facility_name: Fort Myers Academy

summary: SPEP - FY23-24

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Fort Myers Academy
Truecorebehavioral LLC
(Contract Provider)
2515 Ortiz Avenue
Fort Myers, Florida 33905
Primary Service: Moral Reconation Therapy
SPEP Review Period: 04/01/23-03/31/24
SPEP Review Conducted: 04/02/24
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: 9/16/2025
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is data-driven rating system for
evaluating program effectiveness. The SPEP was developed by relying on hundreds of studies
that have examined key characteristics of programs that demonstrated their ability to reduce
recidivism. To determine a SPEP score, the program’s services are compared to characteristics
of effective programs in the research of a similar type.
The SPEP score is composed of four principle characteristics that have been shown to predict
reductions in youth recidivism; service type, quality of service, dosage (amount of service), and
youth level of risk.
• Service Type: service type points are awarded based on the group category that the
service falls within
• Quality of Service: quality points are awarded by determining the extent to which the
program is delivered in what research suggests is a high-quality manner
• Amount of Service: or “dosage” refers to the amount and duration of services that were
received
• Risk Level: refers to the level of criminogenic risk for youth involved in the intervention.
The final output of the SPEP review is the Program Optimization Percentage (POP). This rate is
derived from the Basic Score and Program Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage
score that indicates how the service rates in effectiveness when compared to the potential
effectiveness if optimized to match the most effective services in the research. This means the
POP rate represents how close the program’s Primary Service is to its potential for that Primary
Service Type. For example, a POP rate of 55% would indicate that the program’s Primary
Service is operating at 55% of its potential effectiveness for recidivism reduction based on the
SPEP research.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Basic Score: 35 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 35 Points
POP: 100%
There are five Primary Service Types that have been classified into Groups with a maximum
number of points possible for rating purposes. Some Primary Service Types may also have
qualifying Supplemental Service Types that could earn a program an additional 5 points.
The Primary Service for this program is Moral Reconation Therapy.
The program was awarded 30 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 5
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.
The Primary Service was identified as this type of service as it Cognitive Behavioral: 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: 9 Points
2. Overall Quality of Service Delivery Score POS: 20 Points
POP: 90%
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.
Technical assistance specalist conducted an annual SPEP at Fort Myers Academy for the period
of 04/01/23-03/31/24. The program uses Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) as a primary service.
The curriculum is designed to help juvenile offenders re-examine their choices and develop
appropriate decision-making skills. MRT groups are conducted by therapists that have been
formally trained. MRT training is four days and is conducted by a qualified trainer either in-person
or virtually. The training consists of review of the manual, practice facilitation of mock groups, and
then debrief. There was one staff member that facilitated MRT during the review period — one
unlicensed therapist. The clinical director provided 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 program uses the Moral Reconation Therapy curriculum, Juvenile MRT-How to Escape Your
Prison. The handbook contains information on the group process, specific objective criteria and
guidelines for all exercises and tasks in Moral Reconation Therapy, and specific “how to”
instructions. There are separate student manuals that are given to the youth. Moral Reconation
Therapy was designed to be an open group with groups being running year-round. Every youth
who enters the program is immediately enrolled in the service based on their assigned living
modules. The program maintains the attendance sheets in a tabbed SPEP binder labeled “Moral
Reconation Therapy”.
Documentation of internal fidelity monitoring is maintained in this binder under a tab labeled
“Fidelity Monitoring”. MRT groups are held three times Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday
typically from 3:55-4:55 p.m.
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
c. Observed Adherence to the Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
Upon observation of the Primary Service by the Quality Improvement reviewer, the facilitator of
that service adhered to the written protocol/manual.
An observation of a Moral Reconation Therapy Group took place virtually via Microsoft Teams on
Wednesday, 04/03/24 from 3:55-4:55 p.m.. The group consisted of one facilitator, ten (10) youth,
and one direct care staff. The group was held in a classroom. The facilitator used the facilitator’s
manual throughout this group session and was knowledgeable about the material being presented
to the group. The facilitator used her own words to convey the information. The group actively
participated in the lesson entitled “Your Wiser Self”. The facilitator used effective motivational
interviewing skills to encourage the youth to share more about their personal experiences and to
assess for understanding. There were no behavioral issues observed during this group.
