summary: SPEP - FY21-22

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
DOVE Academy
Twin Oaks Juvenile Development, Inc.
(Contract Provider)
5270 Ezell Road
Graceville, Florida 32440
Primary Service: Moral Reconation Therapy
SPEP Review Period: December 15, 2020 - December 14, 2021
SPEP Review Conducted: January 10, 2022 - January 14, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: 2/23/22
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is data-driven rating system for
evaluating program effectiveness. The SPEP was developed by relying on hundreds of studies
that have examined key characteristics of programs that demonstrated their ability to reduce
recidivism. To determine a SPEP score, the program’s services are compared to characteristics
of effective programs in the research of a similar type.
The SPEP score is composed of four principle characteristics that have been shown to predict
reductions in youth recidivism; service type, quality of service, dosage (amount of service), and
youth level of risk.
• Service Type: service type points are awarded based on the group category that the
service falls within
• Quality of Service: quality points are awarded by determining the extent to which the
program is delivered in what research suggests is a high-quality manner
• Amount of Service: or “dosage” refers to the amount and duration of services that were
received
• Risk Level: refers to the level of criminogenic risk for youth involved in the intervention.
The final output of the SPEP review is the Program Optimization Percentage (POP). This rate is
derived from the Basic Score and Program Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage
score that indicates how the service rates in effectiveness when compared to the potential
effectiveness if optimized to match the most effective services in the research. This means the
POP rate represents how close the program’s Primary Service is to its potential for that Primary
Service Type. For example, a POP rate of 55% would indicate that the program’s Primary
Service is operating at 55% of its potential effectiveness for recidivism reduction based on the
SPEP research.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Basic Score: 35 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 35 Points
POP: 100%
There are five Primary Service Types that have been classified into Groups with a maximum
number of points possible for rating purposes. Some Primary Service Types may also have
qualifying Supplemental Service Types that could earn a program an additional 5 points.
The Primary Service for this program is Moral Reconation Therapy.
The program was awarded 30 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 5
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.
The Primary Service was identified as this type of service as it is intended to correct faulty
cognitions and perceptions and provides skills individuals can use to monitor thought patterns and
correct behaviors.
An additional 5 points was awarded based on a Qualifying Supplemental Service. The Qualifying
Supplemental Service was identified as None (automatic 5 points added to score), which was not
demonstrated to have been implemented.
The Primary and Supplemental Service Raw Score is equal to the sum of the Primary Service
points plus the Qualifying Supplemental Service points.
Note: Quality information is evaluated during quarterly and annual reviews.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
Basic Score: 20 Points
2. Overall Quality of Service Delivery Score POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
The Quality of Service Delivery Score is the sum of the scores for the seven treatment quality
indicators. The Program Optimization Percentage Rating determines the Overall Quality of
Service Level:
Indicator Sum Score 0-3 = Low; Sum Score 4-7 = Medium; Sum Score 8-10 = High.
Sum of all Indicator Scores (a – g below): 10 Points
Overall Quality of Service Delivery Level:
Low (Raw Score = 5)
Medium (Raw Score = 10)
High (Raw Score = 20 Points)
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
a. Facilitator Training
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
All facilitator(s) of the Primary Service must have received formal training specific to the
intervention or model/protocol.
The program utilizes Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) as a primary service. The therapy staff are
trained to facilitate MRT groups. There were seven program staff trained to facilitate MRT groups;
one clinical director, the transition specialist, one case manager, and four therapists.
There is typically one facilitator for MRT groups. However, due to facilitators being out for covid,
all trained staff were utilized at least once during the twelve month review period to facilitate
groups. All training documentation was provided for review and all staff have been formally trained
in the MRT curriculum. The clinical director conducts internal fidelity monitoring for the MRT
facilitators.
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 provided a workbook titled, "Juvenile MRT: How to Escape Your Prison, A Moral
Reconation Therapy Workbook". The book is written by Dr. Gregory Little and Dr. Kenneth
Robinson. For this curriculum, each youth is provided a workbook they will work in throughout
their time in group. There are twelve steps each youth must work through and successfully
complete in order to successfully complete the curriculum. Each youth must complete all twelve
steps of the curriculum. They are given specific tasks they must complete before they can move
to the next step.
Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) is held on Mondays and Wednesdays from 10:30am to
11:30am and 11:30am to 12:30pm. Youth with a mental health diagnosis qualify to attend MRT
groups based upon a review of the program's contract. Documentation for the groups are
maintained in the Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) binders kept in the clinical
director's office. The binders have the sign-in sheets, youth tracking, and internal fidelity
monitoring forms for the groups. Moral Reconation Therapy groups are held as open groups,
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
meaning they are held on a constant basis and youth work through the curriculum during their
stay in the program.
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
