U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 

j 

i l e 

ll l 

l i i li 

l ifi i i 

J u v e n 

R u n a w a y s 

No. 37 

www.cops.usdo .gov 

by Ke y Dede 

Prob em-Or ented Gu des for Po ce 

Prob em-Spec c Gu des Ser es 
l i lici i 

l i i lp 

l i l i i i i 

Got a Problem? We’ve got answers! 

Log onto the Center for Prob em-Or ented Po ng webs te 

at www.popcenter.org for a wea th of nformat on to he 

you dea more effect ve y w th cr me and d sorder n your 

Center for Problem-Oriented Policing 

community, including: www.PopCenter.org

• Web-enhanced versions of all currently available Guides 

• Interactive training exercises 

• Online access to research and police practices 

• Online problem analysis module. 

Designed for police and those who work with them to 

address community problems, www.popcenter.org is a great 

resource in problem-oriented policing. 

Supported by the Office of Community Oriented Policing 

Services, U.S. Department of Justice. 
Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides Series 

Guide No. 37 

Juvenile Runaways

Kelly Dedel 

This project was supported by cooperative agreement 

#2003CKWX0087 by the Office of Community Oriented Policing 

Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein 

are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the 

official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to 

specific companies, products, or services should not be considered an 

endorsement of the product by the author or the U.S. Department 

of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement 

discussion of the issues. 

www.cops.usdoj.gov 

ISBN: 1-932582-56-8 

February 2006 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series i 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series 

The Problem-Specific Guides summarize knowledge about 

how police can reduce the harm caused by specific crime 

and disorder problems. They are guides to prevention 

and to improving the overall response to incidents, not 

to investigating offenses or handling specific incidents. 

The guides are written for police—of whatever rank or 

assignment—who must address the specific problem the 

guides cover. The guides will be most useful to officers 

who: 

• Understand basic problem-oriented policing principles 

and methods. The guides are not primers in problemoriented policing. They deal only briefly with the initial 

decision to focus on a particular problem, methods to 

analyze the problem, and means to assess the results of a 

problem-oriented policing project. They are designed to help 

police decide how best to analyze and address a problem 

they have already identified. (A companion series of ProblemSolving Tools guides has been produced to aid in various 

aspects of problem analysis and assessment.) 

• Can look at a problem in depth. Depending on the 

complexity of the problem, you should be prepared to spend 

perhaps weeks, or even months, analyzing and responding 

to it. Carefully studying a problem before responding helps 

you design the right strategy, one that is most likely to 

work in your community. You should not blindly adopt the 

responses others have used; you must decide whether they 

are appropriate to your local situation. What is true in one 

place may not be true elsewhere; what works in one place 

may not work everywhere. 
ii Juvenile Runaways Underage Drinking

• Are willing to consider new ways of doing police 

business. The guides describe responses that other police 

departments have used or that researchers have tested. 

While not all of these responses will be appropriate to 

your particular problem, they should help give a broader 

view of the kinds of things you could do. You may think 

you cannot implement some of these responses in your 

jurisdiction, but perhaps you can. In many places, when 

police have discovered a more effective response, they have 

succeeded in having laws and policies changed, improving 

the response to the problem. 

• Understand the value and the limits of research 

knowledge. For some types of problems, a lot of useful 

research is available to the police; for other problems, 

little is available. Accordingly, some guides in this series 

summarize existing research whereas other guides illustrate 

the need for more research on that particular problem. 

Regardless, research has not provided definitive answers to 

all the questions you might have about the problem. The 

research may help get you started in designing your own 

responses, but it cannot tell you exactly what to do. This 

will depend greatly on the particular nature of your local 

problem. In the interest of keeping the guides readable, 

not every piece of relevant research has been cited, nor has 

every point been attributed to its sources. To have done so 

would have overwhelmed and distracted the reader. The 

references listed at the end of each guide are those drawn 

on most heavily; they are not a complete bibliography of 

research on the subject. 

