He argues for a resource-intensive program focusing on the sixteen percent of kids who become repeat offenders, starting when they commit petty offenses the system currently ignores as not important compared to the murders and armed robberies happening right now. Like western civilization, it sounds like a good idea.
Interesting - I wonder if this (i.e., intensive services focusing on a particularly problematic population) is going to be the newest vogue in policy debates particularly as "discretionary" spending dollars (i.e., everything at the Federal level that isn't defense, medicare, medicaid, social security or debt service) are increasingly crunched. I just attended a presentation by one of the leading researchers on homelessness prevention and policy and his point was very similar - there are some very simple and relatively inexpensive interventions (primarily small housing subsidies over defined, and often short durations of time) that will "cure" 85-90% of homelessness situations (among homeless families, anyway, there is a somewhat different profile among homeless single adults). But, right now, all homeless families in most jurisdictions are receiving costly warp-around services that really aren't making a difference for the majority. The speaker was making a point similar to Humes - we need to ration these expensive, intensive interventions for the 10-15% chronically/episodically homeless families to really make a difference there.
As always - thanks for sharing your reviews - I always enjoy them.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-06-06 12:48 pm (UTC)Interesting - I wonder if this (i.e., intensive services focusing on a particularly problematic population) is going to be the newest vogue in policy debates particularly as "discretionary" spending dollars (i.e., everything at the Federal level that isn't defense, medicare, medicaid, social security or debt service) are increasingly crunched. I just attended a presentation by one of the leading researchers on homelessness prevention and policy and his point was very similar - there are some very simple and relatively inexpensive interventions (primarily small housing subsidies over defined, and often short durations of time) that will "cure" 85-90% of homelessness situations (among homeless families, anyway, there is a somewhat different profile among homeless single adults). But, right now, all homeless families in most jurisdictions are receiving costly warp-around services that really aren't making a difference for the majority. The speaker was making a point similar to Humes - we need to ration these expensive, intensive interventions for the 10-15% chronically/episodically homeless families to really make a difference there.
As always - thanks for sharing your reviews - I always enjoy them.