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.
The program documentation showed there was no facilitator turnover for Moral Reconation
Therapy (MRT) during the annual review period from 04/01/23-03/31/24. There were no gaps in
service during this annual review period.
An informal interview with the clinical director confirmed that if a facilitator should leave the
program, the program's goal would be to hire another therapist and train them so there would be
no gaps in services to the youth. The program provided documentation of the one open, ongoing
group of MRT.
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
e. Internal Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
The program has a process to monitor the delivery of the intervention to examine how closely
actual implementation matches the model protocol.
A review of the documentation for the annual review period of 04/01/23-03/31/24 shows a total of
eight fidelity checks conducted by the clinical director for the non-licensed therapist who facilitated
the Moral Reconation Therapy group. Both the clinical director and the non-licensed therapist
were formally trained in this primary service.
Documentation shows that internal fidelity monitoring was not conducted monthly for the
facilitator. It was not completed for the months of 04/23, 06/23, 08/23 and 09/23. Note there are
only two trained clinical staff and when the clinical director had to be on the floor conducting her
own groups there was no additional trained staff left to complete the 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.
Basic Score: 1 Point
f. Corrective Action based on Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
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 documentation for the annual review period of 04/01/23-03/31/24, as well as an interview with
the clinical director, showed that there had been no corrective action taken during the review
period. The program has a system in place to address the need for corrective actions identified
during monthly internal fidelity monitoring of Moral Reconation Therapy. If facilitators are in need
of corrective action, they receive progressive discipline in the form of coaching, additional training,
and formal write-ups.
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 evaluation was provided to the technical assistance specialist for
the unlicensed therapist for this past year. The clinical director has not been with the program for
the required year for an annual evaluation. The review included comments on strengths and
weaknesses that the facilitator should be aware of and included an assessement of the
facilitator's proficiency in delivering the primary service.
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 15 weeks for this type of service. Of the 15 youth in the
sample, 93% (14 of 15) 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: 6 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 60%
Research indicates a target of 45 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 15 youth in the
sample, 60% (9 of 15) 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: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 20%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 73%
Moderate to High Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 42%
Table 1
Moderate = 4 youth
Moderate-High = 5 youth
High = 2 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 15 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 13%
High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Table 2
High = 2 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 15 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, 73% (11 of 15) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 5 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 13% (2 of 15) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 0 points.
Note: The latest Community Assessment Tool (CAT) prior to the placement date was used in the
derivation of the risk level score. This CAT provides the best indication of the risk to re-offend
level of the youth when the youth was first placed in the program.
Summary and Recommendations
Program Program
Category Basic Score Optimization Optimization
Score Percentage
Primary and Supplemental Service Type 35 35 100%
Quality of Service Delivery 20 20 100%
Amount of Service: Duration 8 10 80%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 6 10 60%
Risk Level of Youth Served 5 25 20%
Totals 74 100 74%
This SPEP report evaluates Moral Reconation Therapy, an intervention delivered at Fort Myers
Academy.
15 youth completed the program during the review period. Of those youth, 15 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 15 total youth sampled, only
15 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 13
and 22 weeks of service, with an average of 18 weeks.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
The program earned 6 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 15 total youth
sampled, only 15 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 9
received at least the recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 21
and 47 hours of service, with an average of 41 hours.
The program was awarded 5 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 94%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Fort Myers Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by ensuring
fidelity monitoring is completed every month for each facilitator.
Fort Myers Academy can optimize their SPEP Amount of Service score by ensuring dosage for all
youth is recorded accurately in EBS and by ensuring youth receive the full targeted dosage of
service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 9

