state: FL

facility_name: Fort Myers Academy

summary: SPEP - FY25-26

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Fort Myers Academy
Rite of Passage
(Contract Provider)
2515 Ortiz Avenue
Fort Myers, Florida 33905
Primary Service: Impact of Crime
SPEP Review Period: 09/01/2024-08/31/2025
SPEP Review Conducted: 09/10/2025; 9/12/2025
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: 12/12/2025
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is data-driven rating system for
evaluating program effectiveness. The SPEP was developed by relying on hundreds of studies
that have examined key characteristics of programs that demonstrated their ability to reduce
recidivism. To determine a SPEP score, the program’s services are compared to characteristics
of effective programs in the research of a similar type.
The SPEP score is composed of four principle characteristics that have been shown to predict
reductions in youth recidivism; service type, quality of service, dosage (amount of service), and
youth level of risk.
• Service Type: service type points are awarded based on the group category that the
service falls within
• Quality of Service: quality points are awarded by determining the extent to which the
program is delivered in what research suggests is a high-quality manner
• Amount of Service: or “dosage” refers to the amount and duration of services that were
received
• Risk Level: refers to the level of criminogenic risk for youth involved in the intervention.
The final output of the SPEP review is the Program Optimization Percentage (POP). This rate is
derived from the Basic Score and Program Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage
score that indicates how the service rates in effectiveness when compared to the potential
effectiveness if optimized to match the most effective services in the research. This means the
POP rate represents how close the program’s Primary Service is to its potential for that Primary
Service Type. For example, a POP rate of 55% would indicate that the program’s Primary
Service is operating at 55% of its potential effectiveness for recidivism reduction based on the
SPEP research.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Basic Score: 20 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
There are five Primary Service Types that have been classified into Groups with a maximum
number of points possible for rating purposes. Some Primary Service Types may also have
qualifying Supplemental Service Types that could earn a program an additional 5 points.
The Primary Service for this program is Impact of Crime.
The program was awarded 15 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 3
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Social Skills Training. The
Primary Service was identified as this type of service as it focuses on developing social skills
required for an individual to interact in a positive way with others.
An additional 5 points was awarded based on a Qualifying Supplemental Service. The Qualifying
Supplemental Service was identified as None (automatic 5 points added to score), which was not
demonstrated to have been implemented.
The Primary and Supplemental Service Raw Score is equal to the sum of the Primary Service
points plus the Qualifying Supplemental Service points.
Note: Quality information is evaluated during quarterly and annual reviews.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
Basic Score: 20 Points
2. Overall Quality of Service Delivery Score POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
The Quality of Service Delivery Score is the sum of the scores for the seven treatment quality
indicators. The Program Optimization Percentage Rating determines the Overall Quality of
Service Level:
Indicator Sum Score 0-3 = Low; Sum Score 4-7 = Medium; Sum Score 8-10 = High.
Sum of all Indicator Scores (a – g below): 9 Points
Overall Quality of Service Delivery Level:
Low (Raw Score = 5)
Medium (Raw Score = 10)
High (Raw Score = 20 Points)
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
a. Facilitator Training
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
All facilitator(s) of the Primary Service must have received formal training specific to the
intervention or model/protocol.
A Fidelity Support Specialist conducted an annual SPEP review at Fort Myers Youth Academy for
the period of 09/01/2024 through 08/31/2025. The Impact of Crime (IOC) intervention is being
evaluated. The program uses IOC as a primary service. The program has a formal training
protocol provided either by DJJ staff or by a corporate trainer formally trained in the Impact of
Crime curriculum. There were three staff trained during the review period, one transition services
manager and two case managers. All three staff facilitated the IOC groups. The transition services
manager and one case manager provided in-house fidelity monitoring.
The program can earn 1 point if all facilitators are trained in the primary service prior to facilitating
groups.
At the time of the review, the program met the criteria to earn a score of 1.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
b. Treatment Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
There is a specific written manual/protocol detailing delivery of the Primary Service.
There is a specific written manual detailing delivery of the primary service. The program uses the
Impact of Crime: Addressing the Harm v 4.0 as the manual. SPEP coordinator reviewed the
manual. The facilitator’s manual is divided into seven chapters, an appendix with handouts, and
the student guide section (which includes the student exercises). The manual addresses the order
in which to deliver the content and gives the facilitators an outline to follow.
The facility does not have separate student workbooks to give out. The facilitators make copies of
