U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

Screening and Assessing 

Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 

Among Youth in the Juvenile Justice System 

A Resource Guide for 

Practitioners

December 2004 
U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

810 Seventh Street NW. 

Washington, DC 20531 

John Ashcroft

Attorney General 

Deborah J. Daniels 

Assistant Attorney General 

J. Robert Flores

Administrator 

Office of Justice Programs

Partnerships for Safer Communities 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ojjdp 

This report was prepared by the National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice and was supported by

grant number 99–JRVX–0006 from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), Office

of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.

Points of view or opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent 

the official position or policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, 

which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of

Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime. 
Screening and Assessing 

 Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 

Among Youth in the Juvenile Justice System 

A Resource Guide for 

Practitioners

National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice 

Policy Research Associates, Inc. 

Thomas Grisso 

Lee A. Underwood

 

Report 

December 2004

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

NCJ 204956
Foreword 

Research indicates that many youth who come into contact with the juvenile justice system may

have mental health- and substance use-related disorders. Problems related to these conditions 

play a continuing role in delinquency and pose risks to the welfare of youth, juvenile justice 

staff, and others. 

 

Identifying troubled youth is the first step in providing them with appropriate treatment. To take 

that first step, juvenile justice professionals need reliable screening and assessment instruments 

and practical guidance in their effective use. 

 

This Resource Guide offers a comprehensive, user-friendly synthesis of current information on 

instruments that can be used to screen and assess youth for mental health- and substance userelated disorders at various stages of the juvenile justice process. The Guide includes profiles of 

more than 50 instruments, guidelines for selecting instruments, and best practice

recommendations for diverse settings and situations. 

Early, accurate identification of youth with mental disorders in the juvenile justice system is a

critical need. Once identified, these youth can receive the services required to improve their

lives, reduce recidivism rates, and promote community safety. This Resource Guide is intended 

as a basic tool for juvenile justice professionals working toward this goal. 

J. Robert Flores 

Administrator 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders ii
Preface and Acknowledgments 

This document was produced by the National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice 

through a grant from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). The 

mission of the Center is to promote awareness of the mental health needs of youth in the juvenile 

justice system and to assist the field in developing improved policies and programs based on the 

best available research and practice. The Center has four primary objectives: 









Create a national focus on youth with mental health disorders who are in contact with the 

juvenile justice system. 

Serve as a national resource for the collection and dissemination of evidence-based and best

practice information to improve services for these youth. 

Conduct new research and evaluation to fill gaps in the existing knowledge base. 

Foster systems and policy changes at the national, state, and local levels to improve services 

for these youth. 

The National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice is based within Policy Research

Associates, Inc., a nationally recognized research and evaluation organization located in Delmar, 

NY. 

The publication of this Resource Guide would not have been possible without the contributions 

and assistance of a number of individuals and organizations. The Center gratefully acknowledges 

OJJDP for its support of this project, with special recognition to Dr. Karen Stern, our federal 

project officer, for her guidance, patience, and invaluable assistance. The Center thanks the 

authors, Dr. Thomas Grisso and Dr. Lee Underwood, for their tireless efforts and unparalleled 

expertise. The Center also thanks Deborah Chapin for her editorial and research assistance. 

Finally, the Center thanks Dr. Nancy Cunningham and Dr. Glenn Thomas of the Ohio 

Department of Youth Services for their careful review of the document and thoughtful 

comments. 

This Resource Guide is designed to serve as a practical tool for clinicians and practitioners

working with youth with mental health disorders who are in contact with the juvenile justice

system. Our hope is that the information contained in this Guide will further contribute to the

growing knowledge base of best practices and will lead to improved outcomes for children, 

youth, and families. 

Joseph J. Cocozza, Ph.D., Director 

Kathleen R. Skowyra, Associate Director 

National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders iii
Table of Contents

Foreword........................................................................................................................................ ii

Preface and Acknowledgments...................................................................................................iii

Chapter 1: The Role of Screening and Assessment in Juvenile Justice................................... 1

Overview..........................................................................................................................................1 

Defining Screening and Assessment................................................................................................2 

Stages of Screening and Assessment ...............................................................................................3 

Approaches to Screening and Assessment.......................................................................................4 

Summary..........................................................................................................................................6 

Chapter 2: Selecting Screening and Assessment Instruments.................................................. 7

Screening and Assessment for What?..............................................................................................7 

Screening and Assessment of Whom?.............................................................................................9

Screening and Assessment in What Context?................................................................................10 

How To Judge Psychometric Quality ............................................................................................12

Summary: Criteria for Selection of Screening and Assessment Methods.....................................13 

Chapter 3: Menu of Screening and Assessment Instruments................................................. 14

Overview........................................................................................................................................14 

Overview Tables............................................................................................................................16

Instrument Summaries...................................................................................................................19 

Chapter 4: “Best Practice” Selections....................................................................................... 74

Intake Assessment Center..............................................................................................................74 

Juvenile Detention Center..............................................................................................................75 

Pretrial Emergency Mental Health Consultation ...........................................................................76 

Court Clinic Evaluations................................................................................................................76 

Juvenile Correctional Reception Center ........................................................................................77 

Chapter 5: Final Comments and Recommendations............................................................... 78

About the Authors....................................................................................................................... 80

References.................................................................................................................................... 81

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders iv
Chapter 1: The Role of Screening and Assessment in Juvenile Justice

Overview

In 2002, law enforcement agencies in the United States made an estimated 2.3 million arrests of 

juveniles (Snyder, 2004). On any given day, more than 100,000 youth are being held in custody

in juvenile justice facilities across the country, either awaiting trial in detention centers or having

been placed in residential facilities after being adjudicated delinquent (Snyder and Sickmund, 

1999). Many others are supervised by juvenile probation officers after referral to the juvenile 

court. 

A growing body of research suggests that many of these youth meet criteria for at least one 

mental disorder and that at least one of every five has what is considered to be a serious mental 

disorder, often coupled with a co-occurring substance use disorder (Cocozza and Skowyra, 

2000). Growing awareness of these youth, their needs, and the impact that they have on the 

juvenile justice and mental health systems has led to increasing concern regarding the need to 

provide them with appropriate treatment services. Yet the first step—to effectively identify youth 

who require mental health services—has been largely absent. The situation is changing, 

however, with the growing awareness in the juvenile justice system of the need to identify these

youth by using sound screening and assessment procedures. 

There are several reasons why juvenile justice systems throughout the United States are now 

placing a high priority on identifying and responding to the mental health needs of youth in their 

custody. These reasons include:







Ethical, moral, and legal responsibilities require that public and private agencies meet the 

health and mental health needs of youth who are in state custody.

Problems associated with mental disorder often play a role in a youth’s continuing

delinquency and danger to society, so that an appropriate response to these conditions is 

critical in reducing future delinquency.

The welfare and safety of youth and staff in juvenile justice facilities are dependent on the

identification of any psychological conditions that may pose an immediate risk of aggression 

or suicide.

Responding to a youth’s mental, emotional, and substance use problems requires accurate 

identification of those problems. Detecting potential mental health and substance use disorders 

among youth requires reliable and valid screening and assessment tools and instruments, as well 

as information on how best to use these tools. 

This Resource Guide provides clinicians and other professionals working with youth in the 

juvenile justice system with a range of best practice information that will assist in better

identifying youth with mental health disorders, thus ultimately improving their treatment. The

Guide reviews and synthesizes information about the most effective instruments for screening

and assessing youth for mental health and substance use disorders at various points in the 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 1
juvenile justice system. The Guide also provides examples of a variety of models and approaches 

that have been developed to use available instruments. 

Until recently, little attention has been given to the development of instruments designed 

specifically for identifying mental health and substance use disorders among youth in the 

juvenile justice system. Moreover, the process of screening and assessment in juvenile justice

facilities has often been cursory, without clear purpose, or without an integrated approach 

(Trupin and Boesky, 1999). Although these circumstances have gradually begun to improve, 

there are still few standardized and validated tools designed to meet the needs of juvenile justice

agencies responsible for screening and assessing the youth in their care. Therefore, the 

information offered in this Guide will not always provide an ideal solution for the problems 

facing clinicians and administrators in the juvenile justice system. However, the Guide does

provide a benchmark for current progress in this area. It presents information on approaches that

may not be ideal but that offer an improvement over current practices in many jurisdictions. 

Defining Screening and Assessment

Screening and assessment share the objective of evaluating youth, but they are distinguished by

different purposes and often require somewhat different methods. 

Screening. Most definitions of screening for mental health and substance use problems (e.g., 

Trupin and Boesky, 1999; Grisso and Barnum, 2000) describe a relatively brief process designed 

to identify youth who are at increased risk of having disorders that warrant immediate attention, 

intervention, or more comprehensive evaluation. Screening, therefore, is a triage process, often 

employed with all youth entering a particular component of the juvenile justice system. 

Screening typically is intended not to provide an accurate psychiatric diagnosis, but rather to 

distinguish a set of exceptionally troubled youth for whom some special and relatively

immediate response is necessary. Examples of responses to “red flags” in juvenile justice 

screening might include closer monitoring by staff, assignment of a staff member to briefly

inquire further about the youth’s current feelings, placement on suicide watch, scheduling for a 

diagnostic interview and consultation with a mental health professional, or, in some cases, 

immediate transfer to an inpatient psychiatric facility. Identifying the need for further evaluation, 

however, is a more frequent purpose of screening.

The scope of screening may vary at different points in the juvenile justice process, as will be

discussed later. Some screening procedures are very brief (e.g., 10 minutes) and seek the bare

minimum of information needed for a specific decision. Other types of screening may take

longer (e.g., 30 minutes) and seek a broader range of information, but still in a relatively brief 

and efficient manner. In any case, screening is standardized, collecting a specific set of readily

available information for every youth passing through a particular point in the juvenile justice 

process. 

Assessment. In contrast, assessment (in the present context) is a more comprehensive and 

individualized examination of the psychosocial needs and problems identified during the initial 

screening, including the type and extent of mental health and substance abuse disorders, other 

issues associated with the disorders, and recommendations for treatment intervention. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 2
Assessments typically are more expensive than screening because they require more 

individualized data collection, often including psychological testing, clinical interviewing, and 

obtaining past records from other agencies for review by the assessor. Thus, assessment typically

requires the expertise of a mental health professional. These facts mean that assessments should 

be used only for a subset of youth who, through screening or other means, are identified as most 

likely to be in need of such evaluation. 

Stages of Screening and Assessment

At the broadest level, the juvenile justice system consists of a community’s juvenile court and a 

system of services or interventions designed to prevent further misconduct. Juvenile courts

gather information and make decisions regarding a youth’s needs, make legal decisions about a 

youth’s offending, and, if necessary, make decisions about the type of remedial, rehabilitative, 

and correctional response that will best meet the needs of the youth and society. Communitybased agencies and juvenile correctional facilities then provide the appropriate community

services or rehabilitation in secure facilities. 

Screening is most likely to be needed at three points in this system: 







At the first interview with a youth after referral to the juvenile court, often conducted by an 

intake officer. 

Upon admission of a youth to a pretrial detention center to await adjudication. 

Upon admission to a postadjudication community program or correctional facility to begin 

the rehabilitative process.

Far more youth are processed at the first of these points than at the second, and only a minority

of youth referred to juvenile courts reach the third point (i.e., placement in correctional

programs). Because of practical concerns associated with these differences in the volume of 

cases, somewhat different screening procedures are appropriate for different points in the system. 

 

Assessment, the more extensive process of individualized evaluation, may also occur at any of

these points and may be focused on a variety of decisional needs. Some assessments address 

forensic questions—for example, competence to stand trial, risk of future violence, risk of 

repeated sex offending, and factors associated with the transfer of a juvenile case for trial in

criminal court (Grisso, 1998). Far more frequently, however, assessments are used to identify a 

youth’s psychological needs and to recommend treatment and rehabilitative interventions for

consideration by the court or correctional programs. 

 

Like screening, assessment serves somewhat different purposes at different stages in the juvenile

justice process. At intake, assessment results may be used to divert the youth from moving

further into the juvenile justice process, resulting in more appropriate referral to community

mental health services. At the second stage, pretrial assessments often provide juvenile court 

judges with information about the youth’s mental health and substance use needs that should be 

taken into account in deciding what services should be provided for rehabilitation if the youth is 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 3
found delinquent. At the third stage, assessments inform rehabilitation staff of community or 

secure correctional programs about the need for specialized methods of treatment or remediation. 

Approaches to Screening and Assessment 

Valid and reliable instruments are necessary for creating an effective screening and assessment 

process. Equally important, however, is knowledge about how best to use these instruments 

when working with youth within the juvenile justice system. Traditionally, private mental health 

consultants under contract with a juvenile court or a correctional facility provided screening and 

evaluation services for some youth involved with the juvenile justice system. Although this 

arrangement still occurs, various new approaches have been developed to implement screening

and assessment strategies for youth at different stages of the juvenile justice system. However, 

very little is known about the relative effectiveness of these strategies or models and under what 

circumstances these models work best. Further, there is tremendous variation in how these 

strategies can be applied or implemented. 

Despite the lack of evidence-based knowledge and research regarding effective screening and 

assessment models, a number of models and approaches are currently in use. These approaches 

cover a range of community-based and institutional settings and include a variety of partnerships. 

Examples include the following: 





Juvenile Intake. In many communities, juvenile intake is both the initial point of juvenile

justice contact for youth and the entity responsible for making decisions about diversion or 

further referral to detention or juvenile court. Some communities have created probationbased diversion initiatives designed to identify specialized treatment needs and refer youth 

(and families, if necessary) to appropriate community-based services in lieu of immediate

referral to detention or juvenile court. Screening and assessment are performed by juvenile 

justice staff (or by an outside public or private provider under contract with the juvenile 

justice agency) to identify a range of service needs, including the need for mental health

services or followup. Referrals to community-based services are based on the results of these 

assessments. New York State’s PINS (persons in need of supervision) Diversion Program 

authorizes probation intake units to temporarily deny direct access to family court by

petitioners and uses a designated assessment service to provide comprehensive screening,

assessment, and treatment planning services for youth (Cocozza and Skowyra, 2000). 

