Robert Barnoski - June 2000

In 1997, the Washington State Legislature funded intensive parole for youth under the supervision of the state’s Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration (JRA). This legislation targets 25 percent of the JRA population at the highest risk for re-offending. The goals of the intensive parole program include maintaining public protection in both the short-term and long-term; assuring individual accountability; and providing treatment and support services. JRA's method for achieving these goals is through an overarching case management system intended to help high-risk delinquents make the transition from secure confinement to community supervision.

This briefing paper looks at intensive parole program youth and answers the following questions about parole revocations: How often do intensive parole youth have their parole revoked? How does intensive parole affect parole revocations?

Robert Barnoski - June 2000

This briefing paper looks at intensive parole program youth and answers the following questions about unauthorized leaves: (1) How often do intensive parole youth go on unauthorized leave? and (2) How does intensive parole affect unauthorized leaves?

Steve Lerch, Jim Mayfield, Mason Burley - June 2000

This study examines three questions about the Washington State WorkFirst program: Is TANF cost-effective, are WorkFirst clients becoming harder to employ, and does participating in WorkFirst Job Search improve employment outcomes? The analyses support the following conclusions: 1) When compared with AFDC, the government spends more per TANF household. Under TANF, however, fewer clients use welfare, and overall welfare costs are less.  2) According to four specific factors that impact employment, clients on the caseload in February 2000 were no harder to employ than clients on the caseload when WorkFirst began in August 1997.  3) For those with no recent work experience, job search increases employment rates. Results for clients with a recent work history are mixed. WorkFirst replaced AFDC as the state’s welfare program in 1997.

Robert Barnoski - May 2000

In 1997, the Washington State Legislature funded intensive parole for youth placed under the supervision of the state’s Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration (JRA). This legislation targets 25 percent of the JRA population at the highest risk for reoffending. JRA contracted with the Institute to evaluate the program, determine whether it reduces recidivism, and analyze the costs and benefits to taxpayers and crime victims.

Robert Barnoski - May 2000

This briefing paper looks at intensive parole program youth and answers the following questions: (1) Are intensive parole youth completing their parole supervision within 24 weeks of placement on the supervision? (2) Can we compare the status of these intensive parole youth with the status of youth in a control group? and (3) How does intensive parole affect the likelihood that youth will experience supervision difficulties?

Steve Aos, Polly Phipps, Robert Barnoski, Roxanne Lieb - January 2000

The 1999 Washington Legislature passed E2SSB 5421, the Offender Accountability Act, reforming the way adult criminals, under the jurisdiction of the state, are supervised in the community. The legislation directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to carry out an evaluation of the Act. The Institute presented the design of the evaluation to the Legislature in January 2000. This report describes the research design the Institute intends to follow during the course of the evaluation of the Offender Accountability Act.

Edie Harding, Barbara McLain - January 2000

In 1998, the Institute studied the preparation and development of teachers in Washington State at the request of its Board of Directors. A report was published by the Institute in August 1999, Teacher Preparation and Development . The study included surveys of beginning teachers and principals. Due to space limitations, not all the data from the surveys and from the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction’s (OSPI) certification and employment data base were available in the report. This chartbook provides additional insights from the Institute’s study. The link to the appendix above provides a copy of the survey and a summary of survey responses.

Steve Lerch, Jim Mayfield - December 1999

This report analyzes the welfare and employment outcomes of clients in the WorkFirst program, Washington State’s implementation of the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.  WorkFirst clients are more likely to gain employment, have higher earnings, work more hours, and leave the caseload when compared to similar clients under Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Jobs, Opportunities, and Basic Skills (AFDC-JOBS).

Roxanne Lieb - December 1999

The 1999 Legislature passed legislation concerning investigations of alleged child sexual abuse.  In addition to statutory changes to the investigatory process for allegations of child sexual abuse, the law established a multidisciplinary group to create statewide guidelines for these investigations.  This document details the state guidelines, including both minimum state requirements for county protocols and advisory comments to guide local decision-making.  Prosecutors are to use these guidelines in leading local efforts for county protocols; those protocols were put into place July 1, 2000. 

Mason Burley, Steve Lerch, Jim Mayfield - December 1999

To examine the impact of WorkFirst activities and services on employment and welfare outcomes, it is necessary to understand the characteristics and patterns of client participation in the program over time. While in WorkFirst, clients may participate in a variety of activities and receive numerous services. This paper describes general WorkFirst program elements, illustrates the complex links between program elements using a client activity flow chart, and then summarizes general trends in client activity during the implementation phase of WorkFirst (August 1997 through December 1998).