Participants were youth with an open child protection case.
Location/Institution: Urban county in a Midwestern state
Summary: (To include comparison groups, outcomes, measures, notable limitations)
This study examined youth recidivism (reoffending) outcomes of the Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM). Crossover youth are defined as maltreated youth who have engaged in delinquency. In the current study, administrative data bases were linked to examine recidivism outcomes for crossover youth between the ages of 10 and 17 years following the first year of implementation of the CYPM. Measures utilized include administrative datasets received from Minnesota state departments of Health, Education, and Human Services. Results showed involvement in the CYPM reduced youth's risks of recidivism compared to propensity-score-matched youth receiving “services as usual” even when controlling for location, time, and other key factors. Limitations include a lack of access to data to evaluate a primary goal of the CYPM (the immediate diversion of youth from juvenile justice involvement to social services), that analyses were limited to existing administrative data, and a lack of randomization.
Length of postintervention follow-up: None.
Haight, W., Bidwell, L., Marshall, J., & Khatiwoda, P. (2014) Implementing the Crossover Youth Practice Model in diverse contexts: Child welfare and juvenile justice professionals’ experiences of multisystem collaborations. Child and Youth Services Review, 39, 91-100
Kolivoski, K., Barnett, E., & Abbott, S. (2015). The Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) in brief: Out-of-home placements and crossover youth. Washington, DC: Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, Georgetown University McCourt School of Public Policy.
Wright, E. M., Spohn, R., & Chenane, J. L. (2017). Evaluation of the Crossover Youth Practice Model (Youth Impact!) [Executive Summary]. Omaha, NE: Nebraska Center for Justice Research, University of Nebraska, Omaha. Available at: http://childrens.nebraska.gov/PDFs/MeetingDocuments/2017/OJS/04.11.2017/Handout%204%20-%20CYPM%20Evaluation%20-%20Executive%20Summary%20Final%2004.11.2017.pdf
Date Research Evidence Last Reviewed by CEBC: March 2018
Date Program Content Last Reviewed by Program Staff: May 2018
Date Program Originally Loaded onto CEBC: June 2018