state: FL

facility_name: Orange Youth Academy

summary: PREA

raw_content:
PREA AUDIT: Auditor’s Final Report
JUVENILE FACILITIES
Name of Facility: ORANGE COUNTY YOUTH ACADEMY/ ORLANDO INTENSIVE
Physical Address: 3150 39TH STREET, ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32839
Date report submitted
Auditor information: Mr. Tracy S. Maxwell
Address: 1761 REDWOOD LANE, MIDDLEBURG 32068
Email: TORCHLIGHT4CHANGE@GMAIL.COM
Telephone number: 904-349-0045
Date of facility visit July 9-11
Facility Information
Facility Mailing Address:
(if different from above)
Telephone Number: 407-835-0111
The Facility is: Military County Federal
Private for profit Municipal State
X Private not for profit
Facility Type: Detention Correction Other:
Name of PREA Compliance Manager: Todd Johnson Title: Facility
Administrator
407-835-0111
Email Address: Todd.johnson@us.G4s.com Telephone Number:
Agency Information
Name of Agency: G4S YOUTH SERVICES, LLC
Governing Authority or
Parent Agency: (if
applicable)
Physical Address: 6302 Benjamin Road, Suite 400, Tampa Florida 33634
Mailing Address: (if
different from above)
630
Telephone Number:
Agency Chief Executive Officer
Name: Jim Hill Title: President
Email Address: Jim.Hill@us.G4s.com
Telephone
Number: 813-514-6275 ext. 202
Agency Wide PREA Coordinator:
Name: Bobbi.Pohlman-Rodgers Title: PREA Coordinator
Email Address:
Bobbi.Pohlman@us.G4S.com Telephone
Number: 954-818-5131
1
AUDIT FINDINGS
NARRATIVE:
The Orange Youth Academy is a 48-bed hardware-and staff-secure high-risk program for males between the
ages of 14–21. The program provides Mental Health Overlay Services (MHOS) and evidence-based practices
which incorporate the principles of restorative justice.
DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY CHARACTERISTICS:
The goal of the program is to provide an environment that offers vast opportunities for personal growth and
fosters feelings of safety and well-being. Youth participate in daily psychotherapeutic services, seven days per
week, including group and individual counseling and cognitive skills training sessions, as well as educational
and recreational services. Family involvement is an integral component and is achieved through family
counseling, visitation, and Family Day events. Clothing and uniforms are provided by the program. The
anticipated average length of stay for each youth is between 9–12 months. Orange Youth Academy (school
number 488009) is a Type 2 program offering English, Math, Science, Social Studies, Reading and one elective
course. Education services are provided by the Orange County School District.
Orlando Intensive Youth Academy is a 16-bed, staff-secure moderate-risk program for males between the ages
of 12-18. The program provides intensive mental health services, special needs mental health services, social
and life skills, vocational training, and on-site educational classes. The program model is based on a cognitive
behavioral approach incorporating evidence-based treatment practices and restorative justice principles. Youth
receive weekly individual therapy and monthly family therapy sessions. A licensed psychologist completes
assessments and provides monthly follow-ups. Clothing and uniforms are provided by the program. The
anticipated average length of stay is between 9–12 months.
SUMMARY OF AUDIT FINDINGS:
The notification of the on-site audit was posted on May 28, 2014, six weeks prior to the first date of the on-site
audit. The posting of the notices was verified by photographs received electronically from the PREA
Coordinators. The photographs indicated notices were posted in various locations throughout the facility
including the housing unit and administrative areas. The Pre-Audit Questionnaire, policies and supporting
documentation were received on May 28, 2014. The documents were uploaded to a UBS flash drive.
The on-site audit was conducted July 9-10, 2014. An in-brief was conducted with the Facility Administrator
and Assistant Facility Administrator. At the conclusion of the in-brief a complete tour of the facility was
conducted including the resident sleeping, showering areas and areas where residents primarily spend their
time.
My initial assessment of the facility was the youth were under direct supervision of the staff while engaged in
various activities. The sanitation was acceptable throughout the facility. The average daily population during
the past 12 months was 62 residents. The average age of the residents was 13-19 years. Staff acknowledged
where the blind spots were located in the facility but noted that residents are never left without supervision.
There were 23 surveillance cameras located throughout the facility. There was only one camera located in the
kitchen area which limits the viewing of the washing area. Additionally, there was also a blind spot noted
outside of the administration area leading into one of the housing dorms. It is recommended that additional
cameras be place in these areas. The surveillance system does not capture youth in showers or in their rooms.
During the two-day on-site visit, ten staff including those from all three shifts were interviewed. All interviews
validated staff knowledge of PREA standards and their responsibilities as first responders. Fourteen residents
were also interviewed. Residents were well informed of their right to be free from sexual abuse and
harassment, how to report sexual abuse and harassment, and the services that the community based victims
advocate provides.
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 2
The victims’ advocacy Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) service was established; however, the contract
has not been sign during the audit.
Secondary documentation to include two PREA related complaints and one report to law enforcement
concerning an incident which allegedly took place at another facility were thoroughly reviewed.
Number of standards exceeded: 0
Number of standards met: 38
Number of standards not met: 0
Number of standards Not Applicable: 3
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 3
Standard 115.311- Zero Tolerance of Sexual Abuse and Sexual Harassment; PREA
Coordinator
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
The initial review of Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive facility policy (10-25
page #3) met the intent of the PREA Standard. The policy sufficiently met the zero-tolerance
standard prohibiting all forms of sexual abuse and harassment. My interview with the Facility
Administrator who also serves as the PREA Compliance Manager was fully involved and
inculcated a zero-tolerance environment towards all forms of sexual abuse and
harassment with the facility. The policy outlined in the facility’s approach to preventing,
detecting and responding to sexual abuse and harassment, including definitions of prohibited
behaviors and sanctions for prohibited behaviors.
The agency has one dedicated PREA Coordinator. Interviews with the PREA Coordinator and
PREA Manager/Facility Administrator both validated their responsibilities and both conveyed
sufficient time to oversee the facility’s PREA compliance efforts and to perform their other duties.
Standard 115.312- Contracting with Other Entities for the Confinement of Residents
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