• Are willing to work with others to find effective 

solutions to the problem. The police alone cannot 

implement many of the responses discussed in the guides. 

They must frequently implement them in partnership with 
About the Problem-Specific Guides Series iii 

other responsible private and public entities including other

government agencies, non-governmental organizations, 

private businesses, public utilities, community groups, 

and individual citizens. An effective problem-solver must 

know how to forge genuine partnerships with others 

and be prepared to invest considerable effort in making 

these partnerships work. Each guide identifies particular

entities in the community with whom police might work to 

improve the overall response to that problem. Thorough 

analysis of problems often reveals that entities other than 

the police are in a stronger position to address problems 

and that police ought to shift some greater responsibility to

them to do so. 

The COPS Office defines community policing as 

“a policing philosophy that promotes and supports 

organizational strategies to address the causes and reduce 

the fear of crime and social disorder through problemsolving tactics and police-community partnerships.” 

These guides emphasize problem-solving and police-community 

partnerships in the context of addressing specific public 

safety problems. For the most part, the organizational 

strategies that can facilitate problem-solving and policecommunity partnerships vary considerably and discussion 

of them is beyond the scope of these guides. 

These guides have drawn on research findings and police 

practices in the United States, the United Kingdom, 

Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and 

Scandinavia. Even though laws, customs and police 

practices vary from country to country, it is apparent that 

the police everywhere experience common problems. In 

a world that is becoming increasingly interconnected, it is 

important that police be aware of research and successful 

practices beyond the borders of their own countries. 
iv Juvenile Runaways 

The COPS Office and the authors encourage you to provide 

feedback on this guide and to report on your own agency’s 

experiences dealing with a similar problem. Your agency 

may have effectively addressed a problem using responses 

not considered in these guides and your experiences and 

knowledge could benefit others. This information will be 

used to update the guides. If you wish to provide feedback 

and share your experiences it should be sent via e-mail to 

cops_pubs@usdoj.gov 

For more information about problem-oriented policing, visit 

the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing online at www. 

popcenter.org. This website offers free online access to: 

• the Problem-Specific Guides series 

• the companion Response Guides and Problem-Solving Tools 

series 

• instructional information about problem-oriented policing 

and related topics 

• an interactive training exercise 

• online access to important police research and practices. 
Acknowledgments v 

Acknowledgments 

The Problem-Oriented Guides for Police are very much a 

collaborative effort. While each guide has a primary 

author, other project team members, COPS Office staff 

and anonymous peer reviewers contributed to each guide 

by proposing text, recommending research and offering 

suggestions on matters of format and style. 

The principal project team developing the guide series 

comprised Herman Goldstein, professor emeritus, 

University of Wisconsin Law School; Ronald V. Clarke, 

professor of criminal justice, Rutgers University; John 

E. Eck, professor of criminal justice, University of 

Cincinnati; Michael S. Scott, clinical assistant professor, 

University of Wisconsin Law School; Rana Sampson, 

police consultant, San Diego; and Deborah Lamm 

Weisel, director of police research, North Carolina State 

University. 

Cynthia Pappas oversaw the project for the COPS Office. 

Katharine Willis edited the guide. Research for the guides 

was conducted at the Criminal Justice Library at Rutgers 

University under the direction of Phyllis Schultze. 

The project team also wishes to acknowledge the members 

of the San Diego, National City and Savannah police 

departments who provided feedback on the guides' format 

and style in the early stages of the project, as well as the 

line police officers, police executives and researchers who 

peer reviewed each guide. 

