summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Everglades Youth Academy
Youth Opportunity Investments, LLC
(Contract Provider)
5050 NE 168th street
Okeechobee, Florida 34972
Primary Service: Impact of Crime
SPEP Review Period: December 1, 2021-November 30, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 6, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: March 30, 2023
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.
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) review encompasses twelve (12) months
of records. Impact of Crime is based on the belief that crime is more than just a legal definition,
but rather crime affects the victim, the offender, their families, and the community. The harm
caused brings with it the moral responsibility to all involved. The focus of Impact of Crime is to
help offenders understand the harm they have created and assist them in taking personal
accountability for their actions. Together, the victim, offender, and the community arrive at a viable
solution to repair the harm caused by the offender. Once the harm is repaired, the offender
subsequently reintegrates back into the community. Facilitators are encouraged to bring in victim
impact speakers throughout the course of the curriculum.
The program provided documentation of three staff members having been trained to facilitate
Impact of Crime- two case managers and the director of case management.
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 utilizes the department-produced curriculum for Impact of Crime (IOC). It is highly
detailed, providing a facilitator's manual and student workbook. The facilitator's manual provides
lesson plans, classroom management ideas, and tips for engaging youth discussions. The student
manual provides reproducible worksheets to help facilitate group discussions and review concepts
learned during the group sessions. Homework materials are also utilized in the student manual to
reenforce learned concepts. IOC is conducted as a closed group, meaning once a cohort has
begun, no new youth may be added.
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.
A session of Impact of Crime was observed during the review period. The facilitator had a copy of
the facilitator's guide open as a reference during the group. The group consisted of the facilitator
reviewing key points from the previous lesson, then having the youth read definitions of new key
words to be introduced during this session. The youth both completed individual exercises in their
student editions and had a large group discussion about the ripple effects of crime. The youth
were generally engaged and participated in the discussion. No behavioral issues were observed.
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.
According to documentation provided by the program and an informal conversation with the
director of case management, the program has experienced significant turnover of Impact of
Crime (IOC) facilitators during the review period. The director of case management stated that
maintaining a staff of case managers is difficult.
The program completed one cohort of IOC during the review period and a second cohort was
ongoing at the time of this review. A cohort began on June, 2, 2022 with twelve (12) youth and
was completed on September 20, 2022 with twelve (12) youth.
A second cohort began on November 11, 2022 with eleven (11) youth and was ongoing at the
time of the review with eleven (11) youth.
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.
According to documentation provided by the program, internal fidelity monitoring took place in four
of the five months Impact of Crime was facilitated. The director of case management provides the
monthly internal fidelity monitoring.
The program can earn 2 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 2.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
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.
A review of documentation confirmed no corrective actions were initated during the review period
for facilitatirs of Impact of Crime. The facilitators were found to be delivering the service in an
acceptable manner. During an informal interview with the director of case management, it was
explained that if a need for a corrective action plan is discovered, the director of case
management will sit with the facilitator and develop a plan to improve the facilitator's skills.
Additional internal fidelity monitoring may also occur.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1 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 copy of the annual employee evaluations were provided as part of the review. Each employee
who facilitated Impact of Crime was rated on their effectiveness of service delivery.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 8 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 80%
Research indicates the target duration of 16 weeks for this type of service. Of the 19 youth in the
sample, 95% (18 of 19) 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
Basic Score: 8 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 80%
Research indicates a target of 24 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 19 youth in the
sample, 95% (18 of 19) 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:
Basic Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 48%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 79%
Moderate to High Score: 7 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 58%
Table 1
Moderate = 3 youth
Moderate-High = 8 youth
High = 4 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 19 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 21%
High Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 38%
Table 2
High = 4 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 19 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, 79% (15 of 19) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 7 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 21% (4 of 19) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 5 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 8 10 80%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 8 10 80%
Risk Level of Youth Served 12 25 48%
Totals 68 85 80%
This SPEP report evaluates Impact of Crime, an intervention delivered at Everglades Youth
Academy.
21 youth completed the program during the review period.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 8 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 19 total youth sampled, all
19 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 18 received at least the
recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 13 and 21 weeks of
service, with an average of 19 weeks.
The program earned 8 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 19 total youth
sampled, all 19 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 18 received at least the
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 21 and 36 hours of
service, with an average of 34 hours.
The program was awarded 12 available points for 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 95%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Impact of Crime is an intervention suitable for all youth. The Department recommends providing
this service to every youth in the program.
Everglades Youth Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by
ensuring fidelity monitoring is completed every month for each facilitator.
Everglades Youth 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: FY2022-23 Everglades YA IOC.pdf