c. Observed Adherence to the Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Upon observation of the Primary Service by the Quality Improvement reviewer, the facilitator of
that service adhered to the written protocol/manual.
A Moral Reconation Therapy group was observed on July 21, 2021 from 10:30am to 11:30am.
The group was covering lesson 10: Old Habits Die Hard. There were ten youth, four youth care
workers, and one facilitator present for the group. The group has fourteen youth in it, however four
youth were at DOT.
The facilitator provided the observer a lesson to follow along. The group began with a check-in,
reader, and discussion. One youth stated they were ready to provide their testimony, but they did
not have all items needed to present.
The facilitator was comfortable teaching the lesson and did not have to fully rely on the
curriculum. The facilitator ensured all youth were participating, in some way and they understood
the concept before moving on. The facilitator utilized various Motivational Interviewing skills to
keep the discussion moving forward with the 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 experienced turnover during the annual review period. One therapist left
employment on June 30, 2021 and another therapist was working on a part-time basis. When
turnover occurs, another trained facilitator continues conducting the Moral Reconation Therapy
(MRT) groups.
There were no gaps in service during the twelve-month annual review period. All sign-in sheets
were provided for review. The youth were in quarantine from January 2, 2021 to January 19,
2021. One therapist was out from January 5, 2021 to January 18, 2021 and groups were not held
during this time. The program reports youth and staff were in quarantine due to COVID-19 and
groups could not be held as scheduled. This does not qualify as an “unnecessary gap in service”.
This group continued once the facilitator and youth were medically released.
Each group was held for one hour and had the required number of youth.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
e. Internal Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
The program has a process to monitor the delivery of the intervention to examine how closely
actual implementation matches the model protocol.
The clinical director conducts internal fidelity monitoring on a monthly basis for the facilitators of
Moral Reconation Therapy. During the twelve-month review period there were three primary
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
facilitators for the groups. All internal fidelity monitoring forms were provided for review. Twenty-
two out of twenty-two internal fidelity monitoring observations were completed during the twelve
month review period.
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 clinical director addresses any issues or corrective actions with the facilitators of Moral
Reconation Therapy (MRT). The clinical director addresses overall issues during weekly
supervision meetings with the therapy staff. There is a section on the internal fidelity monitoring
forms to document any issues or corrective actions. After a review of all the internal fidelity forms,
it was determined there were no issues or corrective actions noted for the twelve month review
period.
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.
The program's annual performance evaluations include a section to address facilitation of groups
in the program. There is one primary facilitator for the Moral Reconation Therapy groups and this
facilitator has had a six-month performance evaluation based upon the time they fhave been
employed.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 6 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 60%
Research indicates the target duration of 15 weeks for this type of service. Of the 42 youth in the
sample, 79% (33 of 42) 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: 4 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 40%
Research indicates a target of 45 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 42 youth in the
sample, 43% (18 of 42) 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: 7 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 28%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 76%
Moderate to High Score: 7 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 58%
Table 1
Moderate = 11 youth
Moderate-High = 17 youth
High = 4 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 32 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 10%
High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Table 2
High = 4 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 42 youth
The risk level score is compiled by calculating the total percent of the SPEP sample that score
Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend and also the total percent of the SPEP sample that score High-
Risk to reoffend.
Of the SPEP sample, 76% (32 of 42) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 7 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 10% (4 of 42) 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 6 10 60%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 4 10 40%
Risk Level of Youth Served 7 25 28%
Totals 72 100 72%
This SPEP report evaluates Moral Reconation Therapy, an intervention delivered at DOVE
Academy.
44 youth completed the program during the review period.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 6 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 42 total youth sampled, only
33 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 33
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 22
and 48 weeks of service, with an average of 29 weeks.
The program earned 4 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 42 total youth
sampled, all 42 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 18 received at least the
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 22 and 77 hours of
service, with an average of 44 hours.
The program was awarded 7 available points for Risk Level of Youth Served. This is calculated
using data from the Community Assessment Tool (CAT) assessment. 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 90%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DOVE Academy can maintain their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by continuing the
practices in place at the time of this review.
DOVE 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

