The Importance of Interagency Collaboration for Crossover Youth

• Author: Joselyne Chenane,Nick Juliano,Emily M. Wright,Ryan Spohn
• DOI: 10.1177/1541204016686663
• Published date: 01 October 2017
• Date: 01 October 2017
• Subject Matter: Research Note

Research Note

The Importance of Interagency

Collaboration for Crossover

Youth: A Research Note

Emily M. Wright

1

, Ryan Spohn

1

, Joselyne Chenane

1

,

and Nick Juliano

2

Abstract

Crossover or dually involved youth are youth enmeshed in the child welfare system (CWS) and

juvenile justice system (JJS). Given their dual status and high needs, attention has recently focused on

how to best respond to them in an integrated, interagency fashion. The Crossover Youth Practice

Model (CYPM) is designed to facilitate interagency collaboration between the CWS and JJS in order

to enhance services and diversion to these youths. This study reports on the benefits and challenges

that the JJS and CWS, as well as the personnel working within them, experience by participating in a

CYPM effort in a Midwestern county, and provides recommendations for continued improvements

in interagency collaborations for crossover youth.

Keywords

crossover youth, dually adjudicated, juvenile justice, child welfare, qualitative

Children enmeshed in the juvenile justice system (JJS) or the child welfare system (CWS) are high

risk for developing detrimental behavioral, educational, and health-related outcomes, but those who

are involved in both systems may be at even greater risk for a wide range of short- and long-term

problems (Ryan, Williams, & Courtney, 2013; Widom & Maxfield, 2001). These ‘‘dually involved’’

or ‘‘crossover’’ youths are higher risk for exposure to violence and/or abuse, familial dysfunction,

substance use, congregate or group home placement, school dropout, poor grades, truancy, mental

health and/or substance use problems, and adult criminality (e.g., Halemba, Siegel, Lord, &

Zawacki, 2004; Herz & Ryan, 2008; Widom & Maxfield, 2001; Young, Bowley, Bilanain, & Ho,

2015). They are also at risk to incur more juvenile, adult, and violent arrests (Ryan et al., 2013;

Widom & Maxfield, 2001) and to be perceived as high risk by system personnel (Morris &

Freundlich, 2004). It is not surprising, therefore, that they are highly represented at deep levels of

the JJS (e.g., comprising out-of-home placement cases), and they tend to receive harsher sanctions or

1

School of Criminology and Criminal Justice,Nebraska Center for Justice Research, University of Nebraska,Omaha, NE, USA

2

Father Flanagan’s Boys’ Home, Boys Town, NE, USA

Corresponding Author:

Emily M. Wright, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Nebraska Center for Justice Research, University of Nebraska,

6001 Dodge Street, 218 CPACS, Omaha, NE 68182, USA.

Email: emwright@unomaha.edu

Youth Violence and JuvenileJustice

2017, Vol. 15(4) 481-491

ªThe Author(s) 2016

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1541204016686663

journals.sagepub.com/home/yvj