state: FL

facility_name: Everglades Youth Academy

summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Everglades Youth Academy
Youth Opportunity Investments, LLC
(Contract Provider)
5050 NE 168th Street
Okeechobee, Florida 34972
Primary Service: Moral Reconation Therapy
SPEP Review Period: December 1, 2021-November 30, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 7, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: April 10, 2023
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.
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) review encompasses twelve (12) months
of records. Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) was initially designed as a treatment program for
adults residing in prison-based substance abuse therapeutic communities. Moral Reconation
Therapy is designed to help participants re-examine their choices and develop cognitive
structures which will improve decision-making skills. The curriculum for juveniles, entitled Juvenile
MRT- How to Escape Your Prison, is appropriate for both juvenile offenders and juvenile
substance abusers, and is appropriate for general treatment and substance abuse treatment.
Based on cognitive-behavioral therapy principles, characteristics guiding MRT practice include: 1)
self-assessment of attitudes, beliefs, defense mechanisms, and behavior, 2) current relationship
assessment, 3) positive reinforcement, 4) alteration of self-concept in the positive direction, 5)
changes in gratification stimuli, and 6) enhance moral reasoning.
MRT groups are facilitated by master level therapists. The clinical director provided
documentation of the clinical director, assistant clinical director, and six therapists being trained in
the service. During the review period, between four and six therapists were facilitating the primary
service at any one time. All received training before providing services to youth.
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 clinical director provided a copy of the Moral Reconation Therapy curriculum, Juvenile MRT-
How to Escape Your Prison. It is a commercially-produced volume with both student and facilitator
editions. Every youth who enters the program is enrolled in the service. MRT runs as an open
group, meaning as new youth enter the program, they are immediately enrolled in the service.
Groups are organized based on their assigned living modules. Each living module has its own
group. MRT groups are conducted twice per week on Mondays and Wednesdays.
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 Moral Reconation Therapy took place during the annual review. The group
consisted of nine youth, one facilitator, and one direct care staff, and was held in one of the
classrooms. The youth were engaged in the lesson in which the facilitator used lecture, large
group discussion, and individual writing assignments. The group was engaged in the lesson the
entire time and no behavioral issues were observed.
Basic Score: 1 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.
According to documentation provided, facilitator turnover did occur for Moral Reconation Therapy,
but it did not adversely affect delivery of the service. If one facilitator leaves, another facilitator
covers the cohort until a new therapist is hired. Cohorts with facilitator turnover were transitioned
to a new facilitator without gaps in service.
The program provided documentation of six cohorts of the service being facilitated.
The program can earn 2 points if facilitator turnover does not impact groups.
At the time of the review, the program did not meet criteria to earn a score of 2.
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.
According to documentation provided, internal fidelity was conducted for facilitators of Moral
Reconation Therapy (MRT). As six cohorts were facilitated monthly during the review period,
there were seventy-two (72) internal fidelity monitorings required. Internal fidelity monitoring took
place in fifty-six (56) of seventy-two (72) months. Each person conducting internal fidelity
monitoring was trained in the service.
The program can earn 2 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 2.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
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 process in place to address corrective actions identified during monthly
internal fidelity monitoring. A review of documentation confirmed no corrective actions were
initated during the review period. The facilitators were found to be delivering Moral Reconation
Therapy in an acceptable manner.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1 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 copy of the annual employee evaluations were provided as part of the review. Each employee
who facilitated Moral Reconation Therapy was rated on their effectiveness of service delivery.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 4 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 40%
Research indicates the target duration of 15 weeks for this type of service. Of the 21 youth in the
sample, 57% (12 of 21) 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
Basic Score: 8 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 80%
Research indicates a target of 45 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 21 youth in the
sample, 95% (20 of 21) 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:
Basic Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 48%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 76%
Moderate to High Score: 7 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 58%
Table 1
Moderate = 3 youth
Moderate-High = 8 youth
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 21 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 24%
High Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 38%
Table 2
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 21 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, 76% (16 of 21) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 7 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 24% (5 of 21) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 5 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 4 10 40%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 8 10 80%
Risk Level of Youth Served 12 25 48%
Totals 79 100 79%
This SPEP report evaluates Moral Reconation Therapy, an intervention delivered at Everglades
Youth Academy.
21 youth completed the program during the review period.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 4 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 21 total youth sampled, only
12 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 12
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 47
and 77 weeks of service, with an average of 65 weeks.
The program earned 8 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 21 total youth
sampled, all 21 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 20 received at least the
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 36 and 120 hours of
service, with an average of 81 hours.
The program was awarded 12 available points for 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 92%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Everglades Youth Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by
ensuring facilitator turnover does not impact groups and fidelity monitoring is completed every
month for each facilitator.
Everglades Youth 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