Juvenile or Community Assessment Centers. In some communities, juvenile or

community assessment centers provide a centralized point of intake for youth and families 

who have come into contact or who are at risk of coming into contact with the juvenile

justice system. These centers offer a single point of entry for processing and booking youth 

who have been arrested or picked up by the police. In addition, assessment centers often 

provide screening, assessment, and evaluation services to youth on a broad range of service 

issues. The centers typically involve representatives from a range of community-based 

agencies, including law enforcement, juvenile justice, and human services; often these 

agencies are colocated at the facility (Dembo and Brown, 1994). Assessment centers have

been established in a number of states, including Colorado, Florida, Kansas, and New 

Mexico. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 4






Court Evaluation Clinics. In some communities, juvenile or family courts operate clinics 

that provide evaluation information to assist the court in dispositional decisionmaking. These 

evaluations help the court determine how best to meet the needs of a particular youth. Court 

clinics often employ psychologists or other mental health professionals who conduct a 

variety of evaluations of youth and their families to determine specific treatment needs and 

make service recommendations to the court. One example of such a clinic is the Cook 

County (IL) Juvenile Court Clinic (CCJCC). CCJCC, which is designed to ensure that 

clinical information provided to juvenile courts is accurate, culturally sensitive, and timely, 

employs contracted psychologists who perform clinical assessments of youth for juvenile 

court judges (Scally et al., 2001). 

Juvenile Correctional Diagnostic Reception Centers. In response to the increasing number 

of youth entering the juvenile justice system with mental health, substance use, and other 

treatment needs, many states have created centralized diagnostic reception centers. These 

centers serve as the initial point of referral for youth who are referred by a juvenile court to 

secure placement within the state’s juvenile correctional system. The centers provide 

comprehensive screening, assessment, and evaluation services to these youth to determine 

the level and type of rehabilitative treatment needed and the most appropriate facility or

program placement within the system. Youth typically spend from 2 to 4 weeks in reception 

centers, which are often staffed by a combination of mental health professionals and juvenile 

correctional staff. A number of states, including California, Massachusetts, Ohio, Texas, and 

Virginia, have created diagnostic reception centers to determine treatment and supervision 

needs before youth are placed in a facility or program. 

Mental Health and Juvenile Justice Collaboratives. The delivery of mental health services

to youth in juvenile justice settings can often be complex because multiple agencies or 

systems provide services. Given the frequent lack of mental health resources within state

juvenile justice systems, collaborative arrangements between mental health and juvenile

justice agencies can enhance the clinical care provided for youth in juvenile justice settings. 

One model that illustrates this type of collaboration is New York State’s mobile mental

health teams—teams of mental health professionals deployed throughout the state to provide 

onsite assessment, crisis intervention, counseling, and other types of clinical care for youth in 

state juvenile correctional facilities. This collaboration, which has been in place since 1980, 

is supported by a memorandum of understanding between the state’s Office of Children and 

Family Services and Office of Mental Health. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 5
Summary

To provide adequate screening and assessment of the mental health- and substance abuse-related 

needs of youth, mental health professionals and juvenile justice professionals must have access 

to relevant instruments designed for these purposes. Screening and assessment methods must not 

only meet various psychometric standards but must also be adaptable to the needs and 

circumstances of the juvenile justice process. Chapter 2 discusses in more detail the nature of

these demands and provides information to assist mental health professionals and juvenile justice 

personnel in developing appropriate screening and assessment procedures. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 6
Chapter 2: Selecting Screening and Assessment Instruments 

This Resource Guide describes more than 50 screening and assessment instruments for

consideration by those who are responsible for identifying the mental health and substance abuse 

service needs of youth (see chapter 3). Choosing among these instruments requires attention to 

their development, purpose(s), and capacity for meeting the demands associated with use at

various stages of the juvenile justice process. Moreover, selection factors differ somewhat for the 

two categories of instruments. This chapter, therefore, discusses the selection of screening and 

assessment instruments from three perspectives: the type of information sought, characteristics of

the youth involved, and the context in which screening or assessment takes place. 

 

Screening and Assessment for What? 

Screening and assessment instruments for identifying mental health- and substance use-related 

needs of adolescents differ considerably in the kinds of psychological and behavioral 

characteristics that they evaluate. There is probably no definitive set of characteristics that is 

essential for all purposes at every stage in the juvenile justice process. However, research on 

problems among youth in the juvenile justice system suggests several considerations. 

 

Psychiatric Disorders. There is general consensus (e.g., Otto et al., 1992; Kazdin, 2000; Teplin 

and McClelland, 1998) that certain psychiatric disorders are among the most frequent and 

troubling in juvenile justice populations. These include the following: 













Conduct disorders. 

Affective disorders (e.g., dysthymia). 

Anxiety disorders (e.g., posttraumatic stress disorder). 

Substance use disorders. 

Attention deficit disorders. 

Developmental disabilities (e.g., mental retardation). 

Some instruments attempt to identify youth who meet criteria for these diagnostic conditions, as 

defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM–IV)

(American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Although this approach has value, it also has 

shortcomings. It is widely recognized that disorders of adolescence do not fit as easily into 

homogeneous classes as do disorders of adulthood (Mash and Barkley, 1996). Moreover, use of 

specific diagnostic instruments runs the risk of settling for a single diagnosis, when in fact

comorbidity (co-occurrence) of disorders is the rule rather than the exception among adolescents. 

In the juvenile justice system, comorbidity of substance use with other disorders is especially

common, as is comorbidity of conduct disorder with other disorders (Mash and Barkley, 1996). 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 7
Symptoms and Problem Behaviors. Another approach incorporated in some screening and 

assessment instruments for adolescents is identifying symptoms and behaviors of special 

relevance for understanding youth and responding to their needs, rather than seeking to establish 

the presence of formal diagnostic disorders. Many symptoms and problem behaviors are 

associated with more than one diagnostic condition. Examples include the following: 















Depressed affect. 

Anxiety.

 Suicidal tendencies. 

Alcohol and drug use problems. 

Unusual or bizarre thoughts. 

Anger and aggression. 

Intellectual and neuropsychological deficits. 

In this approach, the focus is on identifying mental and emotional disturbances or potential 

symptoms and behaviors that may be found in any number of mental disorders, without requiring

an actual diagnosis. Often, identification of these conditions is sufficient to meet the juvenile

justice system’s obligation to respond appropriately to a youth’s needs. 

Family Characteristics. In the context of screening and assessment, a fundamental difference 

between adults and adolescents is that the latter typically are still dependent on their families and 

are directly influenced by their caretakers’ strengths and weaknesses. Whenever possible, 

assessments should use instruments that allow the evaluator to obtain relevant information about 

a youth’s family.

Strengths. The process of responding to a youth’s problem behaviors and disorders should also 

include attention to the strengths of the youth (and family) on which treatment and rehabilitation 

can build. Unfortunately, most screening and assessment instruments designed for use with 

adolescents focus on deficits and disorders and give little attention to areas of functioning in 

which the youth shows particular capability. Yet for the clinician, this is an essential part of a

complete assessment process, and instruments that do provide such information deserve special 

consideration. 

Not all instruments can be expected to assess the full range of deficits and strengths described 

here. Moreover, the demands of screening require that these instruments seek only limited, 

readily available information. Assessment instruments, on the other hand, should be evaluated in 

terms of all the domains described above. The need for more comprehensive information will 

often lead clinicians to use more than one instrument for assessments. 

 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 8
Screening and Assessment of Whom? 

The characteristics of youth who typically come into contact with the juvenile justice system

raise a number of issues that must be taken into account in the selection of appropriate screening

and assessment instruments. 

Age. Screening and assessment instruments must be designed for the appropriate age range. 

Typically this range is ages 12–17, although the range for specific settings may be somewhat 

different, depending on the stage of the juvenile justice process at which the evaluation is being

performed or the juvenile jurisdictional age in a particular state. Whether an instrument is 

appropriate for a particular age group depends on a number of factors, including content, reading

level, and norms (scores from the population with whom the instrument was originally

developed). 

Gender. In 2002, females constituted approximately 29 percent of all juvenile arrests (Snyder, 

2004). Despite the steady increase in the number of girls involved with the juvenile justice 

system, many instruments designed for use in juvenile justice settings traditionally have been

developed with and for boys. This tradition is changing but is still in evidence. 

Girls differ from boys somewhat in the types of mental, emotional, and substance abuse 

problems they exhibit and in the prevalence of these problems. Thus, for a particular screening or

assessment instrument, clinicians must determine whether the content and norms will be

appropriate when girls are among the youth to be screened or assessed. 

Ethnicity. The ethnic composition of youth involved in the juvenile justice system varies from 

one jurisdiction to another and from one stage in the juvenile justice process to the next. 

Minority ethnic youth make up at least one-half of the youth involved with the juvenile justice 

system in most communities, far more than that in many urban areas, and nearly all of the youth 

entering some juvenile corrections facilities (Isaacs, 1992). It is obvious, therefore, that 

instruments developed and normed primarily or exclusively with non-Hispanic white youth are 

inadequate for screening and assessment in the juvenile justice system. 

When considering the ethnic appropriateness of instruments for juvenile justice samples of

diverse ethnicity, it is important to recognize that race is no longer the framework for making

these judgments. Second-language skills vary widely within racial groups, as does the level of 

cultural diversity. African American youth in New York City and Miami, for example, may

typically have very different cultural and linguistic backgrounds. An instrument that performed 

adequately when developed with Hispanic youth in Boston may produce considerably more error 

in measurement when used with Latino youth in Los Angeles. 

These issues have no easy solutions. Test developers probably will never be able to construct 

screening and assessment instruments that are entirely appropriate for all youth in an 

increasingly multiracial, multiethnic, multilinguistic, and multicultural society. However, some

instruments will come closer to meeting these challenges than others. The selection of screening

and assessment instruments must take into account the particular ethnic, linguistic, and cultural 

composition of the youth in the juvenile justice system where the instruments will be used. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 9
Cognitive and Attentional Deficits. Virtually all large studies of youth in the juvenile justice 

system find that their average score on standardized intelligence tests is considerably below the

average for youth generally in the United States (Frick, 1998). In addition, youth in the juvenile 

justice system disproportionately have problems in reading, attention, and expressive and 

receptive language skills. These deficits should, of course, be assessed in determining a youth’s 

cognitive and educational needs. Such deficits also mean that instruments used to screen and 

assess youth for mental, emotional, and substance abuse problems must be designed to 

accommodate youth with serious limitations in reading and expressive abilities. 

Screening and Assessment in What Context? 

The context in which screening or assessment is performed should receive special consideration 

when selecting instruments. An instrument that requires certain resources might work well at one

point in the system but might not be at all feasible for use at another point. Moreover, the

importance of identifying a particular type of disorder or problem may vary from one point in the 

system to the next. A number of factors require consideration when reviewing instruments for 

use in a particular context. 

Time. Typically, the greater the volume of cases that must be screened or assessed, the less time

is available for the task. Moreover, some objectives—especially those associated with

screening—may simply not require time-consuming methods. Sometimes, shorter is better in all 

respects. In other situations, however, brevity may compromise the objectives of the screening or 

assessment. 

Screening and assessment instruments vary considerably in the time required to administer and 

score them, ranging from 10 minutes to several hours. Moreover, some paper-and-pencil 

instruments may be administered to groups of youth together (e.g., all youth admitted to a facility

during the previous 24 hours), whereas other instruments, especially those requiring interviews, 

must be administered individually. Juvenile justice settings that screen every youth who enters

typically cannot afford to spend more than 15–20 minutes per youth. This limitation places some 

of the better assessment instruments outside the range of feasibility for screening. Because

screening instruments that require little time usually sacrifice range or precision in the

information they provide, they are inadequate for more thorough assessment unless combined 

with other measures. 

Financial Cost. Instruments vary considerably in their per-case cost. Excluding compensation 

for staff or clinician time, some instruments may be used without any per-case fees, and others 

may cost several dollars per case (through purchase of the materials or contracts with 

commercial, computer-based assessment systems). A direct relationship between cost and quality

is not a safe assumption. Each instrument should be considered on its merits and appropriateness 

for a particular setting. 

Expertise of Personnel. Some instruments require professional clinical expertise to administer,

score, and/or interpret. Others may be used by line staff or justice-based counselors, either with

little training or with some specialized inservice training. Selection of an instrument depends on 

the nature of the information that is needed. For example, tools designed for indepth evaluation 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 10
frequently require professional clinical expertise, whereas brief screening instruments often are

designed for use by nonclinicians in juvenile facilities. 

Information Sources. Instruments for evaluating the mental health- and substance use-related 

needs of youth vary considerably in the types of information needed for completion. Some 

require only the youth’s self-report; others require information obtained directly from family

members and/or legal, educational, and mental health records. The latter probably would be of 

little value for screening at admission to pretrial detention facilities, because detention staff

usually do not have access to a youth’s parents or records until several days after admission (and 

sometimes longer). On the other hand, in more extensive assessments to arrive at 

recommendations for longer term treatment, using an instrument that relies solely on a youth’s 

reports of his or her own feelings and behaviors is risky because the information may be

distorted, biased, or incomplete. 

The Screening and Assessment Relationship. Juvenile justice personnel and mental health 

professionals who screen or assess youth in the context of adjudication proceedings are expected 

to act in the best interests of the youth, seeking to identify and meet treatment needs. Yet, the

role of an evaluator acting under the authority of the juvenile court is different from that of an 

evaluator in a children’s clinic. For example, the data obtained in a court-ordered evaluation 

typically are not held to the same standards of confidentiality that apply in strictly clinical

settings. The examiner often communicates assessment information to the court, which may use

the information to make decisions about long-term incarceration involving significant 

deprivations of liberty. 

Expectations of parents and youth about the potential use of the information they are providing

mental health examiners may influence the nature of their responses to the examiner’s inquiries. 

Instruments vary in the degree to which such factors influence results. Moreover, many

instruments have been validated only in the context of clinical assessments in which parents and 

youth expect privacy and confidentiality. Such instruments may not be valid when used in the 

different context of the examiner-examinee relationship in a juvenile justice setting. 

Purpose of Screening and Assessment. As noted earlier, instruments differ in the type of 

information they provide. Some suggest diagnoses; others focus on symptoms, problem areas, or

family characteristics. Different types of information are relevant to varying degrees at different 

stages in the juvenile justice process, depending on the nature of the decisions to be made. For 

example, at pretrial detention intake, establishing a psychiatric diagnosis of major depression 

may be far less important—for purposes of meeting a youth’s immediate needs—than learning

that the youth recently has been obsessing about self-injurious behaviors and has made a suicide 

threat within the past few days. 