the exercises before each session to hand out to the youth. The group is a closed group with no
more than twelve youth in each cohort. The curriculum is to be delivered to the youth over a
minimum of sixteen (16) weeks for thirty-two (32) hours. The program runs the primary service on
Mondays and Fridays from 4-5:00 p.m. The program keeps all documentation in a binder labeled
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
IOC SPEP in the case management office. All youth who are admitted to the program receive the
primary service. The primary service is run as a closed group.
At the time of the review, the program met criteria to earn a score of 2.
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
c. Observed Adherence to the Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Upon observation of the Primary Service by the Quality Improvement reviewer, the facilitator of
that service adhered to the written protocol/manual.
The Fidelity Support Specialist observed Impact of Crime virtually on Friday, 09/12/25, from 4-5
p.m. The group consisted of eight female youth, two facilitators, and one direct care staff. The
facilitator utilized the Impact of Crime manual throughout this group session and was
knowledgeable about the material being presented to the group. A copy of Chapter #1 "Victim
Impact and Restorative Justice," was provided to the reviewer. The facilitator and co-facilitator
both used their own words to convey the information. This session began with an ice breaker,
followed by a review of the previous lesson and a review of the homework assigned during the
last group. The group actively participated in discussion. The facilitators utilized effective
motivational interviewing skills to encourage the youth to share more about their personal
experiences and to assess for understanding. They also ensured that the youth understood each
topic prior to moving on in the lesson.
The program can earn 1 point if the program follows the manual/protocol when delivering the
primary service.
At the time of the review, the program met criteria to earn a score of 1.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
d. Facilitator Turnover
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
Measures the extent to which facilitators of the specific intervention/service have changed as
well as gaps in service of that Primary Service.
There has been no turnover which adversely affected the youth during the past twelve (12)
months. The program's goal is to hire more staff and train them as appropriate so that there would
be no gaps in services to the youth. The program is also striving to overlap the groups and have a
co-facilitator when possible. Their policy in the event of turnover is that the co- facilitator would
take over the group. However if there is no co-facilitator, the group would be transferred to
another trained facilitator who would take over the group.
There were no gaps in the service of Impact of Crime (IOC) to the youth. The program completed
three cohorts of IOC during the review period from 07/15/2024-11/11/2024 with eight youth, two
staff, from 11/18/2024-03/28/2025 with ten (10) youth and two staff and from 03/31/2025-
07/18/2025 with ten (10) youth and two staff. There is also an ongoing group that began on
07/21/2025 with ten (10) youth and two staff.
The program can earn 2 points if facilitator turnover does not impact groups and there are no
unnecessary gaps in service.
At the time of the review, the program met criteria to earn a score of 2.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
e. Internal Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
The program has a process to monitor the delivery of the intervention to examine how closely
actual implementation matches the model protocol.
The program has a process to complete internal fidelity monitoring. They do not have a current
director of case management, however the transition services manager and/or her designee
perform the monitoring. During the review period, there were three facilitators for Impact of Crime:
two case managers, and one transition services manager. Fidelity monitoring was completed
monthly for all three facilitators by the transition services manager and one case manager.
The program can earn 2 points if fidelity monitoring is completed every month for each facilitator.
At the time of the review, the program met the criteria to earn a score of 2.
Basic Score: 1 Point
f. Corrective Action based on Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
The program has a process by which corrective action is applied and demonstrated based on
the fidelity monitoring of the delinquency intervention/therapeutic service.
The program has a system in place to address the need for corrective actions identified during
monthly internal fidelity monitoring of Impact of Crime. A review of the documentation provided as
well as an interview with the clinical director showed that there had been no corrective action
taken during the review period. If facilitators are in need of corrective action related to their
delivery of the service, they would then receive progressive discipline in the form of coaching,
additional training, and formal write-ups.
The program can earn 1 point if any corrective action needed is identified, applied, and
demonstrated.
At the time of the review, the program met the criteria to earn a score of 1.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 0 Point
Intervention Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Performance evaluations of the facilitators of the specific intervention/service include
evaluation of skill in delivering the intervention/service.
A review was conducted of the employee performance evaluations for three facilitators. Upon