source: DJJ

report_type: SPEP

file_name: FY2022-23 Everglades YA MRT.pdf

program_name_raw: Everglades Youth Academy

program_status_note: Open

service_type: Moral Reconation Therapy


summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Everglades Youth Academy
Youth Opportunity Investments, LLC
(Contract Provider)
5050 NE 168th Street
Okeechobee, Florida 34972
Primary Service: Skillstreaming the Adolescent
SPEP Review Period: December 1, 2021- November 30, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 7, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: April 10, 2023
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 Skillstreaming the Adolescent.
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 psychological or
interpersonal problems or issues faced by an individual and involves a group of youths interacting
with each other.
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.
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) review encompasses twelve (12) months
of records. Skillstreaming the Adolescent is designated as a primary service at Everglades
Academy. The program provided documentation of the clinical director, the assistant clincial
director, and six therapists being trained in the primary service. All facilitators are trained in
Skillstreaming the Adolescent prior to delivering services. The clinical director performs most of
the internal fidelity monitoring.
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 Skillstreaming the Adolescent curriculum is a commercially-produced, highly organized
textbook with fifty (50) skills which provide both discussion and practice in each skill. The text
provides for role playing situations, skill cards, and discussions for each skill. Skillstreaming the
Adolescent employs a four-part training approach—modeling, role-playing, performance
feedback, and generalization—to teach essential prosocial skills to adolescents. The curriculum
provides a complete description of the Skillstreaming intervention, with instructions for teaching
fifty (50) prosocial skills.
Skillstreaming the Adolescent is run as an open group, meaning youth are added to the group
upon their arrival at the program. Groups are typically facilitated on the living modules.
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.
A session of Skillstreaming the Adolescent was observed during the annual review. The group
took place in a classroom and was attended by ten (10) youth, one facilitator, and one direct care
staff. The facilitator led the group in a discussion about short and long term behavioral goals. The
youth were engaged as they explored possible interest in other fields that may lead to long term
employment. The group ended with a worksheet where the youth listed goals in one-, five-, and
ten (10)-year increments. The facilitator followed the lesson plan.
Basic Score: 1 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.
According to documentation provided by the program, no facilitator turnover occurred which
adversely affected delivery of Skillstreaming the Adolescent. Cohorts with facilitator turnover were
transitioned to a new facilitator without gaps in service. If a therapist leaves the program, either
the assistant clinical director or another therapist will step in to provide coverage. Skillstreaming
the Adolescent is run year-round as an open group; there were no gaps in service during the
review period.
The program can earn 2 points if facilitator turnover does not impact groups.
At the time of the review, the program did not meet criteria to earn a score of 2.
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.
Internal fidelity monitoring took place on a monthly basis for facilitators of Skillstreaming the
Adolescent. As six cohorts were facilitated during the review period, seventy-two (72) internal
fidelity monitoring must take place; the program provided documentation of forty-two (42) internal
fidelity montorings taking place. During an informal conversation with the clinical director, the
number of therapists remaining changes and sometimes not enough are available to facilitate
groups and provide internal fidelity monitoring. Each person monitoring service delivery was
trained in the primary service.
The program can earn 2 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 2.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
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 process to address corrective actions identified during monthly internal fidelity
monitoring. A review of documentation confirmed no corrective actions were initated during the
review period for facilitators of Skillstreaming the Adolescent. The facilitators were found to be
delivering the service in an acceptable manner.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1 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 copy of the annual employee evaluations were provided as part of the review. Each employee
who facilitated Skillstreaming the Adolescent was rated on their effectiveness in service delivery.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 6 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 60%
Research indicates the target duration of 16 weeks for this type of service. Of the 21 youth in the
sample, 67% (14 of 21) 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
Basic Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Research indicates a target of 24 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 21 youth in the
sample, 100% (21 of 21) 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:
Basic Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 48%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 76%
Moderate to High Score: 7 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 58%
Table 1
Moderate = 3 youth
Moderate-High = 8 youth
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 21 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 24%
High Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 38%
Table 2
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 21 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, 76% (16 of 21) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 7 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 24% (5 of 21) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 5 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 6 10 60%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 10 10 100%
Risk Level of Youth Served 12 25 48%
Totals 68 85 80%
This SPEP report evaluates Skillstreaming the Adolescent, an intervention delivered at
Everglades Youth Academy.
21 youth completed the program during the review period.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 6 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 21 total youth sampled, only
14 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 14
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 63
and 87 weeks of service, with an average of 79 weeks.
The program earned 6 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 21 total youth
sampled, all 21 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 21 received at least the
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 56 and 112 hours of
service, with an average of 80 hours.
The program was awarded 12 available points for 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 95%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Everglades Youth Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by
ensuring fidelity monitoring is completed every month for each facilitator and fidelity monitoring is
completed every month for each facilitator.
Everglades Youth 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: FY2022-23 Everglades YA Skillstreaming.pdf