Similarly, some instruments have been designed to bridge the gap between identifying mental

health or substance abuse disorders and intervening to address the disorders. For example, an 

instrument’s content may focus on problem areas associated with specific intervention needs 

(e.g., frequency, recency, social context, and functional consequences of substance use, with 

high scores indicating a need for a specific type of intervention). Other instruments identify

general mental or emotional conditions (e.g., anxiety) that do not automatically suggest a specific 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 11
intervention. The selection of a specific instrument depends on the context and the purpose for 

which the instrument will be used. 

How To Judge Psychometric Quality

Choosing an instrument for screening or assessment requires adequate attention to the 

psychometric properties of the instrument (i.e., the properties related to its use in the quantitative

measurement of psychological data), as described in the instrument’s manual or in relevant 

research reports. Instruments vary considerably in the degree to which research has demonstrated 

their internal consistency, interexaminer reliability, test-retest reliability, and construct and 

predictive validity.

1

 Weighing these factors during instrument selection frequently involves 

significant compromises, because even the best instruments may not meet stringent and 

comprehensive tests of both reliability and validity.

Less-than-perfect reliability and validity are not surprising, however, given the heterogeneity of

the juvenile justice population. A single instrument is unlikely to meet high standards across all 

categories of youth (ages, ethnicities, offense histories, cognitive and developmental capacities)

for all conditions to be assessed. 

 

Selecting a tool, therefore, involves deciding “how good is good enough” with regard to 

psychometric properties in light of intended usage. There is no “minimum” requirement set by

professional standards. The following guidelines, however, can help juvenile justice 

administrators and clinicians weigh the psychometric adequacy of instruments for juvenile 

justice screening and assessment: 









 

An instrument should not be selected if no research exists on the degree of its reliability or

validity when administered to adolescents. 

Instruments that provide evidence of reliability and validity with youth in the juvenile justice

system are preferable to those that do not. 

The greater the consequences and import of the decisions to be made (e.g., longer term 

treatment and/or incarceration), the higher the standard that should be applied in judging

whether an instrument has an acceptable degree of reliability and validity. 

Instruments that provide variable norms according to gender, age, and ethnic background are 

preferable to those that do not. 

1

Internal consistency is the degree to which the items on a scale are related to each other. Interexaminer 

reliability is the degree to which an individual’s answers on a test are scored similarly by different 

examiners. Test-retest reliability is the degree to which people who take a test twice under the same

circumstances have the same scores both times. Construct validity is the degree to which an instrument is 

useful in testing hypotheses about medical or psychological conditions based on a theory about illness or

human behavior. Predictive validity is the degree to which an instrument identifies individuals who, in the 

future, do or do not engage in some behavior (or develop some condition) that the instrument is designed 

to identify.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 12
Administrators who have difficulty evaluating the psychometric properties of assessment 

instruments may wish to consult with clinical or educational psychologists who are familiar with 

tests and test development. 

Summary: Criteria for Selection of Screening and Assessment Methods 

The following checklist describes basic desirable characteristics of instruments for identifying

mental health- and substance abuse-related needs among youth in the juvenile justice system. 

Both screening and assessment instruments should meet the following criteria: 





















Require low levels of reading ability and use relatively simple response formats (for paperand-pencil instruments that must be completed by youth). 

Assess mental distress and disorder and/or substance use needs along dimensions that are 

meaningful for the specific context and purpose(s) of the evaluation at a particular point in 

the juvenile justice process. 

Be amenable to use with youth of diverse ethnic, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds. 

Have some evidence of psychometric reliability and include information regarding the extent 

and limits of validity with juvenile justice system youth. 

Offer age- and gender-based norms across the age span of youth in a particular juvenile 

justice setting.

In addition, screening instruments should meet the following criteria: 

Assess psychological or behavioral conditions that may indicate a need for immediate or

emergency intervention (e.g., suicide potential, serious depression, anger and aggression, 

substance abuse). 

Have low per-case costs and low publisher fees (important because of the high volume of 

cases that typically must be screened). 

Involve brief, simple administration that requires little or no specialized clinical expertise. 

Offer easy scoring that produces uncomplicated results. 

Allow for quick and simple interpretation of scores or application of decision rules in using

screening data to determine appropriate responses.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 13
Chapter 3: Menu of Screening and Assessment Instruments 

Overview

This chapter provides juvenile justice administrators, probation officers, youth counselors, and 

mental health professionals with information about a wide range of tools that have been 

developed for screening and assessing mental health and substance abuse disorders in youth. The 

information is provided in several forms and will facilitate application of the criteria presented in 

chapter 2 to the selection of instruments for use in juvenile justice settings. 

The instruments described in this chapter were selected on the basis of a thorough search of the 

literature. Literally hundreds of instruments measure aspects of adolescent mental health, 

substance abuse, personality, and cognitive abilities. Some have rarely or never been used in 

clinical or juvenile justice settings. Others have been used even though there is no evidence

regarding their psychometric properties. Others have not yet been used but have preliminary

manuals because research to establish their value is underway. The authors have selected 

instruments with at least some known use in juvenile justice or adolescent clinical settings and 

some evidence of reliability and other psychometric properties. 

Having many instruments to choose from is both an advantage and a problem. Although the vast 

number of instruments means that agencies are more likely to find tools that fit their needs, the

sheer volume of both instruments and selection criteria makes choosing among the instruments a 

daunting task. This Resource Guide has been designed to reduce the complexity of these 

decisions in several ways. 

First, this chapter offers two overview tables: one for screening instruments and another for 

assessment instruments. These tables summarize basic facts for each instrument and can be used 

as a threshold for the decision process, to narrow the selection. Next, one-page instrument 

summaries, arranged alphabetically by instrument title, provide detailed information about each 

instrument covered in the overview table. 

Following this chapter’s menu of instruments, chapter 4 presents “best practice” selections 

recommended by the authors for several hypothetical circumstances. A caution about these 

selections: What is best for one setting—or in the hypothetical circumstances described—might 

not be best for other settings. Actual selections should not be based solely on these hypothetical

examples. 

 

Overview Tables

The overview tables on pages 16–18 divide the instruments into two classifications: Screening

and Assessment. Instruments are classified as suitable for screening if they have all of the 

following characteristics:





Require no more than 15 minutes to administer. 

Offer paper-and-pencil or structured interview questions. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 14










Do not require clinical training for the person administering or scoring the instrument. 

Instruments that exceed the time requirement for screening or require a clinically trained 

examiner are classified as assessment instruments. 

Both tables group the instruments into four categories: 

Assess substance use/abuse only.

Primarily assess symptoms associated with mental or emotional disturbance. 

Focus on psychosocial problems, strengths, or needs. 

Examine cognitive and intellectual abilities. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 15
Overview Table 1: Screening Instruments (15 Minutes or Less, Paper-Pencil or 

Structured Interview, No Clinician Training)

Tests (X=Yes)

Category and 

Instrument

Time 

To 

Administer

(Minutes)

Age

Range

Research 

(Juvenile 

Justice)

Substance

Use

Suicide 

Risk

Symptoms

of 

Disorder

Multiple

Scales

Substance Use Only

Adolescent Substance Abuse 

Subtle Screening Instrument 15 12–18 X X X

Symptoms of Disorder*

Children’s Depression 

Inventory 10–20 6–17 X X X

Massachusetts Youth 

Screening Instrument-Second 

Version 10–15 12–17 X X X X X

Posttraumatic Stress 

Diagnostic Scale 10–15 17+ X X

Reynolds Adolescent

Depression Scale 5–20 13–18 X

Suicide Ideation Questionnaire 5–10 12–18 X X

Problems/Strengths/Needs**

Behavioral and Emotional 

Rating Scale 10–15 5–18 X X

Personal Experience Screening 

Questionnaire 15–20 12–18 X X X

Resiliency Attitude Scale 10–15 13–17 X

Cognitive Abilities

Peabody Picture Vocabulary

Test 10–15 2+ X

Wechsler Abbreviated Scales 

of Intelligence 15–30 6+ X X

* See also, in assessment table, Child Behavior Checklist–Youth Self-Report, which is appropriate for screening in some settings 

despite administration time of 20–25 minutes. 

** See also, in assessment table, Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers, which is appropriate for screening in some

settings despite administration time of 20–25 minutes. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 16
Overview Table 2: Assessment Instruments (More Than 15 Minutes, May Require 

Clinical Experience)

Tests (X=Yes)

Category and 

Instrument

Time 

To 

Administer

(Minutes)

Age

Range

Research 

(Juvenile 

Justice)

Substance

Use

Suicide 

Risk

Symptoms

of 

Disorder

Multiple

Scales

Substance Use As Primary Focus

American Drug and Alcohol 

Survey 20–25 9–18 X X X

Comprehensive Addiction 

Severity Index for Adolescents 45–90 12–18 X X X X

Drug Use Screening InventoryRevised 20–40 12–17 X X X X

Juvenile Automated Substance 

Abuse Evaluation 30–45 11–18 X X X X

Symptoms of Disorder

Adolescent Diagnostic

Interview 45–60 12–18 X X X X

Adolescent Psychopathology

Scale 45–60 12–19 X X X

Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale 

for Children 20 3–17 X X X

Carlson Psychological Survey 15 14+ X X X X

Child and Adolescent Needs

and Strengths-Mental Health 20 1–18 X X X X X

Child Behavior Checklist 

(Parent Form) 20–25 4–18 X X X

Child Behavior Checklist 

(Teacher Report Form) 20–25 4–18 X X X

Child Behavior Checklist (Youth 

Self-Report) 20–25 4–18 X X X

Devereux Scales of Mental 

Disorders 15 5–18 X X X

Diagnostic Interview Schedule

for Children-IV (Voice DISC) 60 9–17 X X X X X

Jesness Inventory 20–30 13–20 X X X

Millon Adolescent Clinical

Inventory 45–75 13–19 X X X X X

Minnesota Multiphasic 

Personality InventoryAdolescent 60–90 14–18 X X X

Practical Adolescent Dual

Diagnostic Interview 20–40 13–18 X X X X

Revised Behavior Problem

Checklist 30–45 5–18 X X X

State-Trait Anger Expression 

Inventory 15 13+ X X

Suicide Probability Scale 15–20 13+ X X X X

Symptom Checklist-90-Revised 15–20 13+ X X

Trauma Symptom Checklist for 

Children 15–20 8–16 X X X

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 17
Tests (X=Yes)

Category and 

Instrument

Time 

To 

Administer

(Minutes)

Age

Range

Research 

(Juvenile 

Justice)

Substance

Use

Suicide 

Risk

Symptoms

of 

Disorder

Multiple

Scales

Problems/Strengths/Needs

Child and Adolescent 

Functional Assessment Scale 10–30 4–14 X X X X

Child and Adolescent Needs

and Strengths-Juvenile Justice 20 4–21 X X X X X

Connors’ Rating ScalesRevised 15–30 3–17 X X

Family Adaptability and 

Cohesion Evaluation Scales-II 30–45 12+ X

Inventory of Suicide Ideation 10–15 13–18 X X

Matson Evaluation of Social

Skills with Youngsters 20 4–18 X X

Personality Inventory for Youth 30–60 8–18 X X X

Problem Oriented Screening 

Instrument for Teenagers 20–25 12–19 X X X

Relationship With Family of 

Origin Scale 20–30 15+ X X

Sixteen Personality Factor 

Questionnaire 45–60 16+ X

Structured Pediatric 

Psychosocial Interview 20 5–19 X X

Vineland Adaptive Behavior

Scales 20–90 1–18 X X 

Youth Level of Service-Case

Management Inventory 30–40 12–16 X X X

Cognitive Abilities

Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test 15–30 4+ X X

Peabody Individual 

Achievement Test-Revised 60 5–18 X X

Quick Neurological Screening 

Test II 20–30 5–18 X X

Stanford-Binet Intelligence 

Scale 45–90 2–23 X X

Wechsler Intelligence Scales

60–120

6–16, 

16+ X X

Wide Range Achievement TestIII 15–30 5+ X X

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 18
Instrument Summaries 

The instrument summaries are listed alphabetically by title. Each summary includes the

information noted below.

Description. A brief review of the instrument, its purpose, and other relevant information. More 

detailed information is available from the developer/publisher (see below). 

 

Constructs Measured. Each scale and the characteristics (constructs) measured. 

 

Age Range. The specific age range designated for the instrument. All instruments are appropriate

for children and/or adolescents. 

Administration/Scoring. The form in which the instrument is administered and scored. Forms 

include paper and pencil, CD–ROM programs in personal computers, and contracts with online 

assessment services. 

Administration Time. Approximately how many minutes are required to complete the

instrument. The authors sought instruments that can be completed in 20–30 minutes. However, 

administration time can vary with the objectives of the instrument. Several instruments that take

longer than 20–30 minutes to administer are included because they provide valuable information. 

Level of Training Required. Information regarding the level of clinical experience and education 

needed to administer the instrument. The authors sought assessment instruments that may be

administered by practitioners who do not have advanced degrees. The following classifications 

are used to describe the levels of training required:

 















Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Specialized training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Master’s degree (M.A.), clinical experience. 

Doctoral degree (Ph.D.), clinical experience. 

Research in General. Brief indication of the extent of research and development involving the 

instrument. In the limited space available, even a summary of the research is not possible. 

Instead, this section attempts to capture the extent to which the instrument has been researched in 

general, not specifically with youth in juvenile justice programs and facilities. The following

categories are used to describe the extent of research:

 

Limited research: Minimal or no known research or minimal research has been published. 

Some research: A few studies have been conducted and published. 

Much research: The instrument is the focus of substantial research and development. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 19
There are several ways to obtain more specific information regarding research on reliability,

validity, and normative data for most of the instruments: (1) consult the technical manual; (2) ask 

the publisher for an updated list of research reports; or (3) access computer-based literature

search programs through a university library, or with the assistance of a university-affiliated 

professional (entering the instrument’s title or author will produce a complete list of related 

publications). 

 

Research With Juvenile Justice Youth. Indication (yes or no) of research on reliability, validity,

or utility with samples of juvenile justice youth. 

Use With Ethnic Minorities. Information on availability in languages other than English and 

research on possible ethnic/racial differences in scores. This section assigns the instrument to one 

of three research categories:

 







Relevant information is available in the manual. 

Relevant information is available in research reports. 

No known relevant research has been conducted and the manual includes no information 

pertaining to race/ethnicity. 

