Effectiveness of the Justice Diversion Halt-intervention

The Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Diversion Measure Halt-intervention: a Randomized Controlled Trial

In the current study the effectiveness of the Dutch diversion measure Halt is investigated using a randomized controlled trial. Because of the thorough scientific substantiation of the intervention theory, it is hypothesized that receiving the Halt-intervention will lead to less recidivism in comparison to receiving no intervention.

Study Overview

• Status: Active, not recruiting
• Conditions: Delinquency; Criminal Recidivism; Antisocial Behavior
• Intervention / Treatment: Behavioral: Halt-intervention

Detailed Description

The Halt-intervention is a widely used Dutch diversion measure for youth (aged 12-17) who committed a minor offence. In the current study, it will be investigated whether the Halt-intervention is successful in reducing recidivism and in achieving the intervention goals. The effectiveness will be assessed using a randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomly assigned to the experimental condition in which participants will receive the halt intervention or to the control condition in which participants will not receive an intervention. Participants fill out three self-reported questionnaires over a time period of one year. With these questionnaires is it investigated whether the intervention is successful in achieving the different intervention goals (improving social skills, taking responsibility, correct wrongdoing or damage, improving conventional beliefs and improving support from the social network) and in achieving a reduction in recidivism. Furthermore, the adherence to children's rights in the practice of Halt is investigated. Lastly, two years after the first contact with Halt recidivism is assessed using official police and judicial records.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Estimated): 1300
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Netherlands
  • Zuid-Holland
    • The Hague, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands, 2500EH
      • WODC

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Child; Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Juveniles who have been referred to Halt after committing a minor offence that is eligible for the Halt-intervention.
• Juveniles between the ages of 12 and 18.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Participants who do not speak Dutch or who do not speak Dutch fluently.
• Participants who have already participated in the study before.
• Participants who are participating in the following Halt-programs: 'Hack_right', 'Respect Online' or 'Sport en Spel'.
• Participants of whom it is suspected that their are serious concerns for their safety.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: None (Open Label)