file_name: FY2021-22 DOVE - MRT.pdf


state: FL

facility_name: DOVE Academy

summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
DOVE Academy
Twin Oaks Juvenile Development, Inc
(Contract Provider)
5270 Ezell Road
Graceville, Florida 32440
Primary Service: Seven Challenges
SPEP Review Period: December 15, 2021 to December 14, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 15, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: April 10, 2023
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is data-driven rating system for
evaluating program effectiveness. The SPEP was developed by relying on hundreds of studies
that have examined key characteristics of programs that demonstrated their ability to reduce
recidivism. To determine a SPEP score, the program’s services are compared to characteristics
of effective programs in the research of a similar type.
The SPEP score is composed of four principle characteristics that have been shown to predict
reductions in youth recidivism; service type, quality of service, dosage (amount of service), and
youth level of risk.
• Service Type: service type points are awarded based on the group category that the
service falls within
• Quality of Service: quality points are awarded by determining the extent to which the
program is delivered in what research suggests is a high-quality manner
• Amount of Service: or “dosage” refers to the amount and duration of services that were
received
• Risk Level: refers to the level of criminogenic risk for youth involved in the intervention.
The final output of the SPEP review is the Program Optimization Percentage (POP). This rate is
derived from the Basic Score and Program Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage
score that indicates how the service rates in effectiveness when compared to the potential
effectiveness if optimized to match the most effective services in the research. This means the
POP rate represents how close the program’s Primary Service is to its potential for that Primary
Service Type. For example, a POP rate of 55% would indicate that the program’s Primary
Service is operating at 55% of its potential effectiveness for recidivism reduction based on the
SPEP research.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Basic Score: 30 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 30 Points
POP: 100%
There are five Primary Service Types that have been classified into Groups with a maximum
number of points possible for rating purposes. Some Primary Service Types may also have
qualifying Supplemental Service Types that could earn a program an additional 5 points.
The Primary Service for this program is Seven Challenges.
The program was awarded 25 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 4
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Group Counseling. The Primary
Service was identified as this type of service as it focuses on psychological or interpersonal
problems or issues faced by an individual and involves a group of youths interacting with each
other.
An additional 5 points was awarded based on a Qualifying Supplemental Service. The Qualifying
Supplemental Service was identified as None (automatic 5 points added to score), which was not
demonstrated to have been implemented.
The Primary and Supplemental Service Raw Score is equal to the sum of the Primary Service
points plus the Qualifying Supplemental Service points.
Note: Quality information is evaluated during quarterly and annual reviews.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
Basic Score: 20 Points
2. Overall Quality of Service Delivery Score POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
The Quality of Service Delivery Score is the sum of the scores for the seven treatment quality
indicators. The Program Optimization Percentage Rating determines the Overall Quality of
Service Level:
Indicator Sum Score 0-3 = Low; Sum Score 4-7 = Medium; Sum Score 8-10 = High.
Sum of all Indicator Scores (a – g below): 10 Points
Overall Quality of Service Delivery Level:
Low (Raw Score = 5)
Medium (Raw Score = 10)
High (Raw Score = 20 Points)
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
a. Facilitator Training
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
All facilitator(s) of the Primary Service must have received formal training specific to the
intervention or model/protocol.
The program utilizes Seven Challenges as a primary service. All clinical staff are trained to
facilitate Seven Challenges groups. All training records were provided for review. There were four
staff trained to facilitate groups during the review period; three facilitated Seven Challenges
groups. The clinical director conducts internal fidelity monitoring for Seven Challenges.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
b. Treatment Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
There is a specific written manual/protocol detailing delivery of the Primary Service.
The program utilizes the current Seven Challenges manual and workbooks. The manuals have all
the lessons and discussion points for the lessons. There are also facilitator guidelines in the
manual. All the youth have separate journals for each of the challenges.
Seven Challenges groups are held on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 10:30am to 11:30am and
11:30am to 12:30pm. Documentation for groups is maintained in a binder in the clinical director's
office. The binder includes the sign-in sheets, group tracking, and internal fidelity forms. All youth
who have a substance abuse diagnosis qualify to attend the Seven Challenges groups.
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
c. Observed Adherence to the Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Upon observation of the Primary Service by the Quality Improvement reviewer, the facilitator of
that service adhered to the written protocol/manual.
A Seven Challenges group was observed on Thursday, December 15, 2022. There was one staff,
six youth, and one facilitator. The lesson for the day was journaling. The facilitator provided each