service_type: Skillstreaming the Adolescent


summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program
Youth Opportunity Investments, LLC
(Contract Provider)
5050 NE 168th Street
Okeechobee, Florida 34972
Primary Service: Impact of Crime
SPEP Review Period: December 1, 2021-November 30, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 6, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: April 10, 2023
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): 10 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.
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) review encompasses twelve (12) months
of records. Impact of Crime is based on the belief that crime is more than just a legal definition,
but rather crime affects the victim, the offender, their families, and the community. The harm
caused brings with it the moral responsibility to all involved. The focus of Impact of Crime is to
help offenders understand the harm they have created and assist them in taking personal
accountability for their actions. Together, the victim, offender, and the community arrive at a viable
solution to repair the harm caused by the offender. Once the harm is repaired, the offender
subsequently reintegrates back into the community. Facilitators are encouraged to bring in victim
impact speakers throughout the course of the curriculum.
The program provided documentation of one case manager and one director of case
management having been trained in the service.
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 utilizes the department-produced curriculum for Impact of Crime (IOC). It is highly
detailed, providing a facilitator's manual and student workbook. The facilitator's manual provides
lesson plans, classroom management ideas, and tips for engaging youth discussions. The student
manual provides reproducible worksheets to help facilitate group discussions and review concepts
learned during the group sessions. Homework materials are also utilized in the student manual to
reenforce learned concepts. IOC is conducted as a closed group, meaning once a cohort has
begun, no new youth may be added.
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.
A session of Impact of Crime was observed during the review period. The facilitator had a copy of
the facilitator's guide open as a reference during the group. The group consisted of the facilitator
reviewing key points from the previous lesson, then having the youth read definitions of new key
words to be introduced during this session. The youth both completed individual exercises in their
student editions and had a large group discussion about the ripple effects of crime. The youth
were generally engaged and participated in the discussion. No behavioral issues were observed.
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.
According to documentation provided by the program and an informal interview with the director of
case management, substantial case manager turnover has occurred. New case managers were
hired in early December 2021 and were not fully trained and able to facilitate Impact of Crime
(IOC) until June 2022. That staff has recently left the program, and no new staff has been hired.
The lack of staff has caused delays in delivery of the service.
Two cohorts of IOC were facilitated during the review period. The first cohort began on June 2,
2022 with eleven (11) youth and was completed on September 20, 2022 with eleven (11) youth.
A second cohort began on November 10, 2022 and was ongoing at the time of the review with
eight youth.
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.
Internal fidelity monitoring took place on a monthly basis for facilitators of Impact of Crime. Each
person facilitating group was observed and the monitoring was conducted by staff member trained
in Impact of Crime.
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.
A review of documentation confirmed no corrective actions were initated during the review period
for facilitatirs of Impact of Crime. The facilitators were found to be delivering the service in an
acceptable manner. During an informal interview with the director of case management, it was
explained that if a need for a corrective action plan is discovered, the director of case
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
management will sit with the facilitator and develop a plan to improve the facilitator's skills.
Additional internal fidelity monitoring may also occur.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1 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 copy of the annual employee evaluations were provided as part of the review. Each employee
who facilitated Impact of Crime was rated on their effectiveness of service delivery.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 8 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 80%
Research indicates the target duration of 16 weeks for this type of service. Of the 13 youth in the
sample, 92% (12 of 13) 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
Basic Score: 8 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 80%
Research indicates a target of 24 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 13 youth in the
sample, 92% (12 of 13) 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:
Basic Score: 2 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 8%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 31%
Moderate to High Score: 2 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 17%
Table 1
Moderate = 2 youth
Moderate-High = 2 youth
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 13 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
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 = 13 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, 31% (4 of 13) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 2 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 0% (0 of 13) 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 8 10 80%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 8 10 80%
Risk Level of Youth Served 2 25 8%
Totals 58 85 68%
This SPEP report evaluates Impact of Crime, an intervention delivered at Everglades Youth
Academy Sex Offender Program.
13 youth completed the program during the review period. Of those youth, all 13 were included in
the sample.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 8 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 13 total youth sampled, only
12 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 12
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 17
and 18 weeks of service, with an average of 18 weeks.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
The program earned 8 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 13 total youth
sampled, only 12 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 12
received at least the recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 32
and 35 hours of service, with an average of 33 hours.
The program was awarded 2 available points for 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.
Based on the risk level of the youth placed at the program (8% Program Optimization
Percentage), the Department should work to ensure a larger proportion of higher risk youth are
recommended. As the program serves youth with a history of sexual behavior problems, this
includes a multitier strategy of working with stakeholders to achieve that practice, as well as
ensuring appropriate treatment services are available in the community to reduce the reliance on
residential commitment for lower risk youth presenting with sexually-related offenses.
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 95%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program can maintain their SPEP Quality of Service
Delivery score by continuing the practices in place at the time of this review.
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program 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: FY2022-23 Everglades SO IOC.pdf