examination, no entries were found documenting the staff's performance in delivering Impact of
Crime. Therefore, there were no comments on any strengths or weaknesses of which the
facilitator should be aware. Two annual performance reviews were completed on 09/01/2025 for
one case manager and one transition services manager. A 90-day performance review was
completed on the other case manager.
The program can earn 1 point if each facilitator’s performance evaluation includes discussion of
their skill in delivering this primary service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
At the time of the review, the program did not meet criteria to earn a score of 1.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
3. Amount of Service - Duration
There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information System (JJIS) Evidence Based
Module (EBS) for the primary service for the annual review period. There was no data available to
enter into the report.
Basic Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Research indicates the target duration of 16 weeks for this type of service. Of the 0 youth in the
sample, 0% (0 of 0) reached at least the indicated target duration. Further explanation is detailed
in the Summary and Recommendations below.
Note: Dosage information (duration) is calculated from the Juvenile Justice Information System
(JJIS) Evidence-Based Services module. Duration is included for the youth in the SPEP sample.
4. Amount of Service – Contact Hours
There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information System (JJIS) Evidence Based
Module (EBS) for the primary service for the annual review period. There was no data available to
enter into the report.
Basic Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Research indicates a target of 24 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 0 youth in the
sample, 0% (0 of 0) reached the indicated target contact hours. Further explanation is detailed in
the Summary and Recommendations below.
Note: Dosage information (contact hours) is calculated from the Juvenile Justice Information
System (JJIS) Evidence-Based Services module. Contact hours are included for the youth in the
SPEP sample.
5. Risk Level of Youth Served:
There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information System (JJIS) Evidence Based
Module (EBS) for the primary service for the annual review period. There was no data available to
enter into the report.
Basic Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 0%
Moderate to High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
Table 1
Moderate = 0 youth
Moderate-High = 0 youth
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 0 youth
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 0%
High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Table 2
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 0 youth
The risk level score is compiled by calculating the total percent of the SPEP sample that score
Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend and also the total percent of the SPEP sample that score High-
Risk to reoffend.
Of the SPEP sample, 0% (0 of 0) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 0
points.
Of the SPEP sample, 0% (0 of 0) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 0 points.
Note: The latest Community Assessment Tool (CAT) prior to the placement date was used in the
derivation of the risk level score. This CAT provides the best indication of the risk to re-offend
level of the youth when the youth was first placed in the program.
Summary and Recommendations
Program Program
Category Basic Score Optimization Optimization
Score Percentage
Primary and Supplemental Service Type 20 20 100%
Quality of Service Delivery 20 20 100%
Amount of Service: Duration 0 10 0%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 0 10 0%
Risk Level of Youth Served 0 25 0%
Totals 40 85 47%
This SPEP report evaluates Impact of Crime, an intervention delivered at Fort Myers Academy.
It is unknown how many youth completed the program during the review period. The program did
not enter data into the Evidence-Based Service Module (EBS).
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 9
The program earned 0 points for Amount of Service: Duration and Amount of Service: Contact
Hours. There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information system (JJIS) Evidence-
Based Services (EBS) module for any youths. With no JJIS data to review, the SPEP score was
reduced. The program must enter dosage data into JJIS in order to receive any score in this
area.
The Risk Level of Youth Served is unknown due to the program not entering data into the EBS
Module. There was no sample available to calculate the Risk Level of Youth Served. This is
calculated using data from the Community Assessment Tool (CAT). This score reflects youths'
most recent CAT score prior to placement at the program. The program itself has no control over
youths' CAT risk level because the scored assessment was administered prior to the youths'
admission.
Had the percentage of youth served with Moderate-High and High risk to reoffend been higher,
and this report awarded each 25 of the available points for this section, the Program Optimization
Percentage for this service would increase to 76%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Fort Myers Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by ensuring each
facilitator’s performance evaluation includes discussion of their skill in delivering this primary
service.
Fort Myers Academy can optimize their SPEP Amount of Service score by ensuring dosage for all
youth is recorded accurately in EBS and by ensuring youth receive the full targeted dosage of
service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 10