youth with the workbook they are working on. The youth were able to discuss and ask any
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
questions. The youth were able to openly ask questions and get assistance when needed. The
group lasted for the full hour, as required.
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's policy, in the event of faciltiator turnover for Seven Challenges, is for another
trained staff to continue with group facilitation. The program did experience turnover with Seven
Challenges facilitators. Two therapists left employment during the fourth quarter of the review
period. Seven Challenges is an open group held on a constant basis. One of the therapists did
come back on contract as a part-time employee. The therapists rotate group facilitation so the
youth were familiar with all facilitators.
All sign-in sheets were provided for review. There were no gaps in service during the annual
review period. All groups have eight to ten (10) youth in each group.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
e. Internal Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
The program has a process to monitor the delivery of the intervention to examine how closely
actual implementation matches the model protocol.
The clinical director conducts monthly internal fidelity monitoring for the facilitators of Seven
Challenges. There were three facilitators during the annual review period. All internal fidelity forms
were provided for review. There were no missing internal fidelity observations for the annual
review period.
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 clinical director addresses any signficant issues or corrective actions for the facilitators of
Seven Challenges. The internal fidelity observation forms utilized by the program include a
section to document any significant issues or corrective actions. All forms were provided for
review and there were no corrective actions during the annual review period.
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.
The program provided an annual performance evaluation which included a section to document
the curricula they were trained in and an evaluation of their facilitation. Two of the three facilitators
had an annual performance evaluation at the time of the annual review. The third facilitator's
evaluation was not due until the end of December.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
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 19 youth in the
sample, 100% (19 of 19) reached at least the indicated target duration. Further explanation is
detailed in the Summary and Recommendations below.
Note: Dosage information (duration) is calculated from the Juvenile Justice Information System
(JJIS) Evidence-Based Services module. Duration is included for the youth in the SPEP sample.
4. Amount of Service – Contact Hours
Basic Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Research indicates a target of 40 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 19 youth in the
sample, 100% (19 of 19) reached the indicated target contact hours. Further explanation is
detailed in the Summary and Recommendations below.
Note: Dosage information (contact hours) is calculated from the Juvenile Justice Information
System (JJIS) Evidence-Based Services module. Contact hours are included for the youth in the
SPEP sample.
5. Risk Level of Youth Served:
Basic Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 25 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 20%
Percentage of Youth with Moderate, Moderate-High, and High-Risk Levels to Reoffend: 58%
Moderate to High Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 42%
Table 1
Moderate = 3 youth
Moderate-High = 8 youth
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 19 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 0%
High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Table 2
High = 0 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 19 youth
The risk level score is compiled by calculating the total percent of the SPEP sample that score
Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend and also the total percent of the SPEP sample that score High-
Risk to reoffend.
Of the SPEP sample, 58% (11 of 19) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 5 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 0% (0 of 19) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 0 points.
Note: The latest Community Assessment Tool (CAT) prior to the placement date was used in the
derivation of the risk level score. This CAT provides the best indication of the risk to re-offend
level of the youth when the youth was first placed in the program.
Summary and Recommendations
Program Program
Category Basic Score Optimization Optimization
Score Percentage
Primary and Supplemental Service Type 30 30 100%
Quality of Service Delivery 20 20 100%
Amount of Service: Duration 10 10 100%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 10 10 100%
Risk Level of Youth Served 5 25 20%
Totals 75 95 79%
This SPEP report evaluates Seven Challenges, an intervention delivered at DOVE Academy.
36 youth completed the program during the review period.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 10 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 19 total youth sampled, all
19 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 19 received at least the
recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 24 and 64 weeks of
service, with an average of 36 weeks.
The program earned 10 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 19 total youth
sampled, all 19 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 19 received at least the
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 41 and 180 hours of
service, with an average of 107 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 100%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DOVE Academy can maintain their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by continuing the
practices in place at the time of this review.
DOVE 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 8