Contents vii 

Contents 

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series ................................. i

Acknowledgments .................................................... v

The Problem of Juvenile Runaways ................................... . . .1

Related Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Factors Contributing to Juvenile Runaways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Why They Run: Reasons and Triggers ......................... . . . .6

When They Run: Seasonal and Temporal Issues...................... 8

How They Go: Methods of Departure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Where They Go: Destination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

How Long They Stay: Duration.................................... 10

What Happens While They Are Gone: Consequences.................. 11

How or If They Return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Understanding Your Local Problem .................................. . . . .15

Asking the Right Questions .................................... . . . .15

Juveniles Who Run Away . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Parents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Foster Parents/Facility Staff...................................... 17

Runaway Episodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Offending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Victimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Current Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Measuring Your Effectiveness .................................. . . . .20
viii Juvenile Runaways

Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways ....................... . . .23

General Considerations for an Effective Response Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Agency-Level Responses. ....................................... 24

Specific Responses to Juvenile Runaways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Before They Run............................................... 29

When They Run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

While They Are Absent From Home or Care ......................... 32

When or If They Return ......................................... 34

Responses With Limited Effectiveness................................. 37

Appendix: Summary of Responses to Juvenile Runaways ..................... 39

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Recommended Readings .......................................... . . . .63

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
The Problem of Juvenile Runaways 1 

The Problem of Juvenile Runaways 

This guide begins by describing the problem of juvenile § The term “runaway” typically runaways and reviewing its risk factors. It then identifies a refers to juveniles who are absent 

series of questions to help you analyze your local juvenile from home or care without 

permission. The term “thrownaway” runaway problem. Finally, it reviews responses to the refers to juveniles who have been 

problem and what is known about them from evaluative forced to leave their homes by a 

research and police practice. parent or guardian. Recognizing 

that the distinction between these 

statuses is blurred, this guide uses 

Juveniles run away from home and from substitute care the term “runaway” to refer to both 

situations. The phrase “missing placements, such as foster care or group homes. Most children” often includes runaway juveniles decide to leave on their own or choose not to and thrownaway juveniles, along with 

return when expected, but in some cases, their parents juveniles who have been abducted by 

a non-custodial parent or stranger. or guardians tell them to leave or do not allow them to This latter group of juveniles is not 

return.§ A runaway episode refers to an overnight stay discussed in this guide. 

away from home, except in the case of young children 

who can be in danger after a much shorter time. Runaways 

were once believed to be juveniles seeking adventure or 

rebelling against mainstream values and the authority of 

their parents; more recently, runaways have been regarded 

as victims of dysfunctional families, schools, and social 

service institutions. 

Estimating the number of juveniles who run away is 

difficult because: 

• researchers do not agree on the definition of “running 

away” 

• juveniles tend to hide their runaway status when talking to 

adult authority figures 

• many runaways do not access services and, therefore, are 

not included in service utilization data. 
2 Juvenile Runaways 

These difficulties notwithstanding, there were 

approximately 1.7 million juvenile runaway episodes in 

1999.1 Only about one-third of these juveniles were 

actually “missing,” meaning that their parents or caretakers 

did not know where they were and were concerned 

about their absence. Only about one-fifth of all runaway 

episodes were reported to police.2 Some parents do not 

report runaway episodes to police because they know 

where their children are or because they do not think the 

police are needed to resolve the issue.3 Others do not 

report runaway episodes because they want to avoid police 

involvement or because they had a negative experience 

when reporting a previous runaway episode to police.4 

Most runaways are older teenagers, ages 15 to 17, with 

only about one-quarter ages 14 and younger.5 Juveniles 

of different races run away at about the same rates and 

boys and girls run away in equal proportions. Although 

juveniles from all socioeconomic statuses run away, the 

majority are from working-class and lower-income homes, 

possibly because of the additional family stress created 

by a lack of income and resources.6 Blended families 

also experience additional stress, which may explain why 

juveniles living in these settings are also more likely to run 

away.7 Runaway rates are similar for juveniles in urban, 

suburban, and rural settings.8 

Runaways have higher rates of depression, physical and 

sexual abuse, alcohol and drug problems, delinquency, 

school problems, and difficulties with peers than juveniles 

who do not run away.9 Many runaways have been 

exposed to high levels of violence, either as victims or as 

witnesses.10 
The Problem of Juvenile Runaways 3 

Juveniles in substitute care (e.g., foster care, group homes) 