service_type: Impact of Crime


summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program
Youth Opportunity Investments
(Contract Provider)
5050 NE 168th Street
Okeechobeee, Florida 34972
Primary Service: Pathways: A Guided Workbook for Youth Beginning
Treatment
SPEP Review Period: December 1, 2021-November 30, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 6, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: April 10, 2023
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: 30 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 30 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 Pathways: A Guided Workbook for Youth Beginning
Treatment.
The program was awarded 25 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 4
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Group Counseling. The Primary
Service was identified as this type of service as it focuses on psychological or interpersonal
problems or issues faced by an individual and involves a group of youths interacting with each
other.
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): 10 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.
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) review encompasses twelve (12) months
of records. Pathways: A Guided Workbook for Youth Beginning Treatment (Pathways), Fourth
Edition, is a structured, guided workbook for use with adolescent males and females with sexual
behavior problems, including but not limited to sexual offending. The treatment focuses
extensively on helping clients develop healthy and responsible patterns of thinking and behavior,
and also provides concrete guidance about how to control sexual feelings in healthy and
responsible ways, including guidelines for successful friendships and dating relationships.
Relapse prevention techniques are reinforced, as is a new focus on helping clients develop
healthy and responsible lifestyles by creating a Healthy Living Project to follow.
Pathways is facilitated by the clincial director and assistant clinical director. The program provided
documentation of both facilitators having been trained to facilitate the service.
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 Pathways: A Guided Workbook for Youth Beginning Treatment (Pathways) curriculum is a
4th edition textbook which contains fourteen (14) chapters. It consists of group discussion ideas,
as well as reproducible worksheets, and group readings. Each chapter also has a chapter review
and test at the end to review the concepts covered it the chapter.
The program has two cohorts of the service being delivered twice per week; all youth are required
to attend the group. Pathways operates as an open group, meaning as youth enter the program
they are added to one of the two cohorts.
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.
A session of Pathways: A Guided Workbook for Youth Beginning Treatment was observed during
the review period. The group session took place in a classroom with eleven (11) youth. The
facilitator led a group discussion of appropirate situational behaviors. There were no behavior
issues observed during the group. The facilitator did not read the script verbatim, but did have the
manual open on the desk to ensure all points of the lesson were covered.
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.
According to documentation provided by the program, no facilitator turnover occurred which
adversely affected delivery of Pathways: A Guided Workbook for Youth Beginning Treatment
(Pathways). An assistant clinical director was hired during the review period, allowing the cohort
to be split into two smaller groups. Pathways is run year-round as an open group; there were no
gaps in services during the review period.
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.
Internal fidelity monitoring took place on a monthly basis for facilitators of Pathways: A Guided
Workbook for Youth Beginning Treatment (Pathways). The facilitators are able to observe each
other conduct Pathways.