X Non- Applicable Standard
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive is a stand-alone facility contracted
and govern by The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice and does not contract for
confinement of its residents.
Standard 115.313- Supervision and Monitoring
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 4
Auditor comments:
In reviewing the facility’s documentation and submitted staffing plan assessment,
considerations were documented and validated for staffing ratios of 1.8 staff to resident during
waking hours. It is important to note that this ratio was also maintained during the evening and
midnight shifts. An assessment was conducted on the physical plant layout and facility blind-
spots.
Documented unannounced higher-level supervisor rounds as required in the standard to monitor,
deter sexual harassment and sexual abuse was validated compliant through corrective action
documentation submitted.
Standard 115.315- Limits to Cross-Gender Viewing and Searches
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 prohibits cross-gender searches
only in exigent circumstances and must document reasoning for the opposite gender search. The
policy additionally prohibited staff from examining a transgender or intersex youth for the sole
purpose of determining the resident’s genital status. Body cavity searches require the Director’s
authorization and must be conducted by licensed medical personnel in a medical establishment.
The Search Log indicated there were no cross-gender strip searches or body cavity searches of
residents in the past 12 months. This standard was validated compliant during resident and staff
interviews.
The policy limits pat-down searches to male staff absent exigent circumstances. This was
validated during interviews with both residents and staff.
Policy requires female staff, volunteers and contractors entering the housing unit to announce
themselves upon entering the areas where the likelihood of residents performing bodily functions
occur and shower except in exigent circumstances or when viewing is incidental to routine room
checks. Staff and Contractor training records along with staff interviews validated 100%
compliance training on cross-gender pat searches, searches of transgender and intersex residents
and Zero tolerance policy concerning sexual harassment and sexual abuse of Residents and Staff.
Standard 115.316- Residents with Disabilities and Residents Who are Limited English
Proficient
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 5
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive has identified selected staff who shall
provide interpreter assistance to residents. The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice provides
interpreter services, a hearing impaired specialist, a vision impaired specialist, an audiologist, an
English as a second language specialist, equipment and technology for residents, as needed.
Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 and FOP 9-2 requires the PREA
Facility Compliance Manager to take steps to ensure residents with disabilities or who are
limited English proficient are provided meaningful access to all aspects of the facility’s efforts to
prevent, protect and respond to sexual abuse and harassment.
This policy also states the facility will not rely on resident interpreters, resident readers or any
kind of resident assistants except when a delay in obtaining interpreters services could
jeopardize residents’ safety. Resident interviews validates compliance the facility does not use
resident assistants and there were no instances of resident interpreter or readers being used in
the past 12 months.
Standard 115.317- Hiring and Promotion Decisions
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 3-16 specifically addresses all
elements as required by this standard. A review of full-time employees and contractors files
interviewed revealed that all eleven hired during the past 12 months had documented criminal
background checks. Questions regarding past conduct were asked during the interview process.
Additionally, signed acknowledgement forms concerning zero-tolerance of sexual harassment
and sexual abuse were present in the files.
The policy also validated compliance based on the requirement to conduct background checks
every five years.
Standard 115.318- Upgrades to Facilities and Technology
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive has not acquired any new facilities since
August 20, 2012. Additionally, the facility has identified the need for the additional cameras and
video monitoring system upgrades.
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 6
Standard 115.321- Evidence Protocol and Forensic Medical Examinations
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando IntensivePolicy 10-25 requires the Facility Director
contact local law enforcement, Office of Inspector General and the Department of Children and
Families who will conduct administrative investigations of abuse allegations. All criminal
investigations are conducted by the Orange County Sheriff’s Office. The Office of the Inspector
General will conduct an administrative investigation apart from any criminal investigation to
identify staff misconduct.
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive has submitted a Memorandum of
Understanding with the Arnold Palmer Hospital and is currently waiting for the agreement
signing to conduct sexual assault forensic examinations. Orange County Sheriff’s Office verbally
acknowledged that uniform evidence protocol would be followed to maximize the potential for
obtaining usable physical evidence for administrative proceedings and criminal prosecutions.
Standard 115.322- Policies to Ensure Referrals of Allegations for Investigations
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 requires referrals of sexual
abuse allegations to be submitted to the Orange County Sheriff’s Office, Florida Department of
Children and Families and the Office of the Inspector General. In the past 12 months, Orange
County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive had one allegation of sexual abuse, which occurred at
the facility involving one resident making an allegation on another resident. The allegation was
reported by the resident accuser to a staff member of the facility. Orange County Youth
Academy/ Orlando Intensive referred the allegation to Orange County Sherriff’s Office. Both
residents; the alleged victim and the abuser were housed at Orange County Youth Academy/
Orlando Intensive and documentation validates both were kept separated. The facility followed
all protocols and documentation of the allegation and follow-up procedures were reviewed and
found to be in compliance with this standard. The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (FDJJ)
Division of Youth Services’ website describes the investigative responsibilities for conducting
investigations for the facilities it operates and funds. FDJJ’s website also includes its PREA policy
which describes how investigative responsibilities are handled for allegations of sexual abuse.
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 7
Standard 115.331- Employees Training
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 and Florida Department of
Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 documents training requirements for PREA. The training curriculums,
documented staff training records and staff interviews validates compliance. The PREA training
covered requirements for direct care, workers, medical personnel and contractors during initial
training and annual refresher training. Specific topics covered during PREA training are consistent
with this standard’s requirements and is tailored to the facility’s male resident population. All
employees are trained as new hires regardless of their previous experience. Employees sign
training rosters and are required to score 70% on a final exam verifying comprehension of PREA
training. This standard was verified compliant through my review of the documentation.
Standard 115.332- Volunteer and Contractor Training
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 and The Florida Department
of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 requires volunteers and contractors who have contact with
residents to receive PREA training. This training is provided online. Employees sign training
rosters and are required to score 70% on a final exam verifying comprehension of PREA training.
Acknowledge completion certificates were reviewed for volunteers and contractors. Interviews
with volunteers and contractors revealed they are knowledgeable concerning their responsibilities
relative to PREA and the agency’s zero tolerance policy regarding sexual abuse and harassment.
Standard 115.333- Resident Education
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 requires residents to receive
information during intake within 24-hours regarding the facility’s zero tolerance policy and how
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 8
to report sexual abuse and harassment. Additionally, The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
requires all residents participate in comprehensive training that is conducted within 10-days of
arrival. Residents are provided a handout entitled “What You Should Know about Sexual
Abuse/Assault/Harassment” which includes information on prevention/intervention, self-
protection, reporting and treatment/counseling. Intake staff or case management staff reviews
the handout with the residents and residents sign verifying receipt of the information.
Documentation of residents’ signatures were reviewed and confirmed during resident
interviews. All residents interviewed stated they received this information the same day they
arrived at the facility and periodically thereafter. Case management staff presents the PREA
information in a manner that is accessible to all residents. During the facility tour PREA posters
and reporting instructions were posted throughout the facility. If needed, the facility has staff
available to provide translation services. Additionally, The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
shall provide services for hearing and visual impairment services for residents with disabilities or
who may be limited English deficient.
Standard 115.334- Specialized Training: Investigation
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
X Non-Applicable Standard
Auditor comments:
There are no facility investigators. All criminal and administrative investigations are referred to
outside agencies.
Standard 115.335- Specialized Training: Medical and Mental Health Care
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy# 1919 requires that all G4S Orange County
Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive full-time, part-time medical and mental health care
practitioners receive specialized training. The training documentation reviewed validated that all
staff received this training from the National Institution of Corrections. While conducting
interviews with the Health Services Administrator and two registered nurses, it was validated
that medical staff do-not conduct forensic examinations.
Standard 115.341- Obtaining information from Residents
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 9
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 9-1 addresses the screening
process for vulnerability to victimization and sexual aggressive behavior by using the Florida
Department of Juvenile Justice Form RC 8050-2. All facility residents are screened within
twenty-four hours upon arrival at the facility. Those residents who score vulnerable to victim or
sexually aggressive are included into the alert system, as well as receiving further assessments,
as identified. Residents who are identified or report as prior sexual victims are referred to the
medical and mental health professionals within 14 days. The screening documentation
instrument met the tenets of the standard. Validation of compliance was conducted through a
review of random resident’s intake.
Standard 115.342- Placement of Residents in housing, bed, program, education and work
Assignments.
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Academy has single occupancy rooms for
residents. Victimization screening information may be used to determine a resident’s room
assignment and its proximity to direct care staff in the housing unit to ensure resident’s safety.
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 8-14, Policy 9-1 and Florida
Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 precludes gay, bi-sexual, transgender and intersex
residents being placed in a particular housing unit. Isolation rooms are prohibited by the Florida
Department of Juvenile Justice. Facility staff and residents interviews validated compliance.
Standard 115. 351- Resident Reporting
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Academy Policy 8.3 provides a plethora
of ways for residents to report sexual abuse and harassment including; a pre-programmed
telephone line to an outside agency; the facility provides the addresses in resident’s handbooks
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 10
and posters throughout the facility. Instructions for reporting are provided to all residents during
the intake process. Instructions include the Victims Assistance Program so they or their family
member can write to an outside agency; and they may report to any staff member or family
member. The facility also has reporting mechanisms in place for staff to privately report.
Resident and staff interviews validated compliance with this standard.
Standard 115. 352- Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 8-4 outline procedures for the
administrative resident’s grievances regarding sexual abuse or sexual harassment. The elements
of this policy address and comports with the intent of the standard. There have been no
grievances relating to sexual abuse filed in the past 12 months. Staff and resident interviews
validate their knowledge of how the grievance process is used to report sexual abuse or
harassment.
Standard 115. 353- Resident Access to Outside Support Services and Legal Representation
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
The facility has established a sign MOU agreement with Victim Service Center of Central
Florida Inc. This organization provides emotional services to victims and coordination for
victim SANE exams.
Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Academy staff are mandated reporters and
are required by Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 and Florida
Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 to immediately report any knowledge, suspicion or
information they receive regarding sexual abuse and harassment, retaliation against residents or
staff who report any incidents or any staff neglect or violation of responsibilities that may have
contributed to an incident or retaliation. Random staff and resident interviews validated the
facility’s compliance with this standard.
Interviews with the case management staff and health service professional validated their
responsibility to inform residents 18 years old of their duty to report and limitations of
confidentiality.
Standard 115. 354- Third Party Reporting
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 11
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive through The Florida Department of
Juvenile website informs the public with information regarding third-party reporting of sexual
abuse or sexual harassment on behalf of any facility resident. Also, parents receive information
regarding–party reporting. Resident interviews revealed their awareness of reporting sexual
abuse or harassment to others outside of the facility.
Standard 115. 361- Staff and Agency Reporting Duties
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
Under Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 and G4S Orange County Youth
Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25, all facility staff are mandated reporters. Staff is
required to immediately report any knowledge, suspicion or information they receive regarding
sexual abuse and harassment, retaliation against residents or staff who report any incidents or
any staff neglect or violation of responsibilities that may have contributed to an incident or
retaliation. Random staff and health professional interviews validated their technical knowledge
and compliance with this standard.
Standard 115. 362- Agency Protection Duties
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando IntensivePolicy 10-25 requires residents identified
as being at risk for sexual victimization to be monitored and to receive ongoing counseling from
mental health or other qualified staff. Residents are provided services consistent with the
community of care. There were no residents identified as being at risk for sexual abuse in the
past 12 months, as indicated on a log maintained by the facility and as revealed in interviews
with the Facility Director and other random staff.
Standard 115. 363- Reporting to other Confinement Facilities
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 12
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Academy received no allegations of
sexual abuse from other facilities during the past 12 months. Upon receiving an allegation that a
resident was sexually abused while confined at another facility, Orange County Youth Academy/
Orlando Intensive Academy Policy 10-25 and Florida Department of Juvenile (FDJJ) Justice Policy
1919 requires facility leadership immediately notify the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Central Communications Center. The FDJJ will in turn notify the facility, and the facility
management overseeing the facility where the alleged abuse occurred.
Standard 115. 364- Staff First Responder Duties
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
During the initial audit, random staff interviews, staff could not consistently articulate the
required actions upon learning of an allegation that a resident was sexually abused and steps to
protect usable physical evidence. A review of the corrective action documentation submitted
validates that all staff have received refresher training on their duties as first responders.
There was one allegation of sexual abuse during the past 12 months which is currently ongoing.
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 and The Florida Department
of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 requires staff to take specific steps to respond to a report of
sexual abuse including; separating the alleged victim from the abuser; preserving any crime
scene within a period that still allows for the collection of physical evidence; request that the
alleged victim not take any action that could destroy physical evidence; and ensure that the
alleged abuser does not take any action to destroy physical evidence, if the abuse took place
within a time period that still allows for the collection of physical evidence.
Standard 115. 365- Coordinated Response
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
Interviews with the Facility Administrator, Assistant Facility Administrator and other professional
staff validated their technical knowledgeable of their duties in response to a sexual assault. G4S
Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25, Policy 7-30 and The Florida
Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 gives technical directions concerning coordinated
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 13
actions taken in response to an incident of sexual assault among staff first responders, medical,
and facility leadership.
Standard 115. 366- Preservation of Ability to Protect Residents from Contact with Abusers
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
X Non-Applicable Standard
Auditor comments:
Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive are not in a Collective bargaining
Agreement.
Standard 115. 367- Agency Protection against Retaliation
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
All G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive staff are charged with monitoring for
possible retaliation. There were no incidents of retaliation in the past 12 months reported. This
was validated during my interview with the PREA Manager/ Facility Administrator. G4S Orange
County Youth Academy/ Orlando IntensivePolicy 10-25, Policy 8-3 and The Florida Department of
Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 all require the monitoring of residents and staff who have reported
sexual abuse or harassment or who have cooperated in a sexual abuse or harassment
investigation. The monitoring will take place for a period of 90 days or longer, as needed.
Standard 115. 368- Post-Allegation Protective Custody
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive are prohibited from having isolation
rooms or segregation housing. G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive use single
occupancy rooms to protect residents who alleged to have suffered sexual abuse. Random staff
interviewed validated residents are monitored constantly by staff. G4S Orlando Youth Academy/
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 14
Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 and The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919
provide guidelines for the use of room restriction as a last measure to keep residents who
alleged sexual abuse safe only until an alternative means for keeping the resident safe can be
arranged.
Standard 115. 371- Criminal and Administrative Agency Investigations
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
There was one reported investigation of alleged resident sexual abuse in the facility in the past
12 months. The investigation is currently ongoing. G4S Orange County Youth Academy/ Orlando