source: DJJ

report_type: SPEP

file_name: FY2022-23 DOVE 7C.pdf

program_name_raw: Dove Academy

program_status_note: Open

service_type: Seven Challenges


summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
DOVE Academy
Twin Oaks Juvenile Development, Inc
(Contract Provider)
5270 Ezell Road
Graceville, Florida 32440
Primary Service: Impact of Crime
SPEP Review Period: December 15, 2021 - December 14, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 15, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: April 10, 2023
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is data-driven rating system for
evaluating program effectiveness. The SPEP was developed by relying on hundreds of studies
that have examined key characteristics of programs that demonstrated their ability to reduce
recidivism. To determine a SPEP score, the program’s services are compared to characteristics
of effective programs in the research of a similar type.
The SPEP score is composed of four principle characteristics that have been shown to predict
reductions in youth recidivism; service type, quality of service, dosage (amount of service), and
youth level of risk.
• Service Type: service type points are awarded based on the group category that the
service falls within
• Quality of Service: quality points are awarded by determining the extent to which the
program is delivered in what research suggests is a high-quality manner
• Amount of Service: or “dosage” refers to the amount and duration of services that were
received
• Risk Level: refers to the level of criminogenic risk for youth involved in the intervention.
The final output of the SPEP review is the Program Optimization Percentage (POP). This rate is
derived from the Basic Score and Program Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage
score that indicates how the service rates in effectiveness when compared to the potential
effectiveness if optimized to match the most effective services in the research. This means the
POP rate represents how close the program’s Primary Service is to its potential for that Primary
Service Type. For example, a POP rate of 55% would indicate that the program’s Primary
Service is operating at 55% of its potential effectiveness for recidivism reduction based on the
SPEP research.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Basic Score: 20 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
There are five Primary Service Types that have been classified into Groups with a maximum
number of points possible for rating purposes. Some Primary Service Types may also have
qualifying Supplemental Service Types that could earn a program an additional 5 points.
The Primary Service for this program is Impact of Crime.
The program was awarded 15 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 3
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Social Skills Training. The
Primary Service was identified as this type of service as it focuses on developing social skills
required for an individual to interact in a positive way with others.
An additional 5 points was awarded based on a Qualifying Supplemental Service. The Qualifying
Supplemental Service was identified as None (automatic 5 points added to score), which was not
demonstrated to have been implemented.
The Primary and Supplemental Service Raw Score is equal to the sum of the Primary Service
points plus the Qualifying Supplemental Service points.
Note: Quality information is evaluated during quarterly and annual reviews.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
Basic Score: 20 Points
2. Overall Quality of Service Delivery Score POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
The Quality of Service Delivery Score is the sum of the scores for the seven treatment quality
indicators. The Program Optimization Percentage Rating determines the Overall Quality of
Service Level:
Indicator Sum Score 0-3 = Low; Sum Score 4-7 = Medium; Sum Score 8-10 = High.
Sum of all Indicator Scores (a – g below): 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 utilizes Impact of Crime (IOC) as a primary service. Case management staff are
formally trained to facilitate IOC groups. There were five staff trained to facilitate IOC groups for
the annual review period; there were three primary facilitators. No new staff were trained during
the annual review period. The transition case manager conducts all internal fidelity monitoring.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
b. Treatment Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
There is a specific written manual/protocol detailing delivery of the Primary Service.
The Impact of Crime (IOC) manual was reviewed during the annual review period. The program
utilizes the current IOC manual and workbooks. The manual includes facilitator notes, facilitation
guidelines, and a script. The manual also includes the workbook for the youth.
Impact of Crime groups are held on Mondays and Wednesdays from 3:15pm to 4:15pm. The
documentation for IOC groups is kept in a binder in the clinical director's office. The program
director changed during the annual review period and the clinical director is now over IOC groups
and documentation. The clinical director is going to keep up with the tracking for the IOC groups.
This reviewer went over the tracking with the clinical director. All youth are eligible to attend IOC
groups. Impact of Crime is a closed group and youth should not be added after the first lesson
has been completed.
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.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
A video observation was conducted for Impact of Crime (IOC) groups on Thursday, December 15,
2022. This reviewer attempted on four different occassions to observe an IOC group in person;
however, it didn't work out each of those times.
Three dates were chosen for a video review of groups: November 16, 2022, November 28, 2022,
and December 7, 2022. The groups occurred for one hour each. The facilitators need to ensure
the group times match the times on the sign-in sheets. The sign-in sheets should not be pre-filled.
The groups observed matched the sign-in sheets for those dates.
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's protocol, in the event of facilitator turnover of Impact of Crime (IOC) groups, is for
another trained staff to continue with group facilitation. The program did experience turnover
during the annual review period. One case manager left during the third quarter. This case
manager was not facilitating an IOC group at that time, so it did not disrupt IOC cohorts. The case
managers rotate facilitation, so the youth are familiar with all case management staff.
All sign-in sheets were provided for review and there were no gaps in service during the annual
review period. The program completed five cohorts during the review period.
