Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM)

A child welfare agency and juvenile justice department serving the same youth or youth at risk of becoming involved in each other's system

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.

Alexandra Miller, PhD

• Title: Deputy Director
• Agency/Affiliation: Multi-System Operations Center for Juvenile Justice Reform Georgetown University
• Website: https://cjjr.georgetown.edu/our-work/crossover-youth-practice-model/
• Email: am4020@georgetown.edu
• Phone: (202) 687-4942

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

Recommended Intensity

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.

Recommended Duration

Once the model is implemented, it is expected to be used on a continual basis.

Delivery Settings

This program is typically conducted in a(n):

• Justice Setting (Juvenile Detention, Jail, Prison, Courtroom, etc.)
• Public Child Welfare Agency (Dept. of Social Services, etc.)

Homework

This program does not include a homework component.

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).

Prerequisite/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.

Manual Information

There is a manual that describes how to deliver this program.

Training Information

There is training available for this program.

Training Contact

Training Type/Location:

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.

Pre-Implementation Materials

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 the program contact listed at the bottom of the page. Additionally, the team is asked to complete the OJJDP Best Practices Rubric for Integrated Systems. This document aligns with the identified best practices from the OJJDP Dual System Youth Design Study: Summary of Findings and Recommendations for Pursuing a National Estimate of Dual System Youth.

Formal Support for Implementation

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 model's impact.

Fidelity Measures

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 jjreform@georgetown.edu.

Established Psychometrics

There are no established psychometrics for Crossover Youth Practice Model.

Fidelity Measures Required

Fidelity measures are required to be used as part of program implementation.

Implementation Guides or Manuals

The CYPM abbreviated guide identified the necessary systemic changes required within a youth-serving organization 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 requires as part of the model. The abbreviated guide can be found at cjjr.georgetown.edu/our-work/crossover-youth-practice-model

Implementation Cost

Wright, E. M., Spohn, R., & Chenane, J. L. (2017). Evaluation of the Crossover Youth Practice Model (Youth Impact!) [Executive Summary]. Nebraska Center for Justice Research, University of Nebraska, Omaha. https://childrens.nebraska.gov/PDFs/MeetingDocuments/2017/OJS/04.11.2017/Handout%204%20-%20CYPM%20Evaluation%20-%20Executive%20Summary%20Final%2004.11.2017.pdf

Research on How to Implement the Program

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.03.025

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.02.001

Kolivoski, K., Barnett, E., & Abbott, S. (2015). The Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) in brief: Out-of-home placements and crossover youth. 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]. Nebraska Center for Justice Research, University of Nebraska, Omaha.

Child Welfare Outcome: Child/Family Well-Being

"What is included in the Relevant Published, Peer-Reviewed Research section?"

• 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.03.025

  Type of Study: Pretest–posttest study with a nonequivalent control group (Quasi-experimental)

  Number of participants: 5,075

  Population:

  • 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:

  The purpose of the study was to examine youth recidivism outcomes of the Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM). Administrative databases 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 indicate that 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 controlled 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. 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]. Nebraska Center for Justice Research, University of Nebraska, Omaha. http://childrens.nebraska.gov/PDFs/MeetingDocuments/2017/OJS/04.11.2017/Handout%204%20-%20CYPM%20Evaluation%20-%20Executive%20Summary%20Final%2004.11.2017.pdf