 

Test Developer/Publisher. Contact information, including Web and e-mail addresses where 

available. 

 

Necessary Purchases. Materials that must be obtained to administer and score the instrument. If

the instrument may be used without cost, that is indicated. Although the specific costs incurred in 

implementing an instrument may be an important consideration in selection, that information is 

not provided here. (Cost information is, however, available from the publishers of the 

instruments.) The Resource Guide omits cost information for several reasons, which should be 

considered by potential users of these instruments: (1) Cost information quickly becomes 

obsolete; (2) some instruments can be administered in various forms at various costs (e.g., pencil 

and paper, CD–ROM, online testing services with a per-case cost); (3) some instruments will 

cost less than the list price if a facility can negotiate a reduced purchase price for high-volume

purchases; and (4) the true cost of implementation often includes more than the purchase cost of 

the materials (e.g., computer hardware, staff time, database management).

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 20
 Adolescent Diagnostic Interview (ADI) 

Description Assesses symptoms found in substance use and mental health 

disorders as described in the DSM–IV. Questions cover all major 

categories of drug use. The purpose is to assess substance use 

disorders and problems commonly associated with substance 

abuse. The ADI also assesses the effect of psychosocial stressors, 

school and interpersonal functioning, and cognitive impairment. It

assists with identifying, referring, and treating adolescents with

substance abuse problems. 

Constructs Measured Psychoactive substance use 

Sociodemographic factors 

Psychosocial stressors 

Alcohol use symptoms

Substance use history

Cannabis use symptoms

Additional drug use symptoms

Level of functioning domains 

Orientation/memory screen 

Psychiatric status

Depression

Mania 

Eating disorders 

Delusional thinking 

Hallucinations 

Attention-deficit disorder

Anxiety disorder 

Conduct disorder

Age Range 12–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 45–60 minutes, depending on the number of substances used. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree (with specialized training in drug and alcohol 

abuse or psychology), clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With 

Juvenile Justice 

Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Western Psychological Services 

12031 Wilshire Blvd. 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 

800–648–8857 or 310–478–2061 

www.wpspublish.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, administration booklets, scoring templates. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 21
Adolescent Psychopathology Scale (APS) 

Description A 346-item (long-form) self-report instrument that assesses 

psychopathology, personality, and social-emotional problems. The 

APS is used to assess psychological problems and behaviors that 

may interfere with an adolescent’s psychological adaptation and 

personal competence. 

Constructs Measured Conduct disorder 

Aggression 

Adjustment disorder

Disorientation 

Sleep disorder 

Infrequency response 

Somatization disorder

Critical item endorsement 

Generalized anxiety disorder 

Panic disorder 

Obsessive-compulsive

 personality disorder 

Borderline personality disorder

Psychosocial substance use 

 disorder

Schizotypal personality disorder

Internalizing disorder factor

Paranoid personality disorder 

Alienation-boredom

Posttraumatic stress disorder 

Major depression 

Avoidant personality disorder 

Dysthymic disorder 

Schizophrenia

Self-concept 

Social phobia 

Introversion 

Substance abuse disorder 

Age Range 12–19 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored with a computer program

(by publisher). 

Administration Time 45–60 minutes (long form), 15–20 minutes (short form). 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Psychological Assessment Resources 

16204 North Florida Avenue 

Lutz, FL 33549 

800–331–8378 (U.S. and Canada) or 813–968–3003 

www.parinc.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, surveys. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 22
Adolescent Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Instrument (Adolescent SASSI) 

Description A self-report screening instrument that examines symptoms and 

other indicators of alcohol and drug dependence (Miller, 1985). 

The Adolescent SASSI, using a third-grade reading level, 

examines both obvious and subtle symptoms related to alcohol 

and drug dependence (Cooper and Robinson, 1987). 

Constructs Measured Substance use frequency, symptoms, and other indicators of

alcohol and other drug dependence.

Age Range 12–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Scored by hand with a template or with a computer program.

Administration Time 15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish (under development). Research 

on ethnic differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher The SASSI Institute

201 Camelot Lane 

Springville, IN 47462 

800–726–0526 

www.sassi.com

Necessary Purchases Questionnaire (25 SASSIs, 25 profiles, 25 questionnaires); 

manual and test; scoring key; user guide. With computerized 

version, all of the these, plus diskette. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 23
American Drug and Alcohol Survey (ADAS) 

Description A 57-item self-report instrument that covers a broad spectrum of 

areas, including more than 36 different types of substances, and 

identifies lifetime use and frequency of use (McLellan and 

Dembo, 1993). 

Constructs Measured Substance use, frequency of use. 

Age Range 9–12 years and 12–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored with a computer 

program (by publisher). 

Administration Time 20–25 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher RMBS, Inc.

305 West Magnolia Street, #291 

Fort Collins, CO 80521 

800–447–6354 

www.rmbsi.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, surveys. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 24
Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS)

Description A 52-item, strength-based, clinician-rated approach to

assessment (Epstein and Sharma, 1998). Using a Likert scale 

format, BERS includes measures such as a sense of family unity, 

the ability to ask for help, interests, and other prosocial-related 

areas. 

Constructs Measured Interpersonal and intrapersonal strengths, involvement with 

family, school functioning, affective strength. 

Age Range 5–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 10–15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Some. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Psychological Assessment Resources 

16204 North Florida Avenue 

Lutz, FL 33549 

800–331–8378 (U.S. and Canada) or 813–968–3003 

www.parinc.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, summary response forms. 

 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 25
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Children (BPRS–C) 

Description Requires clinician ratings based on a clinical interview. The 

BPRS–C yields ratings of severity for a variety of psychiatric 

symptoms and a total symptom severity score (TimmonsMitchell et al., 1997). 

Constructs Measured Somatic concerns 

Anxiety

Depressive mood 

Hostility 

Tension

Uncooperativeness

Hyperactivity

Suicide ideation 

Distractibility 

Unproductive speech 

Speech deviance

Manipulativeness 

Hallucinations 

Blunted affect 

Emotional withdrawal

Disorientation 

Feelings of inferiority

Peculiar fantasies 

Delusions 

Speech and voice pressure 

Sleep difficulties 

Stereotypy

Age Range 3–17. 

Administration/Scoring Interview. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher WorldMedicus Pty Ltd. 

12 Tryon Road 

Lindfield NSW 2070 

Australia

+61–2–9416–0406 

enquiries@worldmdicus.com.au 

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, parent guide, profile, booklets. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 26
Carlson Psychological Survey (CPS) 

 

Description A brief self-report of psychological issues (Carlson, 1982). The

CPS was normed on a juvenile justice population and is reliable

for identifying mental health issues that may need to be further 

questioned. It provides a very brief measure of psychiatric 

symptomatology and depression. 

Constructs Measured Chemical abuse, thought disturbance, antisocial tendencies, selfdeprecation, validity. 

Age Range 14+. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience, supervision by

psychologist. 

Research in General Some. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English, Spanish, French. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Psychological Assessment Resources 

16204 North Florida Avenue 

Lutz, FL 33549 

800–331–8378 (U.S. and Canada) or 813–968–3003 

www.parinc.com

Sigma Assessments 

800–265–1285 

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, questionnaire, answer sheet, scoring sheet, 

profiles. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 27
Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS) 

Description A clinician-rated instrument designed to assess the degree of

impairment in children and adolescents with emotional,

behavioral, or substance use symptoms or disorders. The CAFAS 

provides a quick visual profile of problem areas across settings

and covers significant life domains, including substance use 

issues. It can be used in both research and clinical settings to 

assess progress and outcome (Hodges, 1995). Its purpose is to 

assess the degree of impairment in a youth’s daily functioning, 

help professionals link clients to resources, and assess changes in

clients over time. 

Constructs Measured School/work, home, community, behavior toward others, 

moods/emotions, self-harmful behavior, substance use, thinking

problems. 

Age Range Two versions: 4–7 and 7–14 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer administration. Scored by hand 

with a template and with a computer program.

Administration Time 10 minutes, longer if not familiar with youth. A structured option 

is available that takes 30 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: 

No known research. 

Developer/Publisher CAFAS 

2140 Old Earhart Road 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105 

734–769–9725 

hodges@provide.net 

www.cafas.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, checklist. With computerized version:

evaluations, manual and test, data dictionary. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 28
Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths-Juvenile Justice (CANS–JJ) 

Description An assessment tool that may be administered in the form of an 

interview, a series of interviews, a child and family planning team

meeting, or a record review (Lyons et al., 2000). The CANS–JJ 

may be used by probation officers, child welfare caseworkers, 

parent liaisons, and mental health workers. 

Constructs Measured Criminal/delinquent behavior 

Functioning

Substance abuse complications 

Mental health complications

Other risk behaviors 

Child safety risks 

Caregiver needs and strengths 

Youth strengths 

Organization and intensity of services 

Age Range 4–21 years. 

Administration Time 20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English, Spanish (in development). Research on 

ethnic differences: No known research. 

Developer/Publisher John S. Lyons, Ph.D. 

Mental Health Services and Policy Program

Institute for Health Services Research and Policy Studies 

Northwestern University

339 East Chicago Avenue, Weibolt Building 717 

Chicago, IL 60611 

312–503–0425 

jsl329@nwu.edu 

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 29
Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths-Mental Health (CANS–MH) 

Description Assesses children and adolescents prospectively and 

retrospectively for systems related to the needs and strengths of 

child and family. The CANS–MH provides a structured

assessment of mental health challenges along dimensions relevant

to service planning and decisionmaking. It identifies service gaps 

and is helpful in developing community-based treatment plans 

(Lyons et al., 2000). 

Constructs Measured Problem presentation: Psychosis, attention deficit/impulse

control, depression/anxiety, oppositional behavior, antisocial 

behavior, substance abuse, adjustment to trauma, situational 

consistency of problems, temporal consistency of problems. 

Risk behaviors: Danger to self, danger to others, elopement, 

sexually abusive behavior, crime/delinquency.

Functioning: Intellectual/developmental, physical/medical, 

family, school/day care. 

Care intensity and organization: Monitoring, treatment, 

transportation, service permanence. 

Caregiver capacity: Physical, supervision, involvement with 

care, knowledge, organization, residential stability, resources, 

safety. 

Strengths: Family, interpersonal, relationship permanence, 

education, vocational, well-being, spiritual/religious, 

creative/artistic, inclusion. 

Age Range 1–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer administration. Scored by hand 

with a template and with a computer. 

Administration Time 20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher John S. Lyons, Ph.D. 

Mental Health Services and Policy Program

Institute for Health Services Research and Policy Studies 

Northwestern University

339 East Chicago Avenue, Weibolt Building 717 

Chicago, IL 60611 

312–503–0425 

jsl329@nwu.edu 

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 30
Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), Parent Report Form

Description Designed for completion by the parent (caregiver) as a

behavioral measure of a youth’s overall mental, emotional, and 

adaptational functioning (Achenbach, 1991). The CBCL is also

available in Teacher Report and Youth Self-Report forms. 

Constructs Measured Competence scales: Activities, social. 

 

Syndrome scales: Anxious/depressed, attention problems, 

delinquent behavior, social problems, somatic complaints, 

thought problems, withdrawn, aggressive, externalizing,

internalizing.

Age Range 4–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Computer-automated scoring.

Administration Time 20–25 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: Available in 61 languages. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in the manual and in research 

reports.

Developer/Publisher Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) 

1 South Prospect St. 

Burlington, VT 05401 

802–264–6432 

www.aseba.org/index.html

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, forms, score sheets. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 31
Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), Teacher Report Form

Description Designed for completion by teachers as a behavioral measure of 

a youth’s overall mental, emotional, and adaptational functioning

(Achenbach, 1991). The CBCL is also available in Parent Report 

and Youth Self-Report forms. 

Constructs Measured Competence scales: Activities, social. 

 

Syndrome scales: Anxious/depressed, attention problems, 

delinquent behavior, social problems, somatic complaints, 

thought problems, withdrawn, aggressive, externalizing,

internalizing.

Age Range 4–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Computer-automated scoring.

Administration Time 20–25 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: Available in 61 languages. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in the manual and in research 

reports.

Developer/Publisher Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) 

1 South Prospect St. 

Burlington, VT 05401 

802–264–6432 

www.aseba.org/index.html

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, forms, score sheets. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 32
Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), Youth Self-Report Form

Description Designed for self-report completion by a youth as a behavioral

measure of overall mental, emotional, and adaptational

functioning (Achenbach, 1991). The CBCL is also available in

Parent Report and Teacher Report forms. 

Constructs Measured Competence scales: Activities, social. 

 

Syndrome scales: Anxious/depressed, attention problems, 

delinquent behavior, social problems, somatic complaints, 

thought problems, withdrawn, aggressive, externalizing,

internalizing.

Age Range 4–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Computer-automated scoring.

Administration Time 20–25 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: Available in 61 languages. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in the manual and in research 

reports.

Developer/Publisher Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) 

1 South Prospect St. 

Burlington, VT 05401 

802–264–6432 

www.aseba.org/index.html

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, forms, score sheets. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 33
Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI) 

Description A self-report tool that screens for signs and symptoms related to 

depression and suicide risk (Kovacs, 1985). The CDI uses 

principles of the Beck Depression Inventory (Beck, Steer, and 

Brown, 1996) and is specific for children and adolescents. It is 

written at a fourth grade reading level. 

Constructs Measured Negative mood, interpersonal problems, ineffectiveness, 

anhedonia (inability to experience pleasure), negative selfesteem. 

Age Range 6–17 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 10–20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Bachelor’s degree (in psychology, education, human relations) or 

courses in assessment; no clinical experience; inservice training

with the instrument. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Pearson Assessments 

800–627–7271, ext. 3225 

pearsonassessments@pearson.com

www.pearsonassessments.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, quick-score rating forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 34
Comprehensive Addiction Severity Index for Adolescents (CASI–A) 

Description An interview-based screening instrument designed to measure 

the severity of addiction and problems in other life areas 

(McLellan and Dembo, 1993). The CASI–A assesses 

concomitant symptomatology and consequences of adolescent 

alcohol/drug use within multidimensional functional domains, so 

that problems are not hidden. It guides treatment planning and 

assessment of outcomes, determines when problem symptoms

started, and assesses a youth’s awareness of a problem and the 

level of discomfort the problem is causing. 

Constructs Measured Education 

Alcohol/drugs

Family relationships 

Legal 

Use of free time

General information 

Peer relationships 

Psychiatric 

Age Range 12–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Computer-automated scoring.