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Experimental group: Halt-intervention; The experimental group will receive the Halt-intervention.	Behavioral: Halt-intervention; The Halt-intervention is a Dutch extrajudicial, or diversion, measure for minors (aged 12-17) who committed a minor offence. The intervention can consist of conversations with the Halt-employee, working or learning assignments to learn from the mistakes made or to work on certain skills, such as social skills, and/or apologizing to the victim.
No Intervention: Control group: No Halt-intervention; The control group will not receive the Halt-intervention, nor will they receive any other intervention or form of punishment.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Criminal Recidivism based on self-report	Assessed using the items from the Youth Delinquency Survey.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Criminal Recidivism based on official police records	Assessed using official Dutch Police registration records.	T3 (24 month follow up)
Criminal Recidivism based on official judiciary records	Assessed using official Dutch judicial records.	T3 (24 month follow up)
Truancy based on self-report	Assessed using the items from the Youth Delinquency Survey.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Conventional beliefs	Self-reported degree of conventional beliefs, or attitude towards delinquency, assessed using the Dutch translation of the Attitudes Towards Delinquent Behavior (ATDS) questionnaire (translated by the WODC).	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Minimizing/mislabeling	The degree in which the consequences of delinquent behavior are minimized, mislabeled or seen as acceptable, assessed using the How I Think (HIT) subscale 'Minimizing/Mislabeling' using the Dutch translation ('Hoe Ik Denk (HID)).	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Social skills	The degree in which pressure from friends to conduct delinquent behavior is experienced, assessed using a (self-developed) Dutch translation of the Peer Pressure Scale.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Taking responsibility for the consequences of behavior	The degree to which a sense of guilt, or responsibility, for the consequences for delinquent behaviour is experienced, assessed using the How I Think (HIT) subscale 'Blaming Others' using the Dutch translation ('Hoe Ik Denk' (HID)).	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Correct wrongdoing	The degree in which the wrongdoing and/or damages are corrected, assessed using a self-developed scale consisting of four question about having a conversation with the victim, apologizing to the victim, paying for the victim's damages and correcting the damages made.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Support from social network	The degree in which support from the social network is experienced and the degree in which respondents experience that they can ask their social network for help or advise (for example friends and family). Assessed using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Scale is translated to Dutch by the WODC.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Experienced legitimacy	Experienced legitimacy during the first contact with Halt (experimental and control group) and during the Halt-intervention (experimental group), assessed using a four-item scale.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up)
Experienced treatment	Experienced treatment during the first contact with Halt (experimental and control group) and during the Halt-intervention (experimental group) by the Halt-employee, assessed using a seven-item scale.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up)
Receiving adequate information	The degree to which the information given during the first contact with Halt (experimental and control group) and during the Halt-intervention (experimental group) about the Halt-intervention is experienced as adequate and comprehensible, assessed using a self-developed six-item scale.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up)
The right to be informed	The degree to which participants have the feeling that they are heard during the first contact with Halt (experimental and control group) and during the Halt-intervention (experimental group), assessed using a self-developed six-item scale.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up)
Experienced voluntariness	The degree to which participants experience being forced to confess the crime they committed, assessed using a self-developed three-item scale. Participants are asked (1) whether they feel that they were forced to confess their crime, (2) whether they feel it is justified that they are referred to Halt and (3) whether they feel that it is their own choice to go to Halt. These items will be presented to participants in the experimental and control group during T0 and to participants in the experimental group during T1.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up)
Access to legal assistance	The degree to which participants have access to an attorney, assessed using two self-developed questions. Participants are asked whether they had the opportunity to (1) speak to a lawyer about their offence and had the opportunity to (2) speak to a lawyer about their referral to Halt. These items will be presented to participants in the experimental and control group during T0 and to participants in the experimental group during T1.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up)
Knowledge of not obtaining a criminal record	Whether or not participants are aware of the fact that completion of the Halt-intervention results in not obtaining a criminal record (yes/no). These items will be presented to participants in the experimental and control group during T0 and to participants in the experimental group during T1.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up)
Experienced stigmatisation	The degree of experienced stigmatization, assessed using the four-item Stigmatisation subscale of the Re-integrative Shaming questionnaire.	T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Experienced re-integration	The degree of experienced re-integration, assessed using the four-item Re-integration subscale of the Re-integrative Shaming questionnaire.	T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Mental health problems during the last six months	The degree to which risk and/or protective factors are present, assessed using the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SGQ) using the Dutch translation.	T0 (baseline)
Experienced problems	Experienced problems in different domains (at home, school, alcohol, money, drugs, health, mental health, gaming) and whether their has been professional help for these problems using the ten-item scale from the Youth Delinquency Survey.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Delinquent friends	The degree in which participants have delinquent friends, assessed using a six-item scale from the Youth Delinquency Survey.	T0 (baseline; T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Parental involvement	The degree of parental control, parental monitoring and parental solicitation, assessed using the Dutch translation of the Parental Monitoring Questionnaire.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Demographical characteristics	The different demographical characteristics of respondents, such as gender and age.	T0 (baseline); T1 (100 days follow up); T2 (12 month follow up)
Halt-intervention program integrity	Questionnaire is being developed.	T1 (100 days follow up)
Characteristics Halt-employee	Questionnaire is being developed.	T1 (100 days follow up)
Perceived relationship with Halt-employee	Questionnaire is being developed.	T1 (100 days follow up)
Educational attainment	The most recent completed type of education assessed using the registration system of the Halt-intervention. .	T1 (100 days follow up)
Type of criminal offense	The type of criminal offense (e.g. shoplifting, petty theft) as registered in the registration system of the Halt-intervention.	T1 (100 days follow up)
Characteristics of referral to Halt-intervention	The organisation that referred to Halt (police or truancy officer) assessed using the registration system of the Halt-intervention.	T1 (100 days follow up)
Types of modules used during the Halt-intervention	The Halt-intervention contains of different modules, such as 'Handling Anger'; 'Handling Peer Pressure'; 'Making an apology to the victim'. These modules will be assessed using the registration system of the Halt-intervention.	T1 (100 days follow up)
Parts of the Halt-intervention carries out as group or solo intervention	The Halt-intervention can be offered as a solo of as a group intervention. The different forms used are assessed using the registration system of the Halt-intervention.	T1 (100 days follow up)

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek en Datacentrum
• Collaborators: Leiden University; Utrecht University
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: André M. van der Laan, Prod. Dr., Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek en Datacentrum

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): February 1, 2024
• Primary Completion (Estimated): July 1, 2027
• Study Completion (Estimated): July 1, 2027

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: March 12, 2024
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: April 4, 2024
• First Posted (Actual): April 9, 2024

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): March 25, 2025
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: March 4, 2025
• Last Verified: April 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Mental Disorders; Personality Disorders; Antisocial Personality Disorder
• Other Study ID Numbers: 3325

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: NO
• IPD Plan Description: This study is part of a dissertation consisting of multiple articles which will be offered for publication to peer reviewed journals. First the study protocol article will be written and offered for publication to a peer reviewed journal, including a brief Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP) and as supplement the Informed Consent Form (ICF). Thereafter the study results articles will be offered for publication to peer reviewed journals asap. During this period there is no plan to make individual participant data (IPD) available.

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No
• product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.: No