Intensive Policy 1-5, Policy 10-25 and The Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 establishes
investigation guidelines for reporting allegations of sexual abuse to the Orange County Sheriff’s
Office, The Office of The Inspector General and The Florida Department of Children Services for
investigations.
Standard 115. 372- Evidentiary Standards for Administrative Investigations
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 states the outside investigative entities,
the Orange County Sheriff’s office and the Florida Department of Children Services, shall impose
a standard of preponderance of evidence or lower standards of proof for determining if
allegations are substantiated.
Standard 115. 373- Reporting to Residents
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
There has been one criminal and administrative investigation during the past 12 months. There
has been no notice sent to the residents because the case is still ongoing. G4S Orange County
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 15
Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 10-25 and The Florida Department of Juvenile
Justice Policy 1919 establishes processes to notify residents should the need arise and an
allegation proves substantiated, unsubstantiated or unfounded. The Agencies PREA
Coordinators and facility PREA Compliance Manager validated their technical knowledge of the
process during their interviews.
Standard 115. 376- Disciplinary for Staff
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
There were no employees terminated or disciplined in the past 12 months for violation of the
facility’s sexual abuse or harassment policies. G4s Employee Handbook, G4S Orange County
Youth Academy/ Orlando Intensive Policy 3-3 and Policy 3-5 requires staff disciplinary sanctions
up to and including termination for violating facility’s sexual abuse or harassment policies. The
policy also mandates that the violation be reported to law enforcement.
Standard 115. 377- Corrective Action for Contractors and volunteers
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 requires volunteers and contractors in
violation of the facility’s policies and procedures regarding sexual abuse and harassment of
residents will be reported to local law enforcement and relevant licensing bodies unless the
activity was clearly not criminal. During the interview with the Facility Administrator/PREA
Compliance Manager, it was reported that their have been no volunteers or contractors reported
in the past 12 months.
The policy also requires the facility staff to take remedial measures and prohibit future contact
with residents in the case of any violation of the facility’s sexual abuse and harassment policies
by contractors or volunteers.
Standard 115. 378- Disciplinary sanctions for Residents
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 16
Auditor comments:
There has been one reported case of resident-on-resident sexual abuse in the past 12 months
case that is still an active case. There have been no administrative or criminal findings or rulings
on this case.
Standard 115. 381- Medical and Mental screening; History of Sexual Abuse
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
There were no residents who disclosed prior victimization during their initial screening process.
The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 requires mental health and medical staff
to monitor and provide counseling on an on-going basis for residents who disclose a history of
sexual abuse or who disclose previously perpetrating sexual abuse.
Standard 115. 382- Access to Emergency Medical and Mental Health Services
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
There has been one reported case of sexual abuse in the past 12 months that is currently
ongoing. The Health Services Administrator interview validated through documentation the
resident’s access to medical and mental care of the alleged incident. The Florida Department of
Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 mandates residents receive timely, unimpeded care on-site and off-
site emergency care and crisis intervention services.
Standard 115. 383- Ongoing Medical and Mental Health Care for Sexual Abuse Victims and
Abusers
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 17
Auditor comments:
There has been one alleged sexual assault victim in the past 12 months. The investigation is still
ongoing. The Facility Administrator/ PREA Compliance Manager’s interview revealed that both
the alleged victim and accuser receive ongoing counseling during individual and group
counseling sessions as needed.
Standard 115. 386- Sexual Abuse Incident Reviews
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 and G4S Orange County Youth Academy/
Intensive Policy 10-25 require an incident review team of every sexual abuse allegation at the
conclusion of the investigation within 30 days. The review team includes the PREA Compliance
Manager, Department program staff mental and medical health providers and upper-level
management with input from line supervisors. The facility has a specific review form to capture
all aspects of the incident. There has been one reported case of sexual abuse during the past 12
months. Documentation reviewed during the audit validated an initial assessment completed.
Standard 115. 387- Data Collection
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 Definitions, requires the collection of
accurate, uniform data for every allegation of sexual assault. The facility’s PREA Coordinators
collect all data relating to PREA.
Standard 115. 388- Data Review for Corrective Action
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 18
Auditor comments:
There has been one alleged sexual abuse allegation within the past 12 months. The case is still
an active case; however, The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 requires the
review of data for corrective action to improve the effectiveness of its prevention, protection and
response policies, practices and training.
Standard 115. 389- Data Storage, Publication, and Destruction
Exceeds Standard (substantially exceeds requirement of standard)
X Meets Standard (substantial compliance; complies in all material ways with the standard
for the relevant review period)
Does Not Meet Standard (requires corrective action)
Auditor comments:
The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Policy 1919 directs that data from every allegation of
sexual misconduct at its facilities shall be collected at Central Communications Center. The
PREA Coordinator will review data collected in order to assess and improving the effectiveness
of the Department’s sexual misconduct prevention, detection and response polices, practices
and training. The policy established that aggregated sexual abuse data be reviewed annually
and placed on the facility’s website after all personal identifiers are removed. All data collected
will be maintained for at least 10 years after the date of the initial collection.
AUDITOR CERTIFICATION:
The auditor certifies that the contents of the report are accurate to the best of his/her knowledge and
no conflict of interest exists with respect to his or her ability to conduct an audit of the agency under
review.
Auditor’s Signature Date: November 26, 2014
PREA AUDIT: AUDITOR’S FINAL REPORT 19