report_type: SPEP

file_name: FY2023-24 Fort Myers Academy MRT.pdf

program_name_raw: Fort Myers Youth Academy - Females - TrueCore

program_status_note: Closed

service_type: Moral Reconation Therapy


state: FL

summary: SPEP - FY23-24

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
Fort Myers Academy
Truecorebehavioral LLC
(Contract Provider)
2515 Ortiz Avenue
Fort Myers, Florida 33905
Primary Service: Impact of Crime
SPEP Review Period: 04/01/23-03/31/24
SPEP Review Conducted: 04/02/24
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: 9/16/2025
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is data-driven rating system for
evaluating program effectiveness. The SPEP was developed by relying on hundreds of studies
that have examined key characteristics of programs that demonstrated their ability to reduce
recidivism. To determine a SPEP score, the program’s services are compared to characteristics
of effective programs in the research of a similar type.
The SPEP score is composed of four principle characteristics that have been shown to predict
reductions in youth recidivism; service type, quality of service, dosage (amount of service), and
youth level of risk.
• Service Type: service type points are awarded based on the group category that the
service falls within
• Quality of Service: quality points are awarded by determining the extent to which the
program is delivered in what research suggests is a high-quality manner
• Amount of Service: or “dosage” refers to the amount and duration of services that were
received
• Risk Level: refers to the level of criminogenic risk for youth involved in the intervention.
The final output of the SPEP review is the Program Optimization Percentage (POP). This rate is
derived from the Basic Score and Program Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage
score that indicates how the service rates in effectiveness when compared to the potential
effectiveness if optimized to match the most effective services in the research. This means the
POP rate represents how close the program’s Primary Service is to its potential for that Primary
Service Type. For example, a POP rate of 55% would indicate that the program’s Primary
Service is operating at 55% of its potential effectiveness for recidivism reduction based on the
SPEP research.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Basic Score: 20 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
There are five Primary Service Types that have been classified into Groups with a maximum
number of points possible for rating purposes. Some Primary Service Types may also have
qualifying Supplemental Service Types that could earn a program an additional 5 points.
The Primary Service for this program is Impact of Crime.
The program was awarded 15 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 3
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Social Skills Training. The
Primary Service was identified as this type of service as it focuses on developing social skills
required for an individual to interact in a positive way with others.
An additional 5 points was awarded based on a Qualifying Supplemental Service. The Qualifying
Supplemental Service was identified as None (automatic 5 points added to score), which was not
demonstrated to have been implemented.
The Primary and Supplemental Service Raw Score is equal to the sum of the Primary Service
points plus the Qualifying Supplemental Service points.
Note: Quality information is evaluated during quarterly and annual reviews.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
Basic Score: 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.
Technical assistance specialist conducted a review at Fort Myers Academy for the period of
04/01/23-03/31/24. The documentation shows that the program uses Impact of Crime (IOC) as a
primary service. This is a closed group. The program has a formal training protocol provided
either by DJJ staff or by a corporate trainer formally trained in the Impact of Crime curriculum.
There were four staff trained: one director of case management, two case managers and one
transition services manager. One case manager was running the group that began on 04/04/23
and ended on 05/05/23, when she resigned. That group was unable to be transferred to another
facilitator inorder to complete the service, as the progam did not have any staff trained to continue
providing the service. A new group started on 11/27/23 after the new director of case
management finally received training and that group was completed on 04/01/24. There is a new
cohort that began on 03/11/24.
All of the current trained staff have facilitated the Impact of Crime group. The prior Assistant
Facility Administrator conducted fidelity monitoring for the director of case management while she
facilitated the group that ran from 11/27/23-04/01/24. The current director of case management
will be conducting the fidelity monitoring beginning in April for the group that began in March. The
program maintains all SPEP documentation in a tabbed binder that is separated by tabs into
sections which are then organized by intervention. Impact of Crime groups are on held Mondays
and Fridays from 4:00-5:00 p.m.
The program can earn 1 point if the facilitator completed formal training in the primary service and
if co-facilitators (if any) have completed formal training in the primary service as well.
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.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
The program uses the Impact of Crime-Addressing the Harm curriculum. There is a formal
facilitator’s manual and separate student manuals. A technical assistance specialist reviewed the
manual. The manual includes the lessons, script and instructions for the facilitator, the order the
lessons are to be delivered, implementation guidelines, and provides detailed instructions for the
delivery of each lesson. Every youth who enters the program is immediately enrolled in the
service based on their assigned living modules. The program maintains the attendance sheets in
a SPEP binder labeled “Impact of Crime Sign In Sheets”. Documentation of internal fidelity
monitoring, staff training, staff evaluations and all other SPEP related documentation is
maintained in a tabbed separate binder labeled “SPEP Binder”. The Impact of Crime group is held
on Mondays and Fridays typically from 4:00-5:00 p.m.
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 the Impact of Crime Group took place virtually via Microsoft Teams on Friday,
04/05/24 from 4:00-5:00 p.m. The group consisted of ten (10) youth, two facilitators, and one
direct care staff. The group was held in a classroom. The facilitator used the Impact of Crime
manual throughout this group session and was knowledgeable about the material. The facilitators
used their own words to convey the information. This session began with an ice breaker, followed
by a review of the previous lesson and a review of the homework assigned during the last group.
The group actively participated in a discussion about "Stinkin Thinkin". The facilitator used
effective motivational interviewing skills to encourage the youth to share more about their
personal experiences and to assess for understanding. There were no behavioral issues