The first cohort started October 12, 2021 and ended on January 31, 2022. The group began with
six youth and six youth successfully completed the group. One youth was transferred to another
program due to behavioral issues. Another youth came into the program shortly after the group
started. Due to another cohort not starting for quite some time, this youth was added to the cohort.
The youth had three individual sessions and joined the group, in accordance with guidance from
the Department. This group also participated in Toys for Tots and had a guest speaker at the
program.
A second cohort started on November 30, 2022 and ended on March 31, 2022. The group started
with six youth and eight youth successfully completed the group. Two youth were added to the
first session after the pre-test had been completed. The program had a guest speaker come to the
group in January.
A third cohort started on Feburary 2, 2022 and ended on May 26, 2022. The group began with
seven youth and six youth successfully completed the group. One youth was transferred from the
program during the cohort.
A fourth cohort began April 8, 2022 and ended on August 10, 2022. The group began with seven
youth and seven youth successfully completed the group. This cohort was held consistently. The
facilitator included detailed descriptions of all the lessons on the sign-in sheets. The facilitator also
found current videos to use with the group. These were reviewed by the program director and the
clinical director and approved prior to being shown to the youth.
A fifth cohort started on June 23, 2022 and ended on October 12, 2022. The group started with
eight youth and seven youth successfully completed the group. One youth was transferred to a
different cohort due to behavioral issues and struggling with concepts. This youth did attend
another cohort, pursuant to a review of the sign-in sheets.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
A sixth cohort started on September 19, 2022 and being held at the time of this review. The group
has eleven (11) youth in attendance. One youth was released early on October 24, 2022.
A seventh cohort began on November 14, 2022 with seven youth.
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
e. Internal Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
The program has a process to monitor the delivery of the intervention to examine how closely
actual implementation matches the model protocol.
The program's policy is for the transition case manager to conduct monthly internal fidelity
monitoring observations for Impact of Crime (IOC) facilitators. There were three facilitators for the
annual review period.
One month of internal fidelity observations was missing for one facilitator during the month of
October.
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 clinical director addresses any signficant issues or corrective actions for the facilitators of
Impact of Crime (IOC). The internal fidelity forms were provided for review. There were no
documented issues or corrective actions noted during the annual review period.
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.
The annual performance evaluation the program uses includes a section to document the
curriculua the staff are trained in and evaluated. Three case managers had recevied their annual
performance evaluations for the annual review period. All three were evaluated for group
facilitation for Impact of Crime.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 8 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 80%
Research indicates the target duration of 16 weeks for this type of service. Of the 35 youth in the
sample, 86% (30 of 35) reached at least the indicated target duration. Further explanation is
detailed in the Summary and Recommendations below.
Note: Dosage information (duration) is calculated from the Juvenile Justice Information System
(JJIS) Evidence-Based Services module. Duration is included for the youth in the SPEP sample.
4. Amount of Service – Contact Hours
Basic Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Research indicates a target of 24 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 35 youth in the
sample, 100% (35 of 35) 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: 57%
Moderate to High Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 42%
Table 1
Moderate = 6 youth
Moderate-High = 12 youth
High = 2 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 35 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 6%
High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Table 2
High = 2 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 35 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, 57% (20 of 35) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 5 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 6% (2 of 35) youth scored High-Risk to reoffend, for a score of 0 points.
Note: The latest Community Assessment Tool (CAT) prior to the placement date was used in the
derivation of the risk level score. This CAT provides the best indication of the risk to re-offend
level of the youth when the youth was first placed in the program.
Summary and Recommendations
Program Program
Category Basic Score Optimization Optimization
Score Percentage
Primary and Supplemental Service Type 20 20 100%
Quality of Service Delivery 20 20 100%
Amount of Service: Duration 8 10 80%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 10 10 100%
Risk Level of Youth Served 5 25 20%
Totals 63 85 74%
This SPEP report evaluates Impact of Crime, an intervention delivered at DOVE Academy.
36 youth completed the program during the review period. Of those youth, 35 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 35 total youth sampled, only
30 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth with correct dosage, 30
received at least the recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 16
and 20 weeks of service, with an average of 18 weeks.
The program earned 10 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 35 total youth
sampled, all 35 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 35 received at least the
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 8
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 32 and 34 hours of
service, with an average of 32 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 98%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DOVE Academy can optimize their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by ensuring fidelity
monitoring is completed every month for each facilitator.
DOVE Academy can optimize their SPEP Amount of Service score by ensuring dosage for all
youth is recorded accurately in EBS and by ensuring youth receive the full targeted dosage of
service.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 9