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 process in place to address corrective actions discovered during monthly
internal fidelity monitoring. A review of documentation confirmed no corrective actions were
initated during the review period. The facilitators were found to be delivering Pathways: A Guided
Workbook for Youth Beginning Treatment in an acceptable manner.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1 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 copy of the annual employee evaluations were provided as part of the review. Each employee
who facilitated Pathways: A Guided Workbook for Youth Beginning Treatment was rated on their
effectiveness in service delivery.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 6 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 60%
Research indicates the target duration of 24 weeks for this type of service. Of the 13 youth in the
sample, 62% (8 of 13) 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
Basic Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Research indicates a target of 40 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 13 youth in the
sample, 100% (13 of 13) 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:
Basic Score: 2 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 8%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 31%
Moderate to High Score: 2 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 17%
Table 1
Moderate = 2 youth
Moderate-High = 2 youth
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 13 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
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 = 13 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, 31% (4 of 13) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 2 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 0% (0 of 13) 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 30 30 100%
Quality of Service Delivery 20 20 100%
Amount of Service: Duration 6 10 60%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 10 10 100%
Risk Level of Youth Served 2 25 8%
Totals 68 95 72%
This SPEP report evaluates Pathways: A Guided Workbook for Youth Beginning Treatment, an
intervention delivered at Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program.
13 youth completed the program during the review period. Of those youth, all 13 were included in
the sample.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 6 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 13 total youth sampled, only
8 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 8
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 54
and 83 weeks of service, with an average of 66 weeks.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
The program earned 10 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 13 total youth
sampled, all 13 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 13 received at least the
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 55 and 144 hours of
service, with an average of 103 hours.
The program was awarded 2 available points for 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.
Based on the risk level of the youth placed at the program (8% Program Optimization
Percentage), the Department should work to ensure a larger proportion of higher risk youth are
recommended. As the program serves youth with a history of sexual behavior problems, this
includes a multitier strategy of working with stakeholders to achieve that practice, as well as
ensuring appropriate treatment services are available in the community to reduce the reliance on
residential commitment for lower risk youth presenting with sexually-related offenses.
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 96%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program can maintain their SPEP Quality of Service
Delivery score by continuing the practices in place at the time of this review.
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program 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: FY2022-23 Everglades SO Pathways.pdf