are more likely to run away than juveniles who live at 

home with a parent or guardian. The chances of juveniles 

in care running away are highest in the first few months 

after placement, and older juveniles are more likely to run 

away than younger juveniles.11 Juveniles who run away 

from substitute care are more likely to run away repeatedly 

than juveniles who run away from home.12 Although 

they are only a small proportion of the total number 

of runaways, those who run away from care consume 

a disproportionate amount of police time and effort.13 

Those who run away from care also tend to stay away 

longer and travel farther away than those who run away 

from home.14 

Police encounter runaways, whether reported missing or 

not, through a number of activities: while patrolling areas 

where runaways congregate, while investigating missing 

persons reports, or during criminal investigations in which 

juveniles were either perpetrators or victims. In 1999, 

150,700 juveniles were arrested for running away, less than 

10 percent of all runaways that year.15 Runaways are also 

arrested and charged with prostitution, curfew violations, 

truancy, and drug and alcohol offenses. Police have 

wide discretion in handling runaway cases depending on 

whether the children were reported missing, the level of 

parental or caretaker concern, and the seriousness of the 

risks the juveniles are believed to face. 

Very few runaways are homeless and living on the 

street. Most stay in relative safety at a friend or family 

member’s home. However, some runaways lack safe living 

arrangements and stay on the street, in the company of a 

predatory adult, or in another situation lacking responsible 

adult supervision. Police and policy makers are most 

concerned about this group of juveniles, commonly 

referred to as “street kids,” because of the potential for 

victimization and criminal activity. 
4 Juvenile Runaways 

The problem of juvenile runaways is particularly complex 

because it suggests other social problems, such as family 

dysfunction and child abuse. As a result, police will be able 

to affect only a segment of the problem directly. Although 

many things can be done to address the underlying causes 

of the problem, police are primarily concerned about 

reducing the harm that comes to or is caused by runaways 

when they are absent from home or care. For example, 

some runaways are: 

• involved in criminal activity, either as victims or as 

perpetrators 

• exploited by predatory adults 

• engaged in risky behaviors such as drug use and unsafe 

sexual activity. 

Despite their interest in protecting children’s safety, police 

often assign a low priority to runaway cases for a number 

of reasons: 

• Few jurisdictions have appropriate facilities for placement 

once runaways are taken into police custody.16 

• Processing paperwork and transporting juveniles consume 

significant amounts of time.17 

• Most police have competing demands from more serious 

public safety threats.18 

• Some police believe parents and substitute care providers 

want police to act as disciplinarians or security guards.19 

• Runaway cases can be frustrating when juveniles do not want 

to return or parents do not want the juveniles to return.20 

• Juveniles often run away again shortly after police return 

them home.21 
The Problem of Juvenile Runaways 5 

Running away is a status offense; consequently, juveniles 

can be held in secure facilities only in limited situations.§ 

Unfortunately, the resources available to this population 

§ The Juvenile Justice and generally amount to a collection of loosely affiliated Delinquency Prevention Act of services and shelters of varied quality and quantity. As a 1974 made it illegal to hold status 

result, police often have limited options for responding to offenders in secure facilities. The 

Runaway and Homeless Youth runaways and ensuring their safety. Act (RHYA), reauthorized in 

1992, created alternatives to the 

juvenile justice system by funding Related Problems 

community-based organizations 

to provide services to runaways 

Police encounter juveniles for many reasons related to including outreach, counseling, 

their running away from home. Some of these issues are shelters, aftercare, and referrals to 

social services. The RHYA also 

covered in other guides in this series, all of which are includes the Transitional Living 

listed in the back of this guide. These related problems Program, which provides services for 

homeless juveniles ages 16 to 21 to require their own analyses and responses: increase independent living skills. 