file_name: FY2022-23 DOVE IOC.pdf

service_type: Impact of Crime


summary: SPEP - FY22-23

raw_content:
Standardized Program Evaluation
Protocol [SPEP] Report
DOVE Academy
Twin Oaks Juvenile Development, Inc
(Contract Provider)
5270 Ezell Road
Graceville, Florida 32440
Primary Service: Moral Reconation Therapy
SPEP Review Period: December 15, 2021 - December 14, 2022
SPEP Review Conducted: December 15, 2022
Florida Department of Juvenile Justice
Report Date: April 10, 2023
Introduction
The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) is data-driven rating system for
evaluating program effectiveness. The SPEP was developed by relying on hundreds of studies
that have examined key characteristics of programs that demonstrated their ability to reduce
recidivism. To determine a SPEP score, the program’s services are compared to characteristics
of effective programs in the research of a similar type.
The SPEP score is composed of four principle characteristics that have been shown to predict
reductions in youth recidivism; service type, quality of service, dosage (amount of service), and
youth level of risk.
• Service Type: service type points are awarded based on the group category that the
service falls within
• Quality of Service: quality points are awarded by determining the extent to which the
program is delivered in what research suggests is a high-quality manner
• Amount of Service: or “dosage” refers to the amount and duration of services that were
received
• Risk Level: refers to the level of criminogenic risk for youth involved in the intervention.
The final output of the SPEP review is the Program Optimization Percentage (POP). This rate is
derived from the Basic Score and Program Optimization Score. The POP rate is a percentage
score that indicates how the service rates in effectiveness when compared to the potential
effectiveness if optimized to match the most effective services in the research. This means the
POP rate represents how close the program’s Primary Service is to its potential for that Primary
Service Type. For example, a POP rate of 55% would indicate that the program’s Primary
Service is operating at 55% of its potential effectiveness for recidivism reduction based on the
SPEP research.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 2
Basic Score: 35 Points
1. Primary Service and Supplemental Service Types POS: 35 Points
POP: 100%
There are five Primary Service Types that have been classified into Groups with a maximum
number of points possible for rating purposes. Some Primary Service Types may also have
qualifying Supplemental Service Types that could earn a program an additional 5 points.
The Primary Service for this program is Moral Reconation Therapy.
The program was awarded 30 points because the Primary Service is identified as a Group 5
Service. The specific Sub-Component Service Type identified is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.
The Primary Service was identified as this type of service as it is intended to correct faulty
cognitions and perceptions and provides skills individuals can use to monitor thought patterns and
correct behaviors.
An additional 5 points was awarded based on a Qualifying Supplemental Service. The Qualifying
Supplemental Service was identified as None (automatic 5 points added to score), which was not
demonstrated to have been implemented.
The Primary and Supplemental Service Raw Score is equal to the sum of the Primary Service
points plus the Qualifying Supplemental Service points.
Note: Quality information is evaluated during quarterly and annual reviews.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 3
Basic Score: 20 Points
2. Overall Quality of Service Delivery Score POS: 20 Points
POP: 100%
The Quality of Service Delivery Score is the sum of the scores for the seven treatment quality
indicators. The Program Optimization Percentage Rating determines the Overall Quality of
Service Level:
Indicator Sum Score 0-3 = Low; Sum Score 4-7 = Medium; Sum Score 8-10 = High.
Sum of all Indicator Scores (a – g below): 10 Points
Overall Quality of Service Delivery Level:
Low (Raw Score = 5)
Medium (Raw Score = 10)
High (Raw Score = 20 Points)
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
a. Facilitator Training
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
All facilitator(s) of the Primary Service must have received formal training specific to the
intervention or model/protocol.
The program utilizes Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) as a primary service in the program. The
clinical staff are trained to facilitate MRT groups. All training records were provided for review.
There were five staff trained to facilitate MRT groups during the annual review period. There were
three main facilitators. The clinical director conducts internal fidelity monitoring for MRT.
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 current Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) manual and student workbooks.
These were reviewed during the annual review period. The manual includes a script, facilitator
notes, facilitation guidelines, and lesson plans.
Moral Reconation Therapy groups are held Mondays and Wednesdays from 10:30am to 11:30am
and 11:30am to 12:30pm. All documentation for MRT groups is in a binder kept in the clinical
director's office. All youth with a mental health diagnosis are eligible to attend MRT groups.
Groups are held as open groups running year-round.
Basic Score: 1 Point(s)
c. Observed Adherence to the Manual/Protocol
Maximum Possible Score: 1 Point
Upon observation of the Primary Service by the Quality Improvement reviewer, the facilitator of
that service adhered to the written protocol/manual.
A session of Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) was unable to be conducted during the review
