Revisited: Effective use of the large body of research on the effectiveness of programs for juvenile offenders and the failure of the model programs approach
Mark W. Lipsey
Abstract
Abstract Elliott et al.'s essay is part of what is now a series of papers in Criminology and Public Policy on contrasting ways that the evidence base on effective interventions with juvenile offenders can be used to improve juvenile justice programming. Their paper has two themes—(a) a defense of the model programs approach as promoted by the Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development evidence‐based program registry, and (b) an attack on the Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol scheme for assessing programs for juvenile offenders and the meta‐analysis on which it is based. I address both those themes in this commentary in the context of the broader cross‐disciplinary conversation about ways to apply research evidence to improve the effectiveness of the programs used in actual practice.