• child abduction by non-custodial parents 

• child abduction by strangers 

• child abandonment 

• child abuse and neglect 

• disorderly juveniles in public places 

• underage drinking 

• child sexual exploitation 

• prostitution 

• truancy 

• curfew violations 

• panhandling 

• shoplifting 

• drug dealing 

• problems relating to transient persons (e.g., sleeping, 

bathing, depositing human waste in public). 
6 Juvenile Runaways 

Factors Contributing to Juvenile Runaways 

Understanding the factors that contribute to your problem 

will help you frame your own local analysis questions, 

determine good effectiveness measures, recognize key 

intervention points, and select appropriate responses. 

Why They Run: Reasons and Triggers 

Runaways’ home and family situations suggest that the 

stereotype of juveniles running away to experience 

a carefree and rebellious lifestyle is misguided and 

potentially dangerous. Runaways are usually “running away 

from” a problem they do not know how to solve, rather 

than “running to” an environment they imagine to be 

more relaxed and exciting. Triggers for running away from 

home include: 

• recurrent arguments about typical parent-child issues 

such as autonomy, spending money, staying out late, 

permission to attend a party or concert, arguments with 

siblings, choice of friends, appearance, showing respect to 

parents, criminal behavior, alcohol or drug use, and school 

problems (truancy, suspension, grades)22 

• physical and sexual abuse23 

• tension or rejection because of lifestyle or sexual 

orientation24 

• efforts to avoid a difficult encounter with parents, e.g., 

revealing a pregnancy, reporting failing grades25 

• rigid rules or expectations that do not account for 

normal developmental changes, punishments perceived as 

excessive, and authoritarian parenting styles26 

• seeking fun or adventure, to be with a boyfriend or 

girlfriend, or to do something parents will not permit27 
The Problem of Juvenile Runaways 7 

• parents’ inability to cope with stress, poor boundaries, 

failure to set limits, neglect, substance use, or depression28 

• parents’ disharmony, arguing, and domestic violence29 

• tension with step-parent or problems adjusting to a split or 

blended family.30 

In general, juveniles run away from families that tend to 

retreat from, rather than work through, difficult situations. 

Lacking other coping mechanisms or communication 

strategies to resolve problems, juveniles often run away 

when they feel they have no other option. In particular, 

juveniles run away when the pattern of conflict escalates, 

the risk of physical harm increases, or family life becomes 

intolerable. 

The triggers underlying a runaway episode from foster care 

or a group home may be different from those underlying a 

runaway episode from home. When juveniles in care do not 

have strong emotional ties to their caretakers, they often 

find it easier to leave.31 Juveniles run away from care to: 

• return home or to their neighborhoods to spend time with 

friends, boyfriends or girlfriends, and family32 

• get attention or provoke a reaction, to confirm that 

caretakers care about them and that they are wanted33 

• escape crowded facilities or to seek privacy34 

• protest inadequate service or attention from social workers35 

• protect themselves from bullying or sexual harassment by 

other residents36 

• escape abuse by staff37 

• resist imposed limits, particularly given that many juveniles 

in care come from homes with few limits.38 
8 Juvenile Runaways 

Juveniles in the foster care system are often shuttled 

among multiple placements. These disruptions can cause 

juveniles to feel disempowered and detached and may lead 

to runaway episodes.39 The substitute care placement’s 

culture or environment may also create an incentive to 

run away. Placements lacking structure and activities 

and those with overwhelmed staff who do not exercise 

their authority properly have higher rates of runaways 

than facilities with strong leadership, staff support, and 

juveniles involved in activities and setting rules.40 

When They Run: Seasonal and Temporal Issues 

Some evidence suggests that, in some communities, 

juveniles run away more often in the summer and during 

the afternoon or evening, while in other communities, 

there are no clear patterns with regard to season, day of 

the week, or time of day.41 Local practices surrounding 

curfew and truancy enforcement may cause police to come 

into contact with runaways more often on particular days 

of the week or times of day. 

How They Go: Methods of Departure 

Most juveniles leave home or care spontaneously amid 

emotional or physical conflict. Their departure is generally 

poorly planned and impulsive, and they usually do not 

take any food, clothing, or money to sustain them while 

away. Other juveniles carefully calculate the timing of their 

exits, leave notes announcing their departures, and take 

money, food, clothing, and objects of sentimental value 

with them.42 Juveniles use many modes of transportation: 

walking, taking the family car, organizing a ride with 

friends, using public transportation, or hitchhiking. 