source: DJJ

report_type: PREA

program_name_raw: orange youth academy


summary: PREA - Year 1 Cycle 4

raw_content:
Program: Orange Regional Juvenile Detention Center
Report Type: PREA
Fiscal Year:
Status:
PDF URL: https://www.djj.state.fl.us/content/download/706129/file/Florida_Orange Regional Juvenile Detention Center_year1cycle4.pdf?version=1

cycle: Year 1 Cycle 4


summary: PREA - Year 1 Cycle 4

raw_content:
Program: Orange Youth Academy
Report Type: PREA
Fiscal Year:
Status:
PDF URL: https://www.djj.state.fl.us/content/download/706131/file/Florida_Orange Youth Academy_year1cycle4.pdf?version=1

program_name_raw: Orange Youth Academy


summary: SPEP - FY15-16

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Orange Youth Academy
G4S Youth Services
(Contract Provider)
3150 39th Street
Orlando, Florida 32839
Primary Service: Cannabis Youth Treatment
SPEP Review Date(s): May 31‐June 3, 2016
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date(s): 5/3/2017
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is an assessment tool derived from
meta-analytic research on the effectiveness of juvenile justice interventions. The tool is
designed to compare existing intervention services, as implemented in the field, to the
characteristics of the most effective intervention services found in the research.
The SPEP scoring system allows service providers to identify specific areas in which program
improvements can be made to their existing Primary Services. These improvements can be
expected to increase the effectiveness of those Primary Services in the reduction of recidivism
for youth receiving the Primary Service. A separate SPEP evaluation is conducted, at the time
of the program’s Quality Improvement Review, for each Primary Service provided by the
program.
This report provides two types of SPEP scores: a Basic Score, equivalent to the number of
points received, and a Program Optimization Score (POS) that is equivalent to the maximum
number of possible points that could be received based on the SPEP domains under the control
of the program. The Basic Score compares the Primary Service being evaluated to other
intervention services found in the research to be effective, regardless of service type. It is meant
as a reference to the expected overall recidivism reduction when compared to other Primary
Services of any Type.
A Program Optimization Percentage (POP) rate is derived from the Basic Score and Program
Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage score that indicates where the rate of
effectiveness of the Primary Service is when compared to its potential effectiveness if optimized
to match the characteristics of similar Primary Services found to be most effective in the
research. The POP rate is likely more meaningful to service providers as it 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 that has been found for a similar
Primary Service Type with research evidence of effectiveness.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Program Name: Orange Youth Academy QI Program Code: 1127
Provider Name: G4S Youth Services Contract Number: 10145
Location: Orlando County / Circuit: 9 Number of Beds: 40
Review Date(s): May 31-June 3, 2016 Lead Reviewer Code: 97
Persons Interviewed
Program Director Corporate QI/QA staff # Program Supervisors
DJJ Monitor # Case Managers # Youth
DHA or designee 1 # Clinical Staff # Other (listed by title):
DMHCA or designee # Healthcare Staff
Documents Reviewed
Written Protocol/Manual Logbooks # Personnel Records
Fidelity Monitoring Documents Program Schedules # Training Records/CORE
Internal Corrective Action Reports Supplemental Contracts # Youth Records (Closed)
Staff Evaluations Table of Organization # Youth Records (Open)
Accreditation Reports Youth Handbook # Other:
Contract Monitoring Reports # Health Records
Contract Scope of Services # MH/SA Records
Observations During Review
Group/Session of Primary Service(s)
Program Activities
Recreation
Social Skill Modeling by Staff
Staff Interactions with Youth
Staff Supervision of Youth
Transition/Exit Conferences
Treatment Team Meetings
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
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 Cannabis Youth Treatment. 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 by the Bureau of Monitoring and Quality Improvement while
on-site during the annual compliance review.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
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 documentation reviewed confirmed the program has a formal training protocol that involves
16 hours of facilitator training over a three-day period by an agency approved trainer. One
facilitator has conducted this intervention over the past twelve months.
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 has a brand name manual for the delivery of services and provided the MQI
reviewer with a copy for reference. There are no youth workbooks for this intervention.
Basic Score: N/A 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.
This intervention was not able to be observed; therefore, this indicator rates as non-applicable.
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.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
The program has had no gaps in service or any facilitator turnovers within the twelve-month
review period.
BasicScore: 2Point(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 documentation for twelve-months of internal fidelity checks. The facilitator
received her internal monitoring from the clinical director on a monthly basis. The clinical director
has also been trained in the curriculum.
BasicScore: 1Point
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 for correction action in place. The internal fidelity monitoring did not
warrant any corrective action during this review period.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1Point
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.
Upon review of staff evaluations, all trained facilitators for this curriculum were evaluated for
delivery of this youth intervention.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service ‐ Duration
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 11 youth in the
sample, 0% (0 of 11) 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: 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 11 youth in the
sample, 0% (0 of 11) 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: 25 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 100%
Moderate to High Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Table 1
Moderate = 1 youth
Moderate-High = 5 youth
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 11 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 45%
High Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Table 2
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 11 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, 100% (11 of 11) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a
score of 12 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 45% (5 of 11) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 13 points.
Note: The latest Community Positive Achievement Change Tool (C-PACT) prior to the placement
date was used in the derivation of the risk level score. This C-PACT 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 25 25 100%
Totals 80 100 80%
This SPEP report evaluates Cannabis Youth Treatment, an intervention delivered at Orange
Youth Academy.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 0 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 11 total youth sampled, only
4 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, none
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed 12 weeks of
service.
The program earned 0 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 11 total youth
sampled, none received at least the recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample
completed between 11 and 12 hours of service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
The program was awarded 25 available points for Risk Level of Youth Served. This is calculated
using data from the Community - Positive Achievement Change Tool (C-PACT) assessment. This
score reflects youths' most recent C-PACT score prior to placement at the program. The program
itself has no control over youths' C-PACT risk level because the scored assessment was
administered prior to the youths' admission.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Orange Youth Academy can maintain their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by continuing
the practices in place at the time of this review.
Orange Youth Academy 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 9