 

Administration Time Approximately 45–90 minutes, depending on the extent of 

alcohol/drug use. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: Information

available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Kathleen Meyers 

System Measures, Inc. 

P.O. Box 506 

Spring Mount, PA 19478 

610–287–4426 

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, scoring sheets.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 35
Connors’ Rating Scales-Revised (CRS–R) 

Description An interviewer-rated and a caretaker-rated questionnaire 

designed to measure a wide range of problem behaviors 

(Connors, 1997). The CRS–R measures dimensions rather than 

categories of symptoms. It obtains data from multiple sources for 

use in diagnosis. 

Constructs Measured School/employment 

Medical 

Psychosomatic problems

Social relations 

Family and relationships 

Age Range 3–17 years. 

Administration/Scoring Pencil-and-paper and computer-automated administration. 

Scored with a computer program. 

Administration Time 15–30 minutes, depending on the form used. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

 Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English, Spanish, and French. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher MHS, Inc. 

P.O. Box 950 

North Tonawanda, NY 14120 

800–456–3003 

www.mhs.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, score sheets. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 36
Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders (DSMD)

Description A 110-item, clinician-rated behavior-rating scale designed to 

measure behaviors associated with psychopathology in children 

and adolescents (Naglieri, LeBuffe, and Pfeiffer, 1994). Item

content of the DSMD is based on DSM–IV categories. 

Constructs Measured Conduct 

Delinquency 

Externalizing 

Anxiety 

Depression 

Internalizing 

Autism 

Acute problems 

Critical pathology 

Age Range 5–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored with a computer 

program.

Administration Time 15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience, supervision by

psychologist. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Howard Savin, Ph.D. 

Institute of Clinical Training and Research 

610–520–3000 

www.devereux.org

Necessary Purchases User’s guide, disks, child record forms, adolescent forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 37
Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-IV (Voice DISC) 

Description A structured youth self-report interview, administered on the computer, 

that provides provisional DSM–IV diagnoses (Shaffer et al., 2000). 

Voiced version for parent report currently being bench-tested. 

Constructs Measured Assesses past-month DSM–IV diagnoses and conditions: anxiety

disorders, mood disorders (and suicidality), disruptive disorders, 

substance use disorders, and miscellaneous disorders (e.g., eating 

disorders). 

Age Range 9–17 years. 

Administration/Scoring Requires no clinical expertise to administer and is readily scored by

computer. The Voice DISC presents prerecorded questions via 

headphones, while the same questions appear on the computer screen. 

Scoring algorithms generate a provisional diagnosis. Results can 

immediately be reviewed on the computer screen, saved to a diskette, 

and/or printed for later review. The computer-generated “Clinical 

Report” lists youths’ positive, sub-threshold, and negative diagnoses, 

“impairment” and “symptom” scores by diagnosis, and a preset list of 

“clinically significant symptoms” (e.g. suicide risk). Allows for 

aggregation of data across individuals. 

Administration Time Approximately 1 hour for conventional 21 disorders. Administration 

time can be shortened by reconfiguring computer software to skip 

certain disorders if other scientifically sound instruments are in use. 

Level of Training 

Required 

Inservice training with instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research.

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities 

Languages: Voiced format only available in English. However 

computerized (but nonvoiced) versions of the DISC are available in

English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: information 

available in published and non-published research reports 

Developer/Publisher David Shaffer, FRCP (Lond), FRC Psych (Lond) 

Prudence Fisher, PhD 

Columbia University/New York State Psychiatric Institute 

Division of Child Psychiatry

www.c-disc.com 

Institutional contact for use of Voice DISC in juvenile justice settings: 

Gail A. Wasserman, PhD 

Center for the Promotion of Mental Health in Juvenile Justice 

Columbia University/New York State Psychiatric Institute 

1051 Riverside Drive, Unit 78 

New York, NY 10032 

646–443–8197

www.promotementalhealth.org 

Necessary Purchases Computer program is available without charge for collaborating 

research sites, or can be purchased for noncollaborative use. Training 

on how to use and best incorporate the DISC into existing assessment 

protocols is available. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessment Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 38
Drug Use Screening Inventory-Revised (DUSI–R) 

Description A 159-item, self-report instrument that addresses the health, 

behavior, and psychosocial adjustment of adolescents. The

DUSI–R is helpful for adolescents with alcohol and drug

problems, along with psychosocial issues. It reports the severity

of problems across 10 domains in a practical manner and 

attempts to determine the type and intensity of resources needed 

to maximize the success of interventions (McLellan and Dembo, 

1993). 

Constructs Measured Substance abuse 

Psychiatric disorder 

Behavior problems 

School adjustment 

Health status 

Work adjustment 

Peer relations 

Social competency 

Family adjustment 

Leisure/recreation 

Age Range 12–17 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. Hand 

scoring with a template 

Administration Time 20–40 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Weak to moderate psychometric properties. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English, Spanish, French, Norwegian, Finnish. 

Research on ethnic differences: No known research. 

Developer/Publisher David Gorney

Gordian Group 

P.O. Box 1587 

Hartsville, SC 29550 

843–383–2201 

www.dusi.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test (audiotape available). 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 39
Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales-II (FACES–II)

Description A self-report tool that assesses family relations by measuring the 

dimensions of cohesion and family adaptability and the

occurrence of patterns of enmeshment or chaos (Olson et al., 

1982). (Cohesion refers to the emotional bonding and individual 

autonomy of family members, adaptability to the capacity of the 

family unit to adjust in response to ongoing or situational stress.) 

Constructs Measured Family cohesion, family adaptability. 

Age Range 12–65 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 30–45 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: 

No known research. 

Developer/Publisher Life Innovations, Inc. 

2660 Arthur Street

Roseville, MN 55113 

FIP@lifeinnovation.com

www.prepare-enrich.com/studies/fip.html#family

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 40
Inventory of Suicide Orientation-30 (ISO–30) 

Description A self-report inventory designed to help identify adolescents at

risk for suicide. Gives an overall suicide risk classification. 

Constructs Measured Hopelessness, suicide ideation. 

Age Range 13–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 10–15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: 

No known research. 

Developer/Publisher MHS, Inc. 

P.O. Box 950 

North Tonawanda, NY 14120 

800–456–3003 

www.mhs.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, answer sheets.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 41
Jesness Inventory (JI) 

Description A 155-item, self-report inventory designed to describe and 

measure certain personality characteristics of delinquent youth 

(Jesness, 1988). The JI provides information on level of social

adjustment and deviant behavior. It has been widely used for 

many years in juvenile justice programs. 

Constructs Measured Social maladjustment 

Value orientation 

Immaturity 

Autism 

Alienation 

Manifest aggression 

Withdrawal-depression 

Social anxiety 

Repression 

Denial

Asocial index 

Age Range 13–20 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Scored by hand with a template and with a computer program.

Administration Time 20–30 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: 

Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher MHS, Inc. 

P.O. Box 950 

North Tonawanda, NY 14120 

800–456–3003 

www.mhs.com

Necessary Purchases Behavior checklist manual and test, observer item booklets, 

observer QuikScoreTM forms, self-appraisal item booklets, selfappraisal QuikScoreTM forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 42
Juvenile Automated Substance Abuse Evaluation (JASAE)

Description A 107-item, self-administered questionnaire that evaluates

adolescent alcohol and drug use experiences as well as attitudes 

and life stress (ADE Incorporated, 1997). The JASAE can be 

used to identify substance dependence and to provide critical 

information on other life problems. 

Constructs Measured Test-taking attitude 

Life circumstance evaluation 

Drinking evaluation 

Alcohol addiction evaluation 

Drug use evaluation 

Possible areas of concern 

Drug use symptoms 

Low or unusual life 

 circumstance ratings 

Age Range 11–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Computer-automated administration. Scored with a computer 

program.

Administration Time 30–45 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: Information

available in manual. 

 

Developer/Publisher ADE Incorporated 

P.O. Box 660 

Clarkston, MI 48347 

800–334–1918 

www.adeincorp.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, test-items evaluations, key used with a 

computer program.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 43
Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (K–BIT)

 

Description A brief measure of intelligence, with scales similar to those used in 

full-battery intelligence testing (Kaufman and Kaufman, 1990). 

The K–BIT provides a composite I.Q. score that allows the 

professional to draw conclusions about a youth’s level of cognitive 

functioning. It provides an estimate of intellectual ability but does 

not provide sufficient detail to identify specific strengths and 

weaknesses in thinking and reasoning ability. Therefore, it is not 

suitable for assessing possible learning disabilities. 

Constructs Measured Verbal, nonverbal, full I.Q. 

Age Range 4–90 years. 

Administration/Scoring Interview. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 15 minutes for children ages 4–7, up to 30 minutes for persons 

older than 7. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience, supervision by psychologist. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: 

Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher American Guidance Services, Inc. 

4201 Woodland Road 

Circle Pines, MN 55014 

800–328–2560 

www.agsnet.com

Necessary Purchases Easel, manual and test, individual test records (25). 

 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 44
Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Second Version (MAYSI–2) 

Description A 52-item, self-report instrument that identifies potential mental

health and substance use needs of youth at any entry or

transitional placement point in the juvenile justice system (Grisso 

et al., 2001). The MAYSI–2 can be administered to juveniles in 

probation intake interviews or within 24 to 48 hours after 

admission into juvenile justice facilities. 

Constructs Measured Alcohol/drug use 

Somatic complaints 

Thought disturbance 

Depressed-anxious 

Suicide ideation 

Traumatic experiences 

Angry-irritable 

Age Range 12–17 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Scored by hand with a template and with a computer program.

Administration Time 10–15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English, Spanish (under development). Research on 

ethnic differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher National Youth Screening Assistance Project (MAYSI)

Department of Psychiatry, WSH–8B 

University of Massachusetts Medical School 

Worcester, MA 01655 

508–856–8564 

www.umassmed.edu/nysap

Necessary Purchases Answer forms, scoring forms, and computer programs are 

available without charge. However, use is authorized only for 

programs that register with the National Youth Screening

Assistance Project. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 45
Matson Evaluation of Social Skills With Youngsters (MESSY)

Description A 62-item, self-rating scale that assesses how a child engages in 

a range of appropriate and inappropriate social behaviors 

(Matson, Rotatori, and Helsel, 1983). The MESSY focuses on

the interpersonal world of the youth, a factor that is considered

essential in the appraisal of functioning. 

Constructs Measured Appropriate social skills 

Inappropriate assertiveness 

Impulsive-recalcitrant traits 

Overconfident 

Jealousy-withdrawal 

Age Range 4–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher International Diagnostic Systems 

P.O. Box 389 

Worthington, OH 43085 

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, score sheets. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 46
Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory (MACI)

Description An instrument comprising 160 true-and-false items in 31 

subscales (Millon, 1993). The MACI measures clinical

syndromes and is useful in identifying personality dysfunctions. 

Constructs Measured Personality patterns: Introversive, inhibited, doleful, 

submissive, dramatizing, egotistic, unruly, forceful, conforming, 

oppositional, self-demeaning, borderline tendency.

Modifying indices: Disclosure, desirability, debasement. 

Clinical syndromes: Eating dysfunctions, substance abuse 

proneness, delinquent predisposition, impulsive propensity, 

anxious feelings, depressive affect, suicidal tendency. 

Expressed concerns: Identity diffusion, self-devaluation, body

disapproval, sexual discomfort, peer insecurity, social

insensitivity, family discord, childhood abuse. 

Other: Reliability. 

Age Range 13–19 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Computer scoring available at extra cost. 

Administration Time 45–75 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience, supervision by

psychologist. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Pearson Assessments 

800–627–7271, ext. 3225 

pearsonassessments@pearson.com

www.pearsonassessments.com

Necessary Purchases Test booklets, manual and test, user’s guide, answer sheets,

worksheets, profile forms, answer key.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 47
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI–A) 

Description An extensive self-report, true-and-false inventory that is used to 

broadly assess clinical symptomatology and personality

characteristics (Butcher et al., 1994). The MMPI–A uses familiar 

categories in describing personality and behavioral

characteristics that are most associated with degrees of 

psychopathology. 

Constructs Measured Clinical scales: Hypochondriasis, depression, hysteria, 

psychopathic deviate, masculinity-femininity, paranoia,

psychasthenia, schizophrenia, hypomania, social introversion. 

Other subscales are available. 

Age Range 14–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Hand scoring with a template and with a computer program. 

Administration Time 60–90 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience, supervision by

psychologist. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: 

Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Pearson Assessments 

800–627–7271, ext. 3225 

pearsonassessments@pearson.com

www.pearsonassessments.com 

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, answer sheets, booklets (audiotape available). 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 48
Peabody Individual Achievement Test-Revised (PIAT–R) 

Description A 100-item test designed to measure academic 

achievement. The PIAT–R instrument was normed on a 

sample that was comparable to the U.S. population in 

terms of ethnicity, gender, and parental education. 

Constructs Measured General information 

Reading recognition 

Reading comprehension 

Total reading

Mathematics 

Spelling

Total test 

Written expression 

Written language

Age Range 5–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated 

administration. Scored by hand with a template or with a 

computer program. 

 

Administration Time 60 minutes. 

Level of Training Required Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile Justice 

Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic Minorities Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher American Guidance Services, Inc. 

4201 Woodland Road 

Circle Pines, MN 55014 

800–328–2560

www.agsnet.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, test record, response booklets, software

package. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 49
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Third Edition (PPVT–III) 

Description Designed as a screening test of verbal ability and 

receptive (hearing) vocabulary. The PPVT–III has two

240-item forms: IIIA and IIIB. Each item has simple

black-and-white illustrations on a page; the youth selects 

a response from multiple choices. Youth can select a 

response by pointing; no verbalization is required. 

Constructs Measured Verbal ability. 

Age Range 2–90 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a 

template and with a computer program.

Administration Time 10–15 minutes. 

Level of Training Required Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile Justice 

Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic Minorities Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher American Guidance Services, Inc. 

4201 Woodland Road 

Circle Pines, MN 55014 

800–328–2560

www.agsnet.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, forms IIIA and IIIB, norms booklet,

performance records. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 50
Personal Experience Screening Questionnaire (PESQ)

Description A 40-item, self-report instrument that measures a number of

problem areas. The PESQ is formatted in an easy-to-read fashion 

and has a fourth grade readability level. It is often used as a 

screening instrument for determining drug treatment needs 

among adolescents (Winters, Weller, and Meland, 1993). 