Obviously, some of these involve serious risks to 

juveniles’ safety. 
The Problem of Juvenile Runaways 9 

Discovering that a child has run away can be very 

emotional for parents. They may blame themselves and 

feel guilty, remorseful, or inadequate, or they may blame 

the juvenile, feel angry, and plan to punish the child.43 

Some parents are less affected by their child’s departure, 

believing the juvenile went to a safe location and will 

return shortly.44 Parents try to locate the juvenile by 

calling friends and relatives, searching places the juvenile 

frequents, or filing a missing persons report with the 

police. 

Where They Go: Destination 

Most runaways do not go far. Only about one-quarter 

leave the local area and few of these leave the state.45 

Juveniles who run away from care tend to travel farther 

and are more likely to leave the state.46 The cities of 

New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles attract large 

numbers of out-of-state runaways.47 

Very few runaways identify “the street” as their initial 

destination when they run away from home or care. The 

most common intended destinations are the homes of 

friends or relatives. Often, parents or caretakers know 

where juveniles are staying.48 Juveniles who stay away for 

longer periods of time tend to cycle through a series of 

temporary stays with friends and relatives, a practice called 

“couch surfing.” Only when these resources are exhausted 

do they move out to the street. Although the proportion 

of runaways who live outside, in a public place, or in an 

abandoned building is relatively small, these juveniles are 

often in great peril and at risk of falling prey to predatory 

adults, drugs, and violent crime.49 Police are most likely 

to encounter these juveniles, and they are the ones who 

inspire the greatest concern. 
10 Juvenile Runaways 

Jared Skolnick - www.bc.blogs.com 

Only about one quarter of runaways leave their 

local area. Those who choose to leave tend to be 

attracted to larger cities such as New York, San 

Francisco and Los Angeles. 

How Long They Stay: Duration 

About one-fifth of runaways return within 24 hours, 

and, after one week, three-quarters of all runaways 

have returned home or to care.50 Less than 1 percent 

of runaways never return. Although many absences are 

short, the juveniles involved are not immune to the risks 

faced by those who spend longer periods of time away 

from home, particularly if they are not staying in a safe 

location. 
The Problem of Juvenile Runaways 11 

What Happens While They Are Gone: Consequences 

Once juveniles have left home or care, the variety and 

seriousness of harms they face depend on several factors, 

including: 

• the juveniles’ level of maturity 

• the availability of safe accommodations 

• the juveniles’ companions and associates. 

Survival and safety issues are fairly minimal for the large 

majority of juveniles who stay with friends or relatives.51 

Over time, friends and relatives may become less willing 

to provide for the juveniles and the juveniles either 

return home or move to the street. Those living on the 

street face hazards that are self-imposed (substance use, 

consensual high-risk sexual activity), inflicted by others 

(victimization and exploitation), or driven by the need to 

obtain food, shelter, and money. 

Juveniles living on the street develop survival strategies. 