observed during this group.
Basic Score: 0 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.
The documentation of Impact of Crime (IOC) for the annual review period of 04/01/23-03/31/24
showed there was a gap in service from 04/01/23-04/23/23. The program experienced some
facilitator turnover for Impact of Crime. The case manager who started the initial group that ran
from 04/24/23-05/04/23 left the program. No monitoring was completed for her group. There was
a six month gap from 05/06/23-11/26/23 due to the fact that the program did not have any staff
trained in the curriculum until the current director of case management was hired and was finally
able to receive training in November 2023 and the major hurricane in 09/23. The director of case
management then began the group 11/27/23 and completed it on 04/01/24. Two new staff were
hired, trained and started a group on 03/11/24. Monitoring was then completed by the assistant
facility administrator (AFA), who is no longer with the program, for the months of 11/23, 12/23,
01/24, 02/24, and 03/24.
An informal interview with the director of case management confirmed that if a facilitator should
leave the program, the programs goal would be to hire more staff and train them as appropriate
so that there would be no gaps in services to the youth. The program is also striving to overlap the
groups and have a co-facilitator when possible.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
The program can earn 2 points if facilitator turnover does not impact groups and there are no
unnecessary gaps in service.
At the time of the review, the program 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.
A review of the documentation for the annual review period from 04/01/23-03/31/24 shows a total
of five (5) fidelity checks conducted by the prior assistant facility administrator. These were for the
months of 11/23, 12/23, 01/24, 02/24 and 03/24. The director of case management had to
facilitate the group from 11/27/23-04/01/24 due to staffing shortages. The group did not run
effectively until the first group started on 11/27/23 and completed on 04/01/24. A group was
started by a prior case manager on 04/24/23. She then left the program on 05/05/23. At that point,
no one was trained in the Impact of Crime curriculum so there was no one to transfer the group to
in order to continue and complete it. The current director of case management was hired and
slated to be trained in 09/23, however, Fort Myers experienced a hurricane that month and the
training was cancelled. She was then rescheduled for training and was out on leave at the time
she was to be trained. She received training and began her group on 11/27/23 and as stated
above, this group was completed recently on 04/01/24. Since then, there were two staff trained,
however, both of these staff had given notice upon completion of the training.
The program has since hired a Transition Service Manager and a Case Manager who have been
successfully trained and began a group on 03/11/24. The program's plan per the Director of Case
Management is to overlap future groups to avoid gaps in services as well as train other eligible
staff in the curriculum so that they can both facilitate the group if needed and provide the required
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.
Basic Score: 1 Point
f. Corrective Action based on Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
The program has a process by which corrective action is applied and demonstrated based on
the fidelity monitoring of the delinquency intervention/therapeutic service.
The program has a system in place to address the need for corrective actions identified during
monthly internal fidelity monitoring of Impact of Crime. A review of the documentation provided as
well as an interview with the Director of Case Management showed that there had been no
corrective action taken during the review period. If facilitators are in need of corrective action
related to their delivery of the service, they would then receive progressive discipline in the form of
coaching, additional training, and formal write-ups.
g. Evaluation of Facilitator Skill Delivering the Basic Score: 1 Point
Intervention Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
Performance evaluations of the facilitators of the specific intervention/service include
evaluation of skill in delivering the intervention/service.
There were no annual employee evaluations completed during the review period. The current staff
that are trained and facilitating the Impact of Crime intervention have not been employed for one
year as of the review date. There have been no probationary evaluations completed, therefore
this indicator is rated as non-applicable.
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 15 youth in the
sample, 0% (0 of 15) 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 15 youth in the
sample, 7% (1 of 15) 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: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 20%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 73%
Moderate to High Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 42%
Table 1
Moderate = 4 youth
Moderate-High = 5 youth
High = 2 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 15 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 13%
High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Table 2
High = 2 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 15 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, 73% (11 of 15) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 5 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 13% (2 of 15) 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 10 20 50%
Amount of Service: Duration 0 10 0%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 0 10 0%
Risk Level of Youth Served 5 25 20%
Totals 35 85 41%
This SPEP report evaluates Impact of Crime, an intervention delivered at Fort Myers Academy.
15 youth completed the program during the review period. Of those youth, 15 were included in the
sample.
The program scored Medium for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 0 points for Amount of Service: Duration and Amount of Service: Contact
Hours. There was no data entered into the Juvenile Justice Information system (JJIS) Evidence-
Based Services (EBS) module for any youths. With no JJIS data to review, the SPEP score was
reduced. The program must enter dosage data into JJIS in order to receive any score in this area.
The program was awarded 5 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
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 9
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 65%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Fort Myers Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by ensuring there
are no unnecessary gaps in service, facilitator turnover does not impact groups, and fidelity
monitoring is completed every month for each facilitator.
Fort Myers Academy can optimize their SPEP Amount of Service score by ensuring dosage for all
youth is recorded accurately in EBS and by ensuring youth receive the full targeted dosage of
service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 10

source: DJJ

file_name: FY2023-24 Fort Myers Academy IOC.pdf

service_type: Impact of Crime