Constructs Measured Problem severity, psychosocial problems, drug use history,

defensiveness, and other behaviors and attitudes most consistent 

with alcohol and drug use. 

Age Range 12–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Score by hand with a template and with a computer program.

Administration Time 15–20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Western Psychological Services 

12031 Wilshire Blvd. 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 

310-478-2061 

800–648–8857 or 310–478–2061 

www.wpspublish.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, autoscore forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 51
Personality Inventory for Youth (PIY) 

Description A 270-item, self-report inventory designed to assess

personality, behavioral, and emotional issues. The PIY can 

be administered in a group setting. 

Constructs Measured Validity

Inconsistency

Dissimulation 

Defensiveness 

Cognitive impairment 

Marital discord 

Family dysfunction 

Impulsivity and 

 distractability

Parent maladjustment 

Reality distortion 

Somatic concern 

Psychological discomfort

Social withdrawal

Social skill deficits 

Age Range 8–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration (audiotape available).

Scored by hand with a template and with a computer 

program.

Administration Time 30–60 minutes. 

Level of Training Required Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic Minorities Language: English. Research on ethnic differences:

Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Western Psychological Services 

12031 Wilshire Blvd. 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 

800–648–8857 or 310–478–2061 

www.wpspublish.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, interpretation guide, technical guide, 

answer sheets, scoring templates, profile forms, critical item

summary sheets, mail-in answer sheets for computer scoring,

administration booklets, audiotape, disk for onsite computer

scoring and interpretation. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 52
Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale (PDS) 

Description A brief self-report instrument that measures stressful and 

traumatic events that youth have either experienced or witnessed.

The results can be useful in measuring current social and 

psychological functioning (Foa et al., 1993).

Constructs Measured Symptom onset

Symptom severity

Number of symptoms

Symptom duration 

Level of impairment in functioning

Age Range 17–65 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 10–15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Limited. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Pearson Assessments 

800–627–7271, ext. 3225 

pearsonassessments@pearson.com

www.pearsonassessments.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, answer sheets, worksheets, scoring sheet. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 53
Practical Adolescent Dual Diagnostic Interview (PADDI) 

 Description Used to assist in determining whether a youth has symptoms and 

behaviors consistent with DSM–IV diagnostic criteria (Hoffmann 

and Estroff, 2001). The PADDI uses a standardized structured 

interview to gather information. 

Constructs Measured Major depressive episode 

Manic episode 

Anxiety/phobias 

Conduct disorder 

Oppositional defiant disorder 

Substance dependence

Substance abuse 

Age Range 13–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Hand scoring with a template. 

Administration Time 20–40 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience, supervision by

psychologist. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: Information

available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Evince Clinical Assessments 

P.O. Box 17305 

Smithfield, RI 02917 

800–755–6299 

evinceassessment@aol.com

www.evinceassessment.com/product_paddi.html

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, scoring sheets.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 54
Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers (POSIT) 

Description A 139-item, yes-no, self-administered instrument that measures 

10 problem areas, including mental health and substance abuse. 

The POSIT includes information on the history of juvenile

justice and mental health contacts, health care utilization, and 

current stressors. It is designed to quickly identify problems in 

areas requiring further assessment (McLellan and Dembo, 1993). 

Constructs Measured Substance use/abuse 

Physical health

Mental health 

Family relationships 

Peer relationships 

Educational status

Vocational status 

Social skills 

Leisure and recreation 

Aggressive 

 behavior/delinquency

Age Range 12–19 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Scored by hand with a template and with a computer program.

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: 

In research reports. 

Administration Time 20–25 minutes. 

Developer/Publisher National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information 

P.O. Box 2345 

Rockville, MD 20847 

800–729–6686 

Dr. Elizabeth Rahdert 

301–443–0107 

For information: 

www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/posit-text.htm

To view online: 

www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/insposit.htm

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, scoring templates. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 55
Quick Neurological Screening Test II (QNST)

Description An untimed, self-report screen of neurological deficits. The 

QNST is adapted from standard pediatric neurological exams. 

Scoring patterns suggest possible avenues for further diagnostic

assessment (Mutti et al., 1998). 

Constructs Measured Early identification of learning disabilities 

Manual and test dexterity 

Spatial orientation 

Fine and gross motor movements 

Visual tracking and tactile perceptual activities 

Age Range 5–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration (although teachers and parents 

might be involved in observation and explanation of

implications). Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 20–30 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Doctoral degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Academic Therapy Publications 

20 Commercial Boulevard 

Novato, CA 94949 

800–422–7249 

sales@academictherapy.com

www.academictherapy.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, scoring forms, geometric form reproductive

sheets, remedial guideline forms and cue cards. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 56
Relationship With Family of Origin Scale (REFAMOS) 

Description A standardized clinician-rated interview (Hill et al., 1999). The

REFAMOS provides assessment information on relationships

between young people (i.e., ages 15–35) and their parents. 

Constructs Measured Work/education 

Love relationships 

Social relationships 

Appearance 

Leisure 

Day-to-day coping

Age Range 15–35 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 20–30 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Doctoral degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Jonathan Hill

University of Liverpool 

0151–252–5509 

0151–252–5285 (fax) 

jonathan.hill@liverpool.ac.uk

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, scoring forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 57
Resiliency Attitude Scale (RAS)

Description Provides a brief self-report of resiliency in various domains. The 

RAS measures persistence in working through difficulties 

(Biscoe and Harris, 1994). 

Constructs Measured Insight, independence, relationships, initiative, creativity, humor, 

morality. 

Age Range 13–17 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 10–15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Limited. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Belinda Biscoe 

bbiscoe123@aol.com

psyche@okcforum.org

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, questionnaires. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 58
Revised Behavior Problem Checklist (RBPC)

Description An 89-item, self-report instrument designed to 

assess the dimensions of behavioral problems. 

Teachers, parents, and childcare staff 

complete ratings for an overall score. 

Constructs Measured Conduct disorder-socialized

Attention problem-immaturity

Anxiety-withdrawal

Aggression 

Psychotic behavior 

Motor-tension access 

Age Range 5–18 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by

hand with a template. 

Administration Time 30–45 minutes. 

Level of Training Required Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile Justice Youth Yes.

Use With Ethnic Minorities Language: English. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Psychological Assessment Resources 

16204 North Florida Avenue 

Lutz, FL 33549 

800–331–8378 (U.S. and Canada) or 813–

968–3003 

www.parinc.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, scoring sheets, templates, 

checklists.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 59
Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale (RADS)

Description A self-report instrument that can be administered individually

and in groups (Reynolds, 1987). The RADS consists of 30 items 

rated on a four-point scale. Well suited for individual or group 

assessment in clinical or school situations, the RADS is highly

effective for large-scale administration. 

Constructs Measured Depressive symptoms. 

Age Range 13–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 5–20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: Information

available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Sigma Assessment Systems, Inc. 

P.O. Box 610984 

Port Huron, MI 48061 

800–265–1285 

inforeq@sigmaassessmentsystems.com

www.sigmaassessmentsystems.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, answer sheets, score sheet 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 60
Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF), Fifth Edition 

Description A self-report measure of personality traits that are relevant in 

treatment planning. 

Constructs Measured Warmth (cool vs. warm) 

Intelligence (concrete vs. abstract thinking) 

Emotional stability (easily upset vs. calm)

Dominance (not assertive vs. dominant)

Impulsiveness (sober vs. enthusiastic) 

Conformity (expedient vs. conscientious) 

Boldness (shy vs. venturesome) 

Sensitivity (tough-minded vs. sensitive) 

Suspiciousness (trusting vs. suspicious) 

Imagination (practical vs. imaginative) 

Shrewdness (forthright vs. shrewd) 

Insecurity (self-assured vs. self-doubting)

Radicalism (conservative vs. experimenting)

Self-sufficiency (group-oriented vs. self-sufficient)

Self-discipline (undisciplined vs. self-disciplined) 

Tension (relaxed vs. tense)

Age Range 16 and older. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template

(mail-in scoring). 

Administration Time 45–60 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: Information

available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Institute for Personality and Ability Testing (IPAT), Inc.

800–225–4728

custserv@ipat.com

www.ipat.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test booklets. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 61
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fourth Edition 

Description A standardized test that assesses intelligence and 

cognitive abilities in children and young adults. 

Constructs Measured Verbal reasoning 

Quantitative reasoning 

Abstract/visual reasoning

Short-term memory

Age Range 2–23 years. 

Administration/Scoring Interview and paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by

hand with a template. 

Administration Time 45–90 minutes, depending on subject’s age and number of 

subtests given. 

Level of Training Required Doctoral degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile Justice 

Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic Minorities Research on ethnic differences: Information available in

manual. 

Developer/Publisher Riverside Publishing

425 Spring Lake Drive 

Itasca, IL 60143 

800–323–9540 

www.riverpub.com 

Necessary Purchases Stanford-Binet examiner’s kit. 

Items sold separately: 

 Guide for administering and scoring 

 Technical manual 

 Record booklets 

 Inferred abilities and influences charts 

 Examiner’s handbook: expanded guide 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 62
State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI) 

Description A 44-item, self-administered inventory that measures several 

facets of anger. The STAXI assesses anger and associated 

behavioral expressions (e.g., suppressed, directed against self, 

directed outward). 

Constructs Measured Anger. 

Age Range 13 and older. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Computer interpreter report. 

Administration Time 15 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English. Research on ethnic differences: Information

available in manual and research articles. 

Developer/Publisher Psychological Assessment Resources 

16204 North Florida Avenue 

Lutz, FL 33549 

800–331–8378 (U.S. and Canada) or 813–968–3003 

www.parinc.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, answer sheets, computer program.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 63
Structured Pediatric Psychosocial Interview (SPPI) 

Description Uses an interview format to determine how a youth views his or

her experience (Webb and Van Devere, 1985) and provide 

measures of interpersonal functioning. The SPPI is intended for

use in arriving at a subjective estimate of a youth’s latent 

psychological processes or traits that are thought to underlie his 

or her current emotional state. 

Constructs Measured Fretfulness 

Impetuosity

Adherence 

Emulation 

Doubtfulness 

Obdurateness 

Composure 

Unhappiness 

Resentfulness 

Age Range 5–19 years. 

Administration/Scoring Interview and computer-automated administration. Scored by

hand with a template and with a computer program.

Administration Time 20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Limited. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: In research 

reports.

Developer/Publisher Fourier, Inc. 

P.O. Box 125 

Akron, OH 44308 

Necessary Purchases Interview booklets, computer program.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 64
Suicide Ideation Questionnaire (SIQ) 

Description A 25-item, self-report instrument designed to 

measure suicide ideation. The SIQ can be 

administered individually or in a group 

setting. 

Constructs Measured Suicide ideation. 

Age Range 12–18 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated 

administration. Scored by hand with a 

template and with a computer program.

Administration Time 5–10 minutes 

Level of Training Required Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile Justice Youth Yes.

Use With Ethnic Minorities Language: English. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Psychological Assessment Resources 

16204 North Florida Avenue 

Lutz, FL 33549 

800–331–8378 (U.S. and Canada) or 813–

968–3003 

www.parinc.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, answer sheets, scoring

sheets. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 65
Suicide Probability Scale (SPS)

Description A self-report suicide-risk measure consisting of 36 items based 

on a larger item pool (Cull and Gill, 1988) that differentiates

adults who have attempted suicide from those who have not. The 

SPS measures four significant risk areas and has been 

empirically studied among adolescents in residential facilities

(Larzelere et al., 1996). 

Constructs Measured Hopelessness 

Suicide ideation 

Negative self-evaluation 

Hostility 

Age Range 13 and older. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 15–20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Western Psychological Services 

12031 Wilshire Blvd. 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 

800–648–8857 or 310–478–2061 

www.wpspublish.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, test forms, profile forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 66
Symptom Checklist-90, Revised (SCL–90–R) 

Description A 90-item, self-report measure used to assess current 

psychological symptom patterns of youth (Derogatis, 1994) and 

levels of symptomatology. Each item is rated on a five-point 

scale of distress. The SCL–90–R covers nine primary symptom

dimensions. 

Constructs Measured Somatization 

Obsessive-compulsive 

Interpersonal sensitivity

Depression 

Anxiety 

Hostility 

Phobic anxiety

Paranoid ideation 

Psychoticism

Age Range 13 and older. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Hand scored with a template. 

Administration Time 15–20 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research with Juvenile

Justice Sample 

No. 

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic differences: 

No known research. 

Developer/Publisher Pearson Assessments 

800–627–7271, ext. 3225 

pearsonassessments@pearson.com

www.pearsonassessments.com

Necessary Purchases Answer sheets, manual and test, answer key.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 67
Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children (TSC–C) 

Description A 54-item, self-report instrument designed to evaluate acute and 

chronic posttraumatic symptoms (Briere, 1996). 

Constructs Measured Anxiety 

Depression 

Anger 

Posttraumatic stress 

Dissociation 

Sexual concerns

Age Range 8–16 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 15–20 minutes

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with the instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: No known 

research. 

Developer/Publisher Psychological Assessment Resources 

16204 North Florida Avenue 

Lutz, FL 33549 

800–331–8378 (U.S. and Canada) or 813–968–3003 

www.parinc.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, test booklets, male profiles, female profiles. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 68
Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales 

Description Designed to assess life skills and interpersonal 

competence in daily situations. The Vineland’s 

comprehensive content makes it useful in determining

mental retardation. This instrument comes in an 

interview edition survey (297 items), interview edition

expanded form (577 items), and classroom edition (244

items). 

Constructs Measured Communication 

Daily living

Socialization 

Motor skills 

Adaptive behavior composite 

Maladaptive behavior 

Age Range 1–18 years and low-functioning adults. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a 

template. 

Administration Time Survey edition: 20–60 minutes. 

Expanded form: 60–90 minutes. 

Classroom edition: 20 minutes. 

Level of Training Required Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile Justice 

Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic Minorities Languages: English and Spanish. Research on ethnic 

differences: Information in manual. 

Developer/Publisher American Guidance Services, Inc. 

4201 Woodland Road 

Circle Pines, MN 55014 

800–328–2560

www.agsnet.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, test booklets, score summary and profile

reports.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 69
Wechsler Abbreviated Scales of Intelligence (WASI)

Description A brief measure of intelligence, with verbal and nonverbal 

subscales. The WASI provides a composite I.Q. score that makes 

it possible to draw conclusions about the level of cognitive 

functioning. 