source: DJJ

report_type: SPEP

file_name: FY2025-26 Fort Myers Academy IOC.pdf

program_name_raw: Fort Myers Academy

program_status_note: Open

service_type: Impact of Crime


summary: SPEP - FY25-26

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Fort Myers Academy
Rite of Passage
(Contract Provider)
2515 Ortiz Avenue
Fort Myers, Florida 33905
Primary Service: Moral Reconation Therapy
SPEP Review Period: 09/01/2024-08/31/2025
SPEP Review Conducted: 09/10/2025
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: 09/10/2025
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is data-driven rating system for
evaluating program effectiveness. The SPEP was developed by relying on hundreds of studies
that have examined key characteristics of programs that demonstrated their ability to reduce
recidivism. To determine a SPEP score, the program’s services are compared to characteristics
of effective programs in the research of a similar type.
The SPEP score is composed of four principle characteristics that have been shown to predict
reductions in youth recidivism; service type, quality of service, dosage (amount of service), and
youth level of risk.
• Service Type: service type points are awarded based on the group category that the
service falls within
• Quality of Service: quality points are awarded by determining the extent to which the
program is delivered in what research suggests is a high-quality manner
• Amount of Service: or “dosage” refers to the amount and duration of services that were
received
• Risk Level: refers to the level of criminogenic risk for youth involved in the intervention.
The final output of the SPEP review is the Program Optimization Percentage (POP). This rate is
derived from the Basic Score and Program Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage
score that indicates how the service rates in effectiveness when compared to the potential
effectiveness if optimized to match the most effective services in the research. This means the
POP rate represents how close the program’s Primary Service is to its potential for that Primary
Service Type. For example, a POP rate of 55% would indicate that the program’s Primary
Service is operating at 55% of its potential effectiveness for recidivism reduction based on the
SPEP research.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Basic Score: 35 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 35 Points
POP: 100%
There are five Primary Service Types that have been classified into Groups with a maximum
number of points possible for rating purposes. Some Primary Service Types may also have
qualifying Supplemental Service Types that could earn a program an additional 5 points.
The Primary Service for this program is Moral Reconation Therapy.
The program was awarded 30 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 5
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.
The Primary Service was identified as this type of service as it is intended to correct faulty
cognitions and perceptions and provides skills individuals can use to monitor thought patterns and
correct behaviors.
An additional 5 points was awarded based on a Qualifying Supplemental Service. The Qualifying
Supplemental Service was identified as None (automatic 5 points added to score), which was not
demonstrated to have been implemented.
The Primary and Supplemental Service Raw Score is equal to the sum of the Primary Service
points plus the Qualifying Supplemental Service points.
Note: Quality information is evaluated during quarterly and annual reviews.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
Basic Score: 20 Points
2. Overall Quality of Service Delivery Score POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
The Quality of Service Delivery Score is the sum of the scores for the seven treatment quality
indicators. The Program Optimization Percentage Rating determines the Overall Quality of
Service Level:
Indicator Sum Score 0-3 = Low; Sum Score 4-7 = Medium; Sum Score 8-10 = High.
Sum of all Indicator Scores (a – g below): 8 Points
Overall Quality of Service Delivery Level:
Low (Raw Score = 5)
Medium (Raw Score = 10)
High (Raw Score = 20 Points)
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
a. Facilitator Training
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
All facilitator(s) of the Primary Service must have received formal training specific to the
intervention or model/protocol.
All facilitators of the primary service during the review period have received formal training in
MRT. MRT training is for four days and is conducted by a qualified trainer either in-person or
virtually. The training consists of reviewing of the manual, practicing facilitation of mock groups
and then debrief.
There were three staff trained in MRT, one clinical director, and two therapeutic managers. One of
the therapeutic managers facilitated MRT during the review period. The prior clinical director, one
therapeutic manager, the facility administrator and the current clinical director provided fidelity
monitoring for this group.
The program can earn one point if all facilitators are trained in the primary service prior to
facilitating groups.
At the time of the review, the program met the criteria for a score of one.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
b. Treatment Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
There is a specific written manual/protocol detailing delivery of the Primary Service.
The program uses the Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) curriculum "Juvenile MRT-How to
Escape Your Prison." The handbook contains informmation on the group process, specific
objective criteria and guidelines for all exercises and tasks in Moral Reconation Therapy, and
specific “how to” instructions. There are separate student manuals that are given to the youth.
