American Journal of Community Psychology

, Volume 9, Issue 5, pp 581–604 | Cite as

Policy is one thing; implementation is another: A comparison of community agencies in a juvenile justice referral network

  • Susan J. Frank
  • Darlene M. Atkins
Article

Keywords

Social Psychology Health Psychology Juvenile Justice Community Agency Referral Network 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference Notes

  1. 1.
    Center for Action Research.A design for youth development policy: A summary report of some technical products of the Office of Youth Development's Youth Services System Program, 1973–1976: Goals, organization, and guidance. Prepared with the Office of Youth Development, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, June 1976.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Youth advocacy. Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, October 1979.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cardarelli, A. P.Neighborhood strategies to prevent delinquency and enhance positive youth development through inter-agency coordination. Boston: Boston University, Department of Sociology. Prepared for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, 1977.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hurley, D. J, & Tyler, F. T.Relationship between systems' mental health paradigm and person power utilization. Paper presented at the 47th annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, April 1976.Google Scholar

References

  1. 5.
    Benson, J. K. The interorganization network as a political economy.Administrative Science Quarterly, 1975,20, 229–249.Google Scholar
  2. 6.
    Bloom, B.Community mental health: A historical and critical analysis. Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press, 1973.Google Scholar
  3. 7.
    Carter, R. M., & Klein, M. W.Back on the street: The diversion of juvenile offenders. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1975.Google Scholar
  4. 8.
    Cohen, J. A. Coefficient of agreement for nominal scales.Education and Psychological Measurement, 1960,20, 37–46.Google Scholar
  5. 9.
    Cook, K. Exchange and power in networks of interorganizational relations.Sociological Quarterly, 1977,18, 62–82.Google Scholar
  6. 10.
    Etzioni, A. Two approaches to organizational analysis: A critique and a suggestion.Administrative Science Quarterly, 1961,5, 257–258.Google Scholar
  7. 11.
    Friedson, E. Dominant professions, bureaucracy, and client services. In W. R. Rosengrens & M. Lefton (Eds.),Organizations and clients. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1970.Google Scholar
  8. 12.
    Graziano, A. M. Clinical innovation and the mental health power structure: A social case history.American Psychologist, 1969,24, 10–18.Google Scholar
  9. 13.
    Gregg, G., Preston, T., Geist, A., & Caplan, N. The caravan rolls on: Forty years of social problem research.Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 1979,1, 31–61.Google Scholar
  10. 14.
    Iscoe, I., & Spielberger, C. D. (Eds.).Community psychology: perspectives in training and research. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970.Google Scholar
  11. 15.
    Krisberg, B., & Austin, J. (Eds.).The children of Ishmael. Palo Alto: Mayfield, 1978.Google Scholar
  12. 16.
    Meehl, P. E. Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978,46, 806–834.Google Scholar
  13. 17.
    Miller, W. B. Inter-organizational conflict as a major impediment to delinquency prevention.Human Organization, 1958,17, 20–23.Google Scholar
  14. 18.
    Nie, H. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., & Bent D.Statistical package for the social sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.Google Scholar
  15. 19.
    Offer, D.The psychological world of the teenager. New York: Basic Books, 1969.Google Scholar
  16. 20.
    President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice.Task force report: Juvenile delinquency and youth crime. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967.Google Scholar
  17. 21.
    Rappaport, J.Community psychology: Values, research, and action. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1977.Google Scholar
  18. 22.
    Rappaport, J. Standards for juvenile justice as an example of fundamental change in law and social policy: Opportunities and dangers for psychologists.American Psychological Association Division of Community Psychology Newsletter, 1979,13, 1–3.Google Scholar
  19. 23.
    Reid, W. Interagency coordination in delinquency prevention and control.Social Service Review, 1964,38, 418–428.Google Scholar
  20. 24.
    Sampson, E. E. Psychology and the American ideal.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977,35, 767–782.Google Scholar
  21. 25.
    Schwartzman, H. B., Kneifel, A. W., & Krause, M. S. Culture conflict in a community mental health center,Journal of Social Issues, 1978,34, 93–110.Google Scholar
  22. 26.
    Street, D., Vinter, R. D., & Perrow, C.Organization for treatment. New York: Collier-Macmillan, 1966.Google Scholar
  23. 27.
    Thompson, J. D., & McEwen, W. J. Organizational goals and environment: Goal setting as an interaction process.American Sociological Review, 1958,23, 23–31.Google Scholar
  24. 28.
    Tonry, N. H. Juvenile justice and the national crime commissions. In M. K. Rosenheim (Ed.),Pursuing justice for the child. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  25. 29.
    White, P. E. Levine, S., & Vlasak, G. J. Exchange as a conceptual framework for understanding interorganizational relationships: Application to nonprofit organizations. In R. H. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy, & D. P. Slevin (Eds.),The management of organization design: Research and methodology. New York: Elsevier North-Holland, 1976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan J. Frank
    • 1
  • Darlene M. Atkins
    • 2
  1. 1.Psychology Department, Lewis CollegeIllinois Institute of TechnologyChicago
  2. 2.University of MarylandCollege Park

Personalised recommendations