Constructs Measured Vocabulary, matrix, and full I.Q. score. 

Age Range 6–89 years. 

Administration/Scoring Interview and paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand 

with a template. 

Administration Time 15 minutes for children ages 4–7; up to 30 minutes for persons 

older than 7. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience, supervision by

psychologist. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. Research on ethnic differences: Information

available in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Harcourt Assessment 

19500 Bulverde Road 

San Antonio, TX 78259 

800–872–1726 

www.psychcorp.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 70
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Third Edition (WAIS–III) 

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Third Edition (WISC–III) 

Description Designed to measure a full range of indices associated with 

cognitive functioning (Wechsler, 1991) in persons ages 16 and 

older (WAIS–III) and 6–16 (WISC–III). Both the WAIS–III and 

the WISC–III have been revised and updated to reflect current 

societal and cultural norms (Wechsler, 1997). 

Constructs Measured Verbal, performance, full-scale I.Q. 

Age Range 6–16 years (WISC–III), 16+ years (WAIS–III) 

Administration/Scoring Interview and paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand 

with a template. 

Administration Time Approximately 60–120 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

 Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

 Research on ethnic differences: Information in manual. 

Developer/Publisher Harcourt Assessment 

19500 Bulverde Road 

San Antonio, TX 78259 

800–872–1726 

www.psychcorp.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 71
Wide Range Achievement Test-3 (WRAT–3) 

Description A clinician-rated screening instrument designed to measure 

current functioning in areas associated with academic 

achievement. 

Constructs Measured Reading 

Arithmetic 

Spelling

Age Range 5–75 years. 

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil administration. Scored by hand with a template. 

Administration Time 15–30 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Master’s degree, clinical experience. 

Research in General Much research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Language: English. 

Developer/Publisher Wide Range, Inc. 

15 Ashley Place, Suite 1A, 

Wilmington, DE 19804 

800–221–9728 

302–652–1644 (fax)

wr@widerange.com

www.widerange.com 

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, profile/analysis forms, plastic cards for 

reading/spelling.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 72
Youth Level of Service—Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) 

Description Designed to survey attributes of offenders and their situations 

relevant to selecting an appropriate level of supervision and 

making treatment decisions. Probation officers, parole officers, 

and/or correctional workers interview youth and review file data 

and test scores, etc. These ratings provide a comprehensive 

risk/needs assessment important for offender treatment planning. 

Constructs Measured Prior and current offenses/dispositions

Family circumstances/parenting

Education/employment 

Peer relations 

Substance abuse 

Leisure/recreation 

Personality/behavior 

Attitudes/orientation 

Age Range 12–16 years.

Administration/Scoring Paper-and-pencil and computer-automated administration. 

Scored by hand with a template and with a computer program.

Administration Time 30–40 minutes. 

Level of Training

Required 

Inservice training with instrument, no clinical experience. 

Research in General Some research. 

Research With Juvenile 

Justice Youth 

Yes.

Use With Ethnic 

Minorities

Languages: English, Spanish, French-Canadian. Research on 

ethnic minorities: Information in manual. 

Developer/Publisher MHS, Inc. 

P.O. Box 950 

North Tonawanda, NY 14120 

800–456–3003 

www.mhs.com

Necessary Purchases Manual and test, interview guides, score forms. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 73
Chapter 4: “Best Practice” Selections 

The previous chapter reviews a large number of screening and assessment instruments. Selecting

instruments is a formidable task for those attempting to develop mental health and substance

abuse screening and assessment procedures for juvenile justice programs. Are there any “best

practice” selections that can be recommended? Yes, but only with a word of caution. 

The circumstances in which screening and assessment occur in the juvenile justice system vary

considerably among entry points within the system, among different states, and even among

different facilities within a single jurisdiction. Screening and assessment often are more 

extensive in centers that receive adjudicated youth for long-term custody and placement, while 

resources and time typically are more limited in pretrial detention centers. Some detention 

centers may have better resources or greater access to clinical assistance than others. Therefore, 

it is unlikely that a single instrument or combination of instruments will be the best selection for

all juvenile justice contexts. Each program or facility must base its selections on its own 

particular circumstances and objectives. 

With these caveats in mind, it is possible to provide some examples of “best practice” selections 

within the context of hypothetical programs. This chapter briefly describes some “typical”

facilities or programs and then offers suggestions for selecting instruments that might best meet

their specific needs. It takes into account the principles of screening and assessment discussed in 

chapters 1 and 2 and the information on individual instruments presented in chapter 3. 

Intake Assessment Center 

A community is establishing a center where all youth arrested by local law enforcement officers 

can be assessed to provide a relatively rapid evaluation of their potential danger to themselves 

and others, family and social resources, mental health needs, and potential substance abuse 

needs. The assessment center is expected to route the youth to community services or, where 

necessary, refer the youth to the juvenile court for formal adjudication. The assessment must be 

completed in only a few days, so it must use highly efficient methods but at a level of specificity

not usually accomplished with quick screening instruments. The center will be staffed by

master’s degree social workers and psychologists with excellent preparation for identifying

youth mental health and rehabilitation needs. 

The assessment center will probably have time to obtain some records on youth (e.g., offense

records from the court, mental health records from community agencies) and to conduct very

focused interviews with youth and their parents or guardians. Several instruments not reviewed 

in this manual are becoming available for assessing the risk of future harmful aggression among

youth (e.g., Augimeri et al., 2001; Borum, Bartel, and Forth, 2002). A battery of assessment 

instruments that could help the center achieve its other objectives, offering a range of important 

and not overly redundant information, might include the following: 

 The Child Behavior Checklist (Parent Report Form) and/or the CBCL Youth Self-Report (the 

parallel measure based on the youth’s own responses to questions about feelings, thoughts, 

and behaviors related to delinquency and mental health symptoms). 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 74




Either the Youth Level of Service-Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) or the Problem 

Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers (POSIT), both of which identify problem areas 

and resources that can be used to create a community-based plan of service for the youth and 

family. (The YLS/CMI also provides an index of risk of harm to others.) 

A single-scale measure for substance abuse and another single-scale measure for suicide risk 

(see overview table in chapter 3 for choices). These measures are intended to provide 

information not offered by the YLS/CMI or the POSIT, both of which have basic indicators 

for substance abuse but are not comprehensive and do not provide an indicator for suicide 

risk. Alternatively, the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (MAYSI–2) offers both a 

substance use problem scale and a suicide ideation scale. However, the MAYSI–2 should be 

used only when screening is the objective; it does not provide a detailed view of a youth’s 

substance abuse or suicide risk. 

Juvenile Detention Center 

The Bigtown Juvenile Detention Center (BJDC) admits 150–200 youth each month. Most youth 

are there for less than 3 weeks, but some (youth who are harder to place elsewhere, or youth who 

face more serious charges) stay longer. BJDC has no psychiatrists or psychologists on staff, but

it has several social workers who manage youth with special needs. The center believes that it 

needs a screening tool to help identify youth who (1) pose an immediate suicide risk, (2) may

need emergency psychiatric services, and/or (3) may have serious substance abuse problems that 

will require further assessment and possible intervention when the youth leaves the center. BJDC 

is a well-run facility, but it is crowded and somewhat understaffed. The screening method must 

be highly efficient. Moreover, it must collect only the data needed to address the three questions: 

to do more might interfere with procedures at the nearby juvenile court clinic, where some youth 

undergo more thorough assessment before trials or disposition hearings. 

 

The Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (MAYSI–2) best meets this combination of

needs. It takes less than 15 minutes to administer and score, requires no clinical training, and was 

designed specifically for use with youth admitted to juvenile detention centers. It includes scales

for problematic substance use, suicide ideation, and symptoms (e.g., depressed-anxious) that are 

common to several mental disorders of adolescence. Moreover, it provides cutoff scores that 

identify youth whose problems and symptoms may be in the clinically significant range. Paperand-pencil administration and scoring are available, but BJDC might wish to administer and 

score the MAYSI–2 by computer to maximize efficiency and minimize staff time. Facility

administrators (in consultation with clinicians) will have to determine which MAYSI–2 criteria

to use to translate scores into policies regarding appropriate staff response (e.g., cutoff scores on 

specific scales). 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 75
Pretrial Emergency Mental Health Consultation 

The juvenile court in Bigtown has contracted with a private group of psychiatrists and 

psychologists to provide emergency consultations to the Bigtown Juvenile Detention Center. 

BJDC will contact these clinicians when the MAYSI–2 and brief followup interviews by BJDC 

social workers identify youth who appear to have mental or emotional problems that may require

immediate attention. The consultants are expected to provide relatively clear diagnoses and, 

when necessary, arrange for psychiatric inpatient referral or prescriptions for psychoactive 

medication to be administered by the BJDC nurse. A university hospital adolescent psychiatric 

unit has agreed to maintain a limited number of beds for inpatient referral from BJDC’s

consultants, provided that they establish diagnoses and demonstrate a clear need for inpatient

care by means that include not only a psychiatric interview but also an objective assessment of 

psychiatric disorder. 

The consultants might consider augmenting their clinical interviews with at least two instruments 

designed to identify psychiatric disorders among youth. The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for 

Children (DISC–IV) offers computerized administration and produces diagnoses consistent with 

the DSM–IV. In addition, the consultants could choose between two paper-and-pencil 

instruments designed specifically for diagnostic assessments with adolescents: the Minnesota 

Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent Version or the Millon Adolescent Clinical

Inventory. 

Court Clinic Evaluations 

For some youth adjudicated delinquent in the Middletown Juvenile Court (especially for the first 

time), judges may request that the court clinic (consisting of a full-time Ph.D. clinical

psychologist and full-time master’s degree social worker) perform evaluations to assist the court 

in case disposition. The purpose of these evaluations is to help the court determine whether the 

youth’s rehabilitation needs can be met in the community or whether the youth will require

placement in the secure facilities of the state’s Department of Youth Correction (DYC). If

community services are appropriate, a service plan will be built on this evaluation. However, a 

detailed plan is not necessary if the youth requires the more secure programs of DYC, which 

performs its own assessment for rehabilitation planning (see next example). 

The following battery would supplement a clinical interview, assessment of risk of harm to 

others (e.g., Augimeri et al., 2001; Borum, Bartel, and Forth, 2002), and information from school 

and mental health records: 





A comprehensive instrument for assessing mental and emotional disorder (such as the Child 

Behavior Checklist Youth Self-Report Form, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality

Inventory-Adolescent, or the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory), to assist in 

decisionmaking about the need for community mental health services. 

A tool, such as the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales-II, that will augment 

the clinician’s family interviews in assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the family as a

resource in community placement. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 76










Either the Youth Level of Service-Case Management Inventory or the Problem Oriented 

Screening Instrument for Teenagers, both of which offer practical information about problem 

areas to be addressed in a community-based treatment plan. These instruments should be 

augmented with a single-scale method for evaluating substance abuse (see overview table in 

chapter 2). 

The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-III and the Wide Range Achievement Test-3, 

to help evaluate the youth’s academic needs. 

Juvenile Correctional Reception Center 

When dispositional hearings in Middletown Juvenile Court result in commitment to the state’s 

Department of Youth Correction (DYC), youth are sent for 2–4 weeks to a DYC reception center 

for evaluation. The reception center performs evaluations that determine the level and type of

rehabilitation services that seem best suited for the youth, given the level of security needed

(e.g., semisecure residential programs located in places where treatment resources can be 

accessed in the community versus more secure facilities where educational and rehabilitation 

services must be provided inhouse). 

The DYC reception center could administer the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument upon 

admission, for triage and to alert staff to any special needs (e.g., suicide risk) that might arise 

during the brief time that the youth is at the center. The center’s formal assessment should 

include rather complete evaluations of a youth’s educational needs, vocational aptitudes, and risk 

of harm to others—none of which are featured in the assessment instruments reviewed in this 

manual. In addition, the center should be prepared to perform specialized assessments related to 

particular offenses, such as assessments focused on treatment planning for juvenile sex

offenders. 

Beyond those assessments, the center should consider the following instruments (if not 

previously administered by the court clinic) to focus on mental health and substance abuse needs: 

Either the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent or the Millon Adolescent 

Clinical Inventory, to identify the presence of serious mental disorders requiring treatment. 

One of the single-scale assessment instruments for assessing substance use problems. 

A personality measure designed for classifying youth according to patterns of delinquent 

behavior, personality, and/or interpersonal style. Both the Jesness Inventory and the Revised 

Behavior Problem Checklist, for example, provide information that is helpful in classifying

youthful offenders for assignment to particular types of rehabilitation programs.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 77
Chapter 5: Final Comments and Recommendations 

Screening and assessment are essential steps in appropriately identifying and responding to the 

mental health- and substance use-related needs of youth in the juvenile justice system. It is 

critical that clinicians and other professionals working with these youth understand the 

importance of screening and assessment and how the information collected from these processes 

should be used to inform treatment and placement decisions. 

Providing screening and assessment for youth in the juvenile justice system involves challenges, 

and only limited empirical knowledge about how best to provide these services is available. 

Nevertheless, clear recommendations are emerging that can offer guidance to juvenile justice

administrators, practitioners, and mental health professionals. These recommendations include

the following: 







Screening should be performed for all youth at the earliest point of contact with the 

juvenile justice system. All youth should be screened to identify the possibility of mental 

health and substance use disorders. The screening should be brief and should be used to 

identify youth who require further evaluation and assessment. Although screening is most 

critical at a youth’s earliest point of contact with the system, it should also be used to monitor 

mental health status at all stages of involvement with the system, particularly at transitions 

from one setting to another (e.g., from detention to secure corrections).

Assessments should be performed for youth who require further evaluation. More 

detailed assessments should be performed for youth whose initial screening indicates a need

for further examination of psychosocial needs and problems. Although often more expensive 

than screening, assessment can yield more detailed diagnostic information about a youth’s 

mental health and substance use status and can form the basis of treatment recommendations. 

Care should be taken to identify the most appropriate instruments. The screening and 

assessment instruments selected by a juvenile justice agency or facility should be suitable

and appropriate for use with the population being assessed and, ideally, should meet 

standards for reliability and validity. Important considerations, such as the age, gender, 

ethnicity, linguistic background, and cognitive skills of the youth being assessed, should be 

taken into account. Other considerations include the following: 

 Contextual factors. It is important to consider “situational” factors when selecting

instruments. These include the amount of time it takes to administer an instrument, the 

financial cost involved, and the level of education and expertise required to administer, 

score, and interpret an instrument. 