Moral Reconation Therapy was designed to be an open group with groups being facilitated year-
round. All youth assigned to the Intensive Mental Health side of the program are required to
complete the primary service. The program provides the service on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and
Thursdays from 4-5:00 p.m. The program maintains the attendance sheets, staff trainings, and
monthly internal fidelity checks in the SPEP binder titled MRT.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
c. Observed Adherence to the Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Upon observation of the Primary Service by the Quality Improvement reviewer, the facilitator of
that service adhered to the written protocol/manual.
An observation of a Moral Reconation Therapy group took place virtually on Wednesday,
09/10/2025, from 4-5 p.m. The group consisted of one facilitator, ten (10) female youth, and one
direct care staff. The lesson was on Step #2-"Life Shield." The facilitator utilized the facilitator’s
manual throughout this group session and was knowledgeable about the material being presented
to the group. The facilitator used her own words to convey the information. The group actively
participated in the lesson entitled “Your Wiser Self.” The facilitator uaed effective motivational
interviewing skills to encourage the youth to share more about their personal experiences and to
assess for understanding.
The program can earn one point if the program follows the manual/protocol when delivering the
primary service.
At the time of the review, the program met the criteria for a score of one.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
d. Facilitator Turnover
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
Measures the extent to which facilitators of the specific intervention/service have changed as
well as gaps in service of that Primary Service.
A review of the program documentation showed there was no facilitator turnover for Moral
Reconation Therapy (MRT) during the annual review period from 09/01/2024-08/31/2025. There
were no gaps in service during this annual review period. An informal interview with the clinical
director confirmed that if a facilitator should leave the program, the program's goal would be to
have administrative staff or other trained staff take over that group. They would then hire another
therapist as soon as possible and train them so that there would be no gaps in services to the
youth. The program provided documentation of the one open, ongoing group of MRT with ten (10)
youth and two staff in that group. There have been thirty-six (36) youth that have completed MRT
since 09/01/2024.
The program can earn two points if facilitator turnover does not impact groups and there are no
unnecessary gaps in service.
At the time of the review, the program met the criteria for a score of two.
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
e. Internal Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
The program has a process to monitor the delivery of the intervention to examine how closely
actual implementation matches the model protocol.
A review of the documentation for the evaluation period showed that the program has a process
to perform fidelity monitoring. It is to be completed by the clinical director or her designee monthly
for each facilitator.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
There were three staff trained in Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT), the clinical director and two
therapeutic managers. One therapeutic manager facilitated the group during the evaluation
period. A total of six fidelity checks completed for the facilitator of MRT. The documentation
further shows that internal fidelity monitoring was not conducted monthly for the faciitator. It was
not completed for the months of 09/2024, 10/2024, 11/2024, 12/2024 and 05/2025. Monitoring
was completed for the months of 01/2025 through 04/2025 and 06/2025 throuh 08/2025. The
month of September is to be completed soon. The monitoring was completed by the prior clinical
director, one (1) therapeutic manager, the facility administrator and the current clinical director.
The program can earn two points if fidelity monitoring is completed every month for each
facilitator.
At the time of the review, the program did not meet criteria to earn a score of two.
Basic Score: 1 Point
f. Corrective Action based on Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
The program has a process by which corrective action is applied and demonstrated based on
the fidelity monitoring of the delinquency intervention/therapeutic service.
The program has a system in place to address the need for corrective actions identified during
monthly internal fidelity monitoring of Moral Reconation Therapy. A review of the documentation
provided as well as an interview with the clinical director showed that there had been no
corrective action taken during the review period. However, if facilitators are in need of corrective
action related to their delivery of the service they would receive progressive discipline in the form
of coaching, additional training, and formal write-ups.
The program can earn one point if any corrective action needed is identified, applied, and
demonstrated.
At the time of the review, the program met the criteria for a score of one.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 0 Point
Intervention Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Performance evaluations of the facilitators of the specific intervention/service include
evaluation of skill in delivering the intervention/service.
A review of three facilitator's employee performance evaluations showed no entries for evaluation