report_type: SPEP

program_name_raw: Orange Youth Academy - TrueCore

program_status_note: Closed

service_type: Cannabis Youth Treatment


summary: SPEP - FY15-16

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Orange Youth Academy
G4S Youth Services
(Contract Provider)
3150 39th Street
Orlando, Florida 32839
Primary Service: Living in Balance
SPEP Review Date(s): May 31‐June 3, 2016
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date(s): 5/3/2017
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is an assessment tool derived from
meta-analytic research on the effectiveness of juvenile justice interventions. The tool is
designed to compare existing intervention services, as implemented in the field, to the
characteristics of the most effective intervention services found in the research.
The SPEP scoring system allows service providers to identify specific areas in which program
improvements can be made to their existing Primary Services. These improvements can be
expected to increase the effectiveness of those Primary Services in the reduction of recidivism
for youth receiving the Primary Service. A separate SPEP evaluation is conducted, at the time
of the program’s Quality Improvement Review, for each Primary Service provided by the
program.
This report provides two types of SPEP scores: a Basic Score, equivalent to the number of
points received, and a Program Optimization Score (POS) that is equivalent to the maximum
number of possible points that could be received based on the SPEP domains under the control
of the program. The Basic Score compares the Primary Service being evaluated to other
intervention services found in the research to be effective, regardless of service type. It is meant
as a reference to the expected overall recidivism reduction when compared to other Primary
Services of any Type.
A Program Optimization Percentage (POP) rate is derived from the Basic Score and Program
Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage score that indicates where the rate of
effectiveness of the Primary Service is when compared to its potential effectiveness if optimized
to match the characteristics of similar Primary Services found to be most effective in the
research. The POP rate is likely more meaningful to service providers as it 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 that has been found for a similar
Primary Service Type with research evidence of effectiveness.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Program Name: Orange Youth Academy QI Program Code: 1127
Provider Name: G4S Youth Services Contract Number: 10145
Location: Orlando County / Circuit: 9 Number of Beds: 40
Review Date(s): May 31-June 3, 2016 Lead Reviewer Code: 97
Persons Interviewed
Program Director Corporate QI/QA staff # Program Supervisors
DJJ Monitor # Case Managers # Youth
DHA or designee 1 # Clinical Staff # Other (listed by title):
DMHCA or designee # Healthcare Staff
Documents Reviewed
Written Protocol/Manual Logbooks # Personnel Records
Fidelity Monitoring Documents Program Schedules # Training Records/CORE
Internal Corrective Action Reports Supplemental Contracts # Youth Records (Closed)
Staff Evaluations Table of Organization # Youth Records (Open)
Accreditation Reports Youth Handbook # Other:
Contract Monitoring Reports # Health Records
Contract Scope of Services # MH/SA Records
Observations During Review
Group/Session of Primary Service(s)
Program Activities
Recreation
Social Skill Modeling by Staff
Staff Interactions with Youth
Staff Supervision of Youth
Transition/Exit Conferences
Treatment Team Meetings
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
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 Living in Balance. 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 by the Bureau of Monitoring and Quality Improvement while
on-site during the annual compliance review.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
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 program’s documentation reflected the program does have a training protocol and that six
therapists received formal training and four of those have successfully facilitated this intervention
over the past twelve months.
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 has the brand named, detailed manual for the delivery of services and provided a
copy for this reviewer to examine. This curriculum does not provide student manuals.
Basic Score: N/A 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.
This intervention was not able to be observed; therefore, this indicator rates as non-applicable.
This intervention is being held on Saturdays and Sundays. Due to the weekend scheduling,
observation of this intervention was not possible.
The program maintains their records by keeping youth attendance sheets, internal fidelity checks,
intervention overview, staff training, and coaching notes in a binder. Further documentation can
be found in the individual youth progress notes stating attendance and participation comments.
d. Facilitator Turnover Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
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.
This intervention has no gaps in service during the review period. There was one event of
facilitator turnover within the twelve-month review period, which was due to staff retirement. This
turnover did not impact groups. The program also has multiple trained staff available to step into
the facilitator role in the event of staff turnover needs.
BasicScore: 2Point(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 for internal fidelity monitoring led by the clinical director. All
documentation for this curriculum is maintained in a binder. All active facilitators are being
monitored by the clinical director and there were no missing monitoring sheets for this review
period.
BasicScore: 1Point
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 for correction action in place. The internal fidelity monitoring did not
warrant any corrective action during this review period.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1Point
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.
Upon review of staff evaluations, all trained facilitators for this curriculum received an assessment
for delivery of this youth intervention.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service ‐ Duration
Basic Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Research indicates the target duration of 24 weeks for this type of service. Of the 12 youth in the
sample, 100% (12 of 12) 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: 2 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 20%
Research indicates a target of 40 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 12 youth in the
sample, 25% (3 of 12) 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: 25 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 100%
Moderate to High Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Table 1
Moderate = 2 youth
Moderate-High = 5 youth
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 12 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 42%
High Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Table 2
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 12 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, 100% (12 of 12) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a
score of 12 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 42% (5 of 12) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 13 points.
Note: The latest Community Positive Achievement Change Tool (C-PACT) prior to the placement
date was used in the derivation of the risk level score. This C-PACT 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 10 10 100%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 2 10 20%
Risk Level of Youth Served 25 25 100%
Totals 87 95 92%
This SPEP report evaluates Living in Balance, an intervention delivered at Orange Youth
Academy.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 10 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 12 total youth sampled, all
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 26
and 40 weeks of service, with an average of 32 weeks.
The program earned 2 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 12 total youth
sampled, 3 received at least the recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed
between 21 and 45 hours of service, with an average of 31 hours.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
The program was awarded 25 available points for Risk Level of Youth Served. This is calculated
using data from the Community - Positive Achievement Change Tool (C-PACT) assessment. This
score reflects youths' most recent C-PACT score prior to placement at the program. The program
itself has no control over youths' C-PACT risk level because the scored assessment was
administered prior to the youths' admission.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Orange Youth Academy 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 9