period. A group observation was scheduled on three different occassions and was unable to be
completed due to unforseen circumstances. Video footage was reviewed to confirm group
completion. Three video observations were completed during the annual review- November 21,
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 4
2022, November 28, 2022, and December 7, 2022. There was a behavioral issue during the
group on November 21, 2022, which was handled appropriately by the facilitator and staff. All
groups were held for one full hour and matched the sign-in sheets.
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's protocol, in the event of facilitator turnover for Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT), is
for another trained staff to continue with the group facilitation. The therapy staff rotate facilitation
so the youth are familiar with all facilitators.
The program did experience turnover during the fourth quarter of the annual review period. Two
therapists left employment; however one has returned part-time and on a contract. Pursuant to a
review of the sign-in sheets, there were no gaps in service during the annual review period.
Basic Score: 2 Point(s)
e. Internal Fidelity Monitoring
Maximum Possible Score: 2 Points
The program has a process to monitor the delivery of the intervention to examine how closely
actual implementation matches the model protocol.
The clinical director conducts internal fidelity monitoring for Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT)
groups. There were three main facilitators for MRT during the annual review period. The internal
fidelity forms were provided for a review and there were no missing observations.
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 clinical director addresses any issues or corrective actions for the facilitators of Moral
Reconation Therapy (MRT). The internal fidelity forms include a section to document any
corrective actions for facilitators. All internal fidelity forms were provided for review and there were
no significant issues or corrective actions noted for the annual review period.
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.
The annual performance evaluation the program utilizes includes a section to document what
curricula the employees are trained in and evaluated the facilitation. There were three main
facilitators for Moral Reconation Therapy grups during the annual review period. Two of the three
facilitators had an annual performance evaluation and they were provided for review. The third
facilitator had not had an annual performance evaluation at the time of the review.
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 5
3. Amount of Service - Duration
Basic Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 100%
Research indicates the target duration of 15 weeks for this type of service. Of the 34 youth in the
sample, 100% (34 of 34) reached at least the indicated target duration. Further explanation is
detailed in the Summary and Recommendations below.
Note: Dosage information (duration) is calculated from the Juvenile Justice Information System
(JJIS) Evidence-Based Services module. Duration is included for the youth in the SPEP sample.
4. Amount of Service – Contact Hours
Basic Score: 8 Points
Program Optimization Score: 10 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 80%
Research indicates a target of 45 contact hours for this type of service. Of the 34 youth in the
sample, 97% (33 of 34) 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: 59%
Moderate to High Score: 5 Points
Program Optimization Score: 12 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 42%
Table 1
Moderate = 6 youth
Moderate-High = 12 youth
High = 2 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 34 youth
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 6
Percentage of Youth with High-Risk Level to Reoffend: 6%
High Score: 0 Points
Program Optimization Score: 13 Points
Program Optimization Percentage: 0%
Table 2
High = 2 youth
Total Youth in Sample = 34 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, 59% (20 of 34) youth scored Moderate to High-Risk to reoffend, for a score
of 5 points.
Of the SPEP sample, 6% (2 of 34) 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 10 10 100%
Amount of Service: Contact Hours 8 10 80%
Risk Level of Youth Served 5 25 20%
Totals 78 100 78%
This SPEP report evaluates Moral Reconation Therapy, an intervention delivered at DOVE
Academy.
36 youth completed the program during the review period.
The program scored High for Quality of Service Delivery.
The program earned 10 points for Amount of Service: Duration. Of the 34 total youth sampled, all
34 included dosage with end dates in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 34 received at least the
recommended weeks of service. Youth in the sample completed between 23 and 230 weeks of
service, with an average of 33 weeks.
The program earned 8 points for Amount of Service: Contact Hours. Of the 34 total youth
sampled, all 34 included dosage in the EBS Module. Of those youth, 33 received at least the
Department of Juvenile Justice | Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol [SPEP] Report 7
recommended hours of service. Youth in the sample completed between 42 and 230 hours of
service, with an average of 112 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 98%. As stated previously, the Risk Level of Youth
Served score is not under the control of the program.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
DOVE Academy can maintain their SPEP Quality of Service Delivery score by continuing the
practices in place at the time of this review.
DOVE 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 8

file_name: FY2022-23 DOVE MRT.pdf

service_type: Moral Reconation Therapy