 Psychometric properties and adequacies. Available research suggests that instruments 

that evaluate psychiatric disorders, problem behaviors, family characteristics, and 

strengths are most appropriate for the juvenile justice population. Instruments that 

provide evidence of reliability and validity when used with juvenile justice populations 

should be considered. Tools that can demonstrate normative performance according to 

gender, age, and ethnic background are preferable. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 78




Need and risk levels should be appropriately balanced. Juvenile justice agencies and 

facilities often conduct risk assessments to evaluate a youth’s risk of future delinquency or to 

determine the most appropriate level of security for the youth. Risk assessment results should 

be combined with needs assessment results to develop treatment plans that reflect both the

level of risk a youth presents and the youth’s need for services and treatment. 

There is no one best way to provide mental health screening and assessment for youth

in the juvenile justice system. Implementation of a particular screening and assessment 

approach depends on a variety of factors: the point within the juvenile justice system where

screening and assessment occur, the resources available to support the effort, the amount of 

time available to conduct the evaluations, and the extent to which other systems (e.g., mental 

health and child welfare) can serve as collaborators or partners in the effort. 

This Resource Guide has been written to provide practical assistance to individuals working in 

the juvenile justice system who are committed to improving their ability to identify youth with 

mental health disorders. The importance of their work cannot be overstated. It reflects the 

growing awareness that many youth in the juvenile justice system require mental health care and 

that effective identification and treatment of these youth are essential not only for achieving

positive outcomes for individual youth and their families but also for reducing recidivism rates 

and ensuring community safety. 

At the same time that commitment to improving the juvenile justice system has intensified, there

is growing concern over what has come to be known as the “criminalization of mental illness.”

Evident within the adult system for some time, this practice involves incarcerating individuals 

with mental and addiction disorders for relatively minor offenses because community-based 

mental health services and alternatives to incarceration are unavailable. It is widely recognized 

that the increasing reliance on the criminal justice system to care for individuals with mental

health disorders exists within the juvenile justice system as well (Butterfield, 2000). 

 

This Resource Guide is not designed to exacerbate this situation. Some youth, because of their 

behavior, will come in contact with the juvenile justice system. For these youth, early

identification of mental health treatment needs and the provision of quality care are critical. The 

authors hope that this Resource Guide will improve the delivery of services to these youth, 

perhaps even preventing their further involvement with the justice system. 

Whenever public safety considerations allow, however, youth with identified mental health 

disorders should be diverted from further involvement with the juvenile justice system and into 

appropriate community-based services and programming. Many youth with mental health 

disorders experience seriously exacerbated symptoms as they penetrate further into the system. 

Appropriate diversion can decrease the growing number of youth with mental health disorders in 

the juvenile justice system and increase the likelihood that they will receive the treatment they

need. 

 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 79
About the Authors 

Thomas Grisso, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist, is Professor of Psychiatry at the University of 

Massachusetts Medical School, where he is Coordinator of the Law and Psychiatry Program. He

received his Ph.D. in psychology at the University of Arizona in 1969. He is the author of more 

than 100 journal articles in clinical, applied developmental, and forensic psychology, as well as 

books, including Evaluating Competencies (1986), Juveniles’ Waiver of Rights (1981), 

Competency to Stand Trial Evaluations (1988), Understanding Aggressive Behavior in Children

(1996, edited with C. Ferris), Assessing Competence to Consent to Treatment (1998, with Paul 

Appelbaum), Forensic Evaluation of Juveniles (1998), and Youth on Trial (2000, edited with 

Robert Schwartz). Dr. Grisso has received several research grants from the National Institute of 

Mental Health, the National Science Foundation, and private foundations. He is currently a 

member of the MacArthur Foundation’s Research Network on Adolescent Development and 

Juvenile Justice. His research and clinical practice have focused on legal competencies in civil,

criminal, and juvenile law; methods for improving forensic clinical assessments; and mental 

health needs and service delivery systems for adults and juveniles in justice and corrections 

settings. 

Lee A. Underwood, Psy.D., a clinical psychologist with certification in sex offender treatment, 

serves as Corporate Director of Clinical Operations for Community Education Centers (CEC), a 

community and correctional healthcare organization. He is a senior consultant to the National 

Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice and the National GAINS Center for People with 

Co-Occurring Disorders in the Justice System, affiliates of Policy Research Associates (PRA) in 

Delmar, NY. Dr. Underwood received his Ph.D. in psychology from Wright State University

School of Professional Psychology. He is affiliated with Regent University School of 

Psychology and Counseling, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center Juvenile 

Corrections Program, and Rutgers University Graduate School of Criminal Justice. He is former 

Director of Clinical Services for the Ohio Department of Youth Services. Dr. Underwood’s 

clinical and research interests focus primarily on serious mental health-related, sexually

aggressive, substance use-related, and antisocial behaviors in juvenile and adult offenders. He 

also specializes in the design and evaluation of programs for juvenile justice system-involved 

youth with co-occurring mental health and substance abuse disorders. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 80
References 

Achenbach, T.M. 1991. Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist. Burlington, VT: The 

University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.

ADE Incorporated. 1997. Juvenile Automated Substance Abuse Evaluation. Reference Guide. 

Clarkston, MI: ADE Incorporated. 

 

American Psychiatric Association. 1994. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 

4th Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. 

Augimeri, L., Koegl, C., Webster, C., and Levene, K. 2001. Early Assessment Risk List for Boys: 

EARL–20B, Version 2. Toronto, Ontario: Earlscourt Child and Family Center. 

Beck, A.T., Steer, R.A., and Brown, G. 1996. Beck Depression Inventory-II. San Antonio, TX: 

The Psychological Corporation. 

Biscoe, B., and Harris, B. 1994. Resiliency Attitude Scale. Oklahoma City, OK: Eagle Ridge 

Institute, Inc.

Borum, R., Bartel, P., and Forth, A. 2002. Manual for the Structured Assessment of Violence 

Risk in Youth (SAVRY). Tampa, FL: University of South Florida. 

Briere, J. 1996. Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment 

Resources, Inc. 

Butcher, J., William, C., Graham, J., Archer, R., Tellegen, A., Ben-Porath, V., and Kaemmer, B.

1994. Manual for Administration, Scoring and Interpretation: MMPI–A. Minneapolis, MN: 

University of Minnesota Press. 

Butterfield, F. 2000. Concern rising over use of juvenile prisons to ‘warehouse’ the mentally 

ill. New York Times (December 5): A14. 

Carlson, K.A. 1982. Carlson Psychological Survey Manual. Port Huron, MI: Research 

Psychologists Press. 

Cocozza, J.J., and Skowyra, K.R. 2000. Youth with mental health disorders: Issues and emerging

responses. Juvenile Justice Journal VII(1). 

Connors, C.K. 1997. The Connors Rating Scale-Revised User’s Guide. North Tonawanda, NY: 

Multi-Health Systems. 

Cooper, S.E., and Robinson, D.A. 1987. Use of the substance abuse subtle screening inventory

with a college population. Journal of American College Health 36(3):180–184. 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 81
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 82

Cull, J.G., and Gill, W.S. 1988. Suicide Probability Scale. Los Angeles, CA: Western 

Psychological Services. 

Dembo, R., and Brown, R. 1994. The Hillsborough County Juvenile Assessment Center. Journal 

of Child and Adolescent Substance Abuse 3(2):25–43. 

Derogatis, L.R. 1994. SCL–90–R: Administration, Scoring and Procedures Manual (3rd 

Edition). Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems, Inc. 

Epstein, M.H., and Sharma, J.M. 1998. Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale Examiner’s 

Manual. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. 

Foa, E.B., Riggs, D.S., Dancu, C.V., and Rothbaum, B.O. 1993. Reliability and validity of a 

brief instrument for assessing post traumatic stress disorder. Journal of Traumatic Stress 6:459–

473. 

Frick, P. 1998. Conduct Disorders and Severe Antisocial Behavior. New York, NY: Plenum. 

Grisso, T. 1998. Forensic Evaluation of Juveniles. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press. 

Grisso, T., and Barnum, R. 2000. Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument Second Version: 

User Manual and Technical Report. Worchester, MA: University of Massachusetts Medical 

School. 

Grisso, T., Barnum, R., Fletcher, K., Cauffman, E., and Peuschold, D. 2001. Massachusetts 

Youth Screening Instrument for mental health needs of juvenile justice youth. Journal of the 

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 40(5):541–548. 

Hill, J., Mackie, E., Banner, L., Kondryn, H., and Blair, V. 1999. Relationship With Family of 

Origin Scale (REFAMOS): Interrater reliability and associations with childhood experiences. 

The Journal of Psychiatry 175(6):565–578. 

Hodges, K. 1995. CAFAS Self-Training Manual and Blank Scoring Forms.Ypsilanti, MI: Eastern 

Michigan University Psychology Department. 

Hoffmann, N.G., and Estroff, T.W. 2001. PADDI: Practical Adolescent Dual Diagnostic 

Interview–Administration Guide. Smithfield, RI: Evince Clinical Assessments. 

Isaacs, M. 1992. Assessing the mental health needs of children and adolescents of color in the 

juvenile justice system. Overcoming institutionalized perceptions and barriers. In 

Responding to the Mental Health Needs of Youth in the Juvenile Justice System,edited by J. 

Cocozza. Seattle, WA: National Coalition for the Mentally Ill in the Criminal Justice System, pp. 

141–163. 

Jesness, C.F. 1988. The Jesness Inventory classification system. Criminal Justice and Behavior 

15(1):78–91. 
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 83

Kaufman, S.K., and Kaufman, N.L. 1990. Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test Manual. Circle Pines, 

MN: American Guidance Services. 

Kazdin, A. 2000. Mental disorders of adolescences. In Adolescent Development and Juvenile 

Justice, edited by T. Grisso and R. Schwartz. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 

Kovacs, M. 1985. The Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI). Psychopharmacology Bulletin 

21:995–998. 

Larzelere, R.E., Smith, G.L., Batenhorst, L.M., and Kelly, D.B. 1996. Predictive validity of the 

suicide probability scale among adolescents in group home treatment. Journal of American 

Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry 35(2):166–172. 

Lyons, J.S., Sokol, P.T., Khalsa, A., Lee, M., and Lewis, M. 2000. Child and Adolescent Needs 

and Strengths (CANS) Manual. Chicago, IL: Northwestern University, Institute for Health 

Services Research and Policy Studies. 

 

Mash, E., and Barkley, R. 1996. Child Psychopathology. New York, NY: Guilford. 

Matson, J.L., Rotatori, A.F., and Helsel, W.J. 1983. Development of a rating scale to measure 

social skills in children: The Matson Evaluation of Social Skills With Youngsters (MESSY), 

Behavioral Research and Therapy 21(4):335–340. 

McLellan, T., and Dembo, R. 1993. Screening and Assessment of Alcohol and Other Drug 

Abusing Adolescents. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse 

Treatment. 

Miller, G.A. 1985. The Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory (SASSI) Manual. 

Bloomington, IN: SASSI Institute. 

Millon, T.M. 1993. Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory (MACI) Manual. Minneapolis, MN: 

National Computer Systems, Inc. 

Mutti, M., Sterling, H., Martin, N., and Spalding, N. 1998. Manual for the Quick Neurological 

Screening Test II. Novato, CA: Academy Therapy Publications. 

Naglieri, J.A., LeBuffe, P.A., and Pfeiffer, S.I. 1994. The Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders.

San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. 

Olson, D.H., McCubbin, H.I., Barnes, H., Larsen, A., Muxen, M., and Wilson, M. 1982. Family 

Inventories: Inventories Used in a National Survey of Families Across the Family Life Cycle. St. 

Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, Family Social Science. 

Otto, R.K., Greenstein, J.J., Johnson, M.K., and Friedman, R.M. 1992. Prevalence of mental 

disorders among youth in the juvenile justice system. In Responding to the Mental Health Needs 
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Screening and Assessing Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders 84

of Youth in the Juvenile Justice System, edited by J. Cocozza. Seattle, WA: National Coalition 

for the Mentally Ill in the Criminal Justice System. 

Reynolds, W.M. 1987. Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale (RADS): Professional Manual.

Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. 

Scally, J.T., Kavanaugh, A.E., Budd, K.S., Baerger, D.R., Kahn, B.A., and Biehl, J.L. 2001. 

Problems in acquisition and use of clinical information in juvenile court: One jurisdiction’s 

response. Children’s Legal Rights Journal 21(4):15–24. 

Shaffer, D., Fisher, W.P., Lucas, C., Dulcan, M., and Schwab-Stone, M. 2000. The NIMH 

Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (NIMH–DISC–IV): Description, differences from 

previous versions, and reliability of some common diagnoses. Journal of the American Academy 

of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 39(1):28–38. 

Snyder, H.N. 2004. Juvenile Arrests 2002. Bulletin. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice 

Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 

Snyder, H.N., and Sickmund, M. 1999. Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 National Report. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile 

Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 

Teplin, L.A., and McClelland, G. 1998. Psychiatric and substance abuse disorders among 

juveniles in detention: An empirical assessment. Paper presented at the convention of the 

American Psychology-Law Society, Redondo Beach, CA, March. 

Timmons-Mitchell, J., Brown, C., Schultz, S.C., Webster, S.E., Underwood, L.A., and Semple, 

W. 1997. Final report: Results of a three-year collaborative effort to assess the mental health 

needs of youth in the juvenile justice system in Ohio. Unpublished manuscript. 

Trupin, E., and Boesky, L. 1999. Working Together for Change: Co-Occurring Mental Health 

and Substance Use Disorders Among Youth Involved in the Juvenile Justice System: Cross 

Training, Juvenile Justice, Mental Health, Substance Abuse. Delmar, NY: The National GAINS 

Center for People with Co-Occurring Disorders in the Justice System. 

Webb, T.E., and Van Devere, C.A. 1985. Manual for the Structured Pediatric Psychosocial 

Interview. Akron, OH: Fourier. 

Wechsler, D. 1991. Manual for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition. San 

Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation. 

Wechsler, D. 1997. Technical Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition.

San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation. 

Winters, K.C., Weller, C.L., and Meland, J.A. 1993. Extent of drug abuse among juvenile 

offenders. Journal of Drug Issues 23(3):515–524.