service_type: Living in Balance


summary: SPEP - FY15-16

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Orange Youth Academy
G4S Youth Services
(Contract Provider)
3150 39th Street
Orlando, Florida 32839
Primary Service: LifeSkills Training
SPEP Review Date(s): May 31‐June 3, 2016
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date(s): 5/3/2017
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is an assessment tool derived from
meta-analytic research on the effectiveness of juvenile justice interventions. The tool is
designed to compare existing intervention services, as implemented in the field, to the
characteristics of the most effective intervention services found in the research.
The SPEP scoring system allows service providers to identify specific areas in which program
improvements can be made to their existing Primary Services. These improvements can be
expected to increase the effectiveness of those Primary Services in the reduction of recidivism
for youth receiving the Primary Service. A separate SPEP evaluation is conducted, at the time
of the program’s Quality Improvement Review, for each Primary Service provided by the
program.
This report provides two types of SPEP scores: a Basic Score, equivalent to the number of
points received, and a Program Optimization Score (POS) that is equivalent to the maximum
number of possible points that could be received based on the SPEP domains under the control
of the program. The Basic Score compares the Primary Service being evaluated to other
intervention services found in the research to be effective, regardless of service type. It is meant
as a reference to the expected overall recidivism reduction when compared to other Primary
Services of any Type.
A Program Optimization Percentage (POP) rate is derived from the Basic Score and Program
Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage score that indicates where the rate of
effectiveness of the Primary Service is when compared to its potential effectiveness if optimized
to match the characteristics of similar Primary Services found to be most effective in the
research. The POP rate is likely more meaningful to service providers as it 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 that has been found for a similar
Primary Service Type with research evidence of effectiveness.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Program Name: Orange Youth Academy QI Program Code: 1127
Provider Name: G4S Youth Services Contract Number: 10145
Location: Orlando County / Circuit: 9 Number of Beds: 40
Review Date(s): May 31-June 3, 2016 Lead Reviewer Code: 97
Persons Interviewed
Program Director Corporate QI/QA staff # Program Supervisors
DJJ Monitor 1 # Case Managers # Youth
DHA or designee # Clinical Staff # Other (listed by title):
DMHCA or designee # Healthcare Staff
Documents Reviewed
Written Protocol/Manual Logbooks # Personnel Records
Fidelity Monitoring Documents Program Schedules # Training Records/CORE
Internal Corrective Action Reports Supplemental Contracts # Youth Records (Closed)
Staff Evaluations Table of Organization # Youth Records (Open)
Accreditation Reports Youth Handbook # Other:
Contract Monitoring Reports # Health Records
Contract Scope of Services # MH/SA Records
Observations During Review
Group/Session of Primary Service(s)
Program Activities
Recreation
Social Skill Modeling by Staff
Staff Interactions with Youth
Staff Supervision of Youth
Transition/Exit Conferences
Treatment Team Meetings
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
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 LifeSkills Training. 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 by the Bureau of Monitoring and Quality Improvement while
on-site during the annual compliance review.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
Basic Score: 10 Points
2. Overall Quality of Service Delivery Score POS: 20 Points
POP: 50%
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): 7 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 documentation reviewed along with an interview of the Director of Case Management (DCM)
confirmed the program has a formal training protocol. Staff participated in a DJJ approved two-
day training. Two staff have facilitated this intervention over the past twelve months. Two
additional staff have been trained and added to the facilitator rotation as of February 2016.
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 has a detailed manual for this intervention and each facilitator either has their own
copy or have access to an available copy located in the office of the DCM. The manual is brand
named Botvin’s LifeSkill Training. The curriculum does include youth workbooks. The youth
workbooks can be used at the discretion of the facilitator.
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 reviewer observed a session of LifeSkills Training during the review. A copy of the lesson
was provided to the reviewer. The topic of discussion was advertising. The facilitator used
creative games and visual advertisements to keep youth engaged in the topic of discussion. The
facilitator stayed true to the fidelity of the curriculum and created an atmosphere for interaction
and learning for the participants.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
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.
An interview with the DCM and the program's documentation confirms no facilitator turnover or
gaps in service occurred during the twelve-month review period. The program as also added two
additional facilitators, as of February 2016, in order to avoid the possibility of gaps in service.
BasicScore: 0Point(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.
An interview with the DCM confirmed the program has a process but has not provided any fidelity
checks due to the fact of only having two facilitators who were actively conducting groups. The
DCM will begin the fidelity process now that more facilitators are trained and will be conducting
groups.
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.
BasicScore: 0Point
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 for corrective action which will be documented in the fidelity binder.
Since there have been no fidelity monitoring of this intervention, the process has not been
activated.
The program can earn 1 point if fidelity monitoring includes a corrective action process.
At the time of the review, the program did not meet criteria to earn a score of 1.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1Point
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 the annual performance evaluations for the two active facilitators verified that they are
assessed specifically on the proficiency standard for facilitating this primary service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
3. Amount of Service ‐ Duration
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 12 youth in the
sample, 8% (1 of 12) 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: 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 12 youth in the
sample, 0% (0 of 12) 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: 25 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 100%
Moderate to High Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Table 1
Moderate = 2 youth
Moderate-High = 5 youth
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 12 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 42%
High Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Table 2
High = 5 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 12 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, 100% (12 of 12) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a
score of 12 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 42% (5 of 12) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 13 points.
Note: The latest Community Positive Achievement Change Tool (C-PACT) prior to the placement
date was used in the derivation of the risk level score. This C-PACT 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 10 20 50%
Amount of Service: Duration 0 10 0%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 0 10 0%
Risk Level of Youth Served 25 25 100%
Totals 55 85 65%
This SPEP report evaluates LifeSkills Training, an intervention delivered at Orange Youth
Academy.
The program scored Medium for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 0 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 12 total youth sampled, one
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 7
and 17 weeks of service, with an average of 14 weeks.
The program earned 0 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 12 total youth
sampled, none received at least the recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample
completed between 6 and 16 hours of service, with an average of 15 hours.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 9
The program was awarded 25 available points for Risk Level of Youth Served. This is calculated
using data from the Community - Positive Achievement Change Tool (C-PACT) assessment. This
score reflects youths' most recent C-PACT score prior to placement at the program. The program
itself has no control over youths' C-PACT risk level because the scored assessment was
administered prior to the youths' admission.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Orange Youth Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by ensuring
fidelity monitoring is completed monthly.
Orange Youth Academy 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 10

service_type: LifeSkills Training