of the staff's performance in the delivery of Moral Reconation Therapy. Therefore there were no
comments on any strengths or weaknesses of which that facilitator should be aware. One staff
had an annual review completed, one had a ninety-day review completed. The other staff member
has not been at the program long enough to receive a review.
The program can earn 1 point if each facilitator’s performance evaluation includes discussion of
their skill in delivering this primary service.
At the time of the review, the program did not meet criteria to earn a score of one.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service - Duration
There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information System (JJIS) Evidence Based
Module (EBS) for the primary service for the annual review period. There was no data available to
enter into the report.
Basic Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Research indicates the target duration of 15 weeks for this type of service. Of the 0 youth in the
sample, 0% (0 of 0) reached at least the indicated target duration. Further explanation is detailed
in the Summary and Recommendations below.
Note: Dosage information (duration) is calculated from the Juvenile Justice Information System
(JJIS) Evidence-Based Services module. Duration is included for the youth in the SPEP sample.
4. Amount of Service – Contact Hours
There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information System (JJIS) Evidence Based
Module (EBS) for the primary service for the annual review period. There was no data available to
enter into the report.
Basic Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Research indicates a target of 45 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 0 youth in the
sample, 0% (0 of 0) reached the indicated target contact hours. Further explanation is detailed in
the Summary and Recommendations below.
Note: Dosage information (contact hours) is calculated from the Juvenile Justice Information
System (JJIS) Evidence-Based Services module. Contact hours are included for the youth in the
SPEP sample.
5. Risk Level of Youth Served:
There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information System (JJIS) Evidence Based
Module (EBS) for the primary service for the annual review period. There was no data available to
enter into the report.
Basic Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 0%
Moderate to High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Table 1
Moderate = 0 youth
Moderate-High = 0 youth
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 0 youth
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 0%
High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Table 2
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 0 youth
The risk level score is compiled by calculating the total percent of the SPEP sample that score
Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend and also the total percent of the SPEP sample that score High-
Risk to reoffend.
Of the SPEP sample, 0% (0 of 0) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 0
points.
Of the SPEP sample, 0% (0 of 0) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 0 points.
Note: The latest Community Assessment Tool (CAT) prior to the placement date was used in the
derivation of the risk level score. This CAT provides the best indication of the risk to re-offend
level of the youth when the youth was first placed in the program.
Summary and Recommendations
Program Program
Category Basic Score Optimization Optimization
Score Percentage
Primary and Supplemental Service Type 35 35 100%
Quality of Service Delivery 20 20 100%
Amount of Service: Duration 0 10 0%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 0 10 0%
Risk Level of Youth Served 0 25 0%
Totals 55 100 55%
This SPEP report evaluates Moral Reconation Therapy, an intervention delivered at Fort Myers
Academy.
It is unknown how many youth completed the program during the review period. The program did
not enter data into the Evidence-Based Service Module (EBS).
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
The program earned 0 points for Amount of Service: Duration and Amount of Service: Contact
Hours. There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information system (JJIS) Evidence-
Based Services (EBS) module for any youths. With no JJIS data to review, the SPEP score was
reduced. The program must enter dosage data into JJIS in order to receive any score in this
area.
The Risk Level of Youth Served is unknown due to the program not entering data into the EBS
Module. There was no sample available to calculate the Risk Level of Youth Served. This is
calculated using data from the Community Assessment Tool (CAT). This score reflects youths'
most recent CAT score prior to placement at the program. The program itself has no control over
youths' CAT risk level because the scored assessment was administered prior to the youths'
admission.
Had the percentage of youth served with Moderate-High and High risk to reoffend been higher,
and this report awarded each 25 of the available points for this section, the Program Optimization
Percentage for this service would increase to 80%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Fort Myers Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by ensuring
fidelity monitoring is completed every month for each facilitator and each facilitator’s performance
evaluation includes discussion of their skill in delivering this primary service.
Fort Myers Academy can optimize their SPEP Amount of Service score by ensuring dosage for all
youth is recorded accurately in EBS and by ensuring youth receive the full targeted dosage of
service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 9

file_name: FY2025-26 Fort Myers Academy MRT.pdf

service_type: Moral Reconation Therapy