service_type: Pathways to Self‐Discovery and Change


summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program
Youth Opportunity Investments, LLC
(Contract Provider)
5050 168th Street
Okeechobee, Florida 34972
Primary Service: Skillstreaming the Adolescent
SPEP Review Period: December 1, 2021-November 30, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 6, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: April 10, 2023
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 Skillstreaming the Adolescent.
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.
Job-Related Training: includes vocational counseling, job training arranged to provide work
experience. The overall emphasis is on preparing the juveniles to enter the work force
Individual Counseling: includes any range of treatment techniques that focus on psychological or
interpersonal problems or issues faced by an individual that involves a one-on-one relationship
with a therapist or counselor
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): 10 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.
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) review encompasses twelve (12) months
of SPEP records. Skillstreaming the Adolescent is designated as a primary service at Everglades
Academy Sex Offender Program. The program provided documentation confirming six therapists
are trained in and delivering the service.
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 Skillstreaming the Adolescent curriculum is a commercially-produced, highly organized
textbook with fifty (50) skills which provide both discussion and practice in each skill. The text
provides for role playing situations, skill cards, and discussions for each skill. Skillstreaming the
Adolescent employs a four-part training approach—modeling, role-playing, performance
feedback, and generalization—to teach essential prosocial skills to adolescents. The curriculum
provides a complete description of the Skillstreaming intervention, with instructions for teaching
fifty (50) prosocial skills.
Skillstreaming the Adolescent is run as an open group, meaning youth are added to the group
upon their arrival at the program. Groups are typically facilitated on the living modules.
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.
A session of Skillstreaming the Adolescent was observed during the review period. The group
took place in a classroom and was attended by twelve (12) youth, one facilitator, and one direct
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
care staff. The facilitator led the group in a discussion triggers leading to anger for each youth. It
was discussed if we are able to monitor our triggers, were are more able to be in control when
triggered and avoiding violent behaviors. The group was engaged in the conversation and no
behavioral issues were observed.
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.
According to documentation provided by the program, no facilitator turnover occurred which
adversely affected delivery of Skillstreaming the Adolescent. During an informal discussion with
the clinical director, it was revealed that if a therapist leaves the program, other therapists,
including the clinical and assistant clinical directors, rotate to cover the cohort until a new
therapists is hired. Skillstreaming the Adolescent is run year-round as an open group; there were
no gaps in service during the review period.
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.
Internal fidelity monitoring took place on a monthly basis for facilitators of Skillstreaming the
Adolescent. Each person facilitating group was observed and the monitoring was conducted by
staff member trained in the service.
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 process to address corrective actions identified during monthly internal fidelity
monitoring. A review of documentation confirmed no corrective actions were initated during the
review period for facilitators of Skillstreaming the Adolescent. The facilitators were found to be
delivering the service in an acceptable manner.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1 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 copy of the annual employee evaluations were provided as part of the review. Each employee
who facilitated Skillstreaming the Adolescent was rated on their effectiveness in service delivery.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 6 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 60%
Research indicates the target duration of 16 weeks for this type of service. Of the 13 youth in the
sample, 62% (8 of 13) 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
Basic Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Research indicates a target of 24 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 13 youth in the
sample, 100% (13 of 13) 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:
Basic Score: 2 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 8%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 31%
Moderate to High Score: 2 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 17%
Table 1
Moderate = 2 youth
Moderate-High = 2 youth
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 13 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
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 = 13 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, 31% (4 of 13) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 2 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 0% (0 of 13) 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 6 10 60%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 10 10 100%
Risk Level of Youth Served 2 25 8%
Totals 58 85 68%
This SPEP report evaluates Skillstreaming the Adolescent, an intervention delivered at
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program.
13 youth completed the program during the review period.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 6 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 13 total youth sampled, only
8 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 8
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 54
and 83 weeks of service, with an average of 66 weeks.
The program earned 10 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 13 total youth
sampled, all 13 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 13 received at least the
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 50 and 280 hours of
service, with an average of 122 hours.
The program was awarded 2 available points for 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.
Based on the risk level of the youth placed at the program (8% Program Optimization
Percentage), the Department should work to ensure a larger proportion of higher risk youth are
recommended. As the program serves youth with a history of sexual behavior problems, this
includes a multitier strategy of working with stakeholders to achieve that practice, as well as
ensuring appropriate treatment services are available in the community to reduce the reliance on
residential commitment for lower risk youth presenting with sexually-related offenses.
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 95%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program can maintain their SPEP Quality of Service
Delivery score by continuing the practices in place at the time of this review.
Everglades Youth Academy Sex Offender Program can optimize their SPEP Amount of Service
score by ensuring that dosage for all youth is recorded accurately in EBS and by ensuring that
youth receive the full targeted dosage of service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8

file_name: FY2022-23 Everglades SO Skillstreaming.pdf