Sometimes they access shelters or emergency care 

facilities; other times they are forced to settle for 

riskier arrangements such as staying with strangers who 

have apartments or living in abandoned buildings or 

on rooftops. Juveniles may shoplift, panhandle, steal, 

threaten, or use violence to get money from others.52 

Although there is no consensus on whether the practice 

is widespread, some juveniles also engage in “survival 

sex,” meaning they trade sex for food, shelter, drugs, or 

protection.53 Sometimes, survival sex involves statutory 

rape, which has obvious implications for police. 
12 Juvenile Runaways 

Some acts of “survival sex” are consensual; however, 

some runaways living on the street are exploited by 

predatory adults and become involved in prostitution, 

pornography, and drug dealing.54 In addition to being a 

precursor to running away, juveniles are often victims of 

physical and sexual assault while they are living on the 

street.55 

Runaways living on the street jeopardize themselves by 

using drugs. Illegal drugs are very accessible to those on 

the street, who tend to use them both as social lubricants 

and to self-medicate.56 Large numbers of juveniles on the 

street also engage in unprotected sexual activity.57 These 

behaviors, coupled with the harms inflicted by others, 

create serious physical and mental health issues. Physical 

illnesses result from poor nutrition, poor hygiene, and 

exposure to the elements.58 Given their high levels of 

intravenous drug use, shared drug paraphernalia, and highrisk sexual behaviors, juveniles on the street are vulnerable 

to HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases.59 

Finally, their stressful lives coupled with their troubled 

backgrounds make them susceptible to suicide, depression, 

and other mental illnesses.60 

Many runaways living on the street constantly fear 

victimization and struggle to meet their basic survival 

needs. Very little is known about the experiences of 

runaways who do not spend time on the street. In general, 

runaway experiences are not all bad. Some juveniles feel 

independent, autonomous, and free and are relieved to 

escape the pressures of family conflict and school. Being 

away from home often provides time to think and is useful 

for sorting out problems. Unfortunately, running away 

does not improve juveniles’ emotional lives nor does it 

address the issues that made them want to leave home.61 
The Problem of Juvenile Runaways 1313 

How or If They Return 

Most runaways eventually return to their homes, 

placements, or another safe alternative. Sometimes 

juveniles return on their own; sometimes they are located 

by a parent, guardian, friend, or relative and convinced 

to return; sometimes they are apprehended by police and 

brought home; and other times, their return is negotiated 

by runaway shelter or other social service working on their 

behalf. They may return with the hope of reconciling or 

because they are tired of their stressful life on the street.62 

Although shelters and other social services may 

negotiate the juveniles’ return, families rarely receive 

the comprehensive services needed to resolve the 

issues causing the juveniles to flee in the first place.63 

Some juveniles do not want to return home and avoid 

contact with services and authority figures so they are 

not forced to do so. Similarly, some parents blame the 

juveniles for running away and do not recognize their 

own contributions to the problem.64 In these situations, 

automatic or immediate reunification may place the 

juveniles at risk of continued harm. 

Understanding Your Local Problem 15 

Understanding Your Local Problem 

The information provided above is only a generalized 

description of juvenile runaways and runaway episodes. 

You must combine the basic facts with a more specific 

understanding of your local problem. Analyzing the local 

problem carefully will help you design a more effective 

response strategy. 

Asking the Right Questions 

The following are some critical questions you should ask 

in analyzing your particular problem of juvenile runaways, 

even if the answers are not always readily available. 

Your answers to these and other questions will help you 

choose the most appropriate set of responses later. Most 

research on juvenile runaways is based on information 

reported by juveniles; very few studies examine parents’ or 

caretakers’ perspectives.65 Both perspectives are needed 

to understand the local problem’s dynamics, the available 

resources and barriers to using them, and the types of 

police responses most likely to impact the problem. 

Many police contacts with runaways are not recorded 

systematically because they do not involve criminal 

behavior or are considered too minor. Unfortunately, 

information from these contacts is needed to craft 

effective responses. As a result, you should first determine 

what types of records are being kept and, if needed, 

develop additional procedures to capture the information 

needed to fully understand the interactions among police, 

runaways, and their parents or caretakers. Engaging 

social service partners in information gathering can help 

to mediate any negative reaction to police questioning. 
16 Juvenile Runaways 

Further, many runaways never encounter police, so you 

will need to collaborate with local social service providers 

and schools to answer many of the analysis questions. 

Although police will be directly involved with only a 

segment of the runaway population, complete information 

is required to develop a comprehensive array of responses. 

Juveniles Who Run Away 

• How many runaway episodes were reported to police in 

the past year? How many weren’t? Why weren’t they? 

• Aside from investigating missing persons reports, how 

do police come in contact with runaways? How many 

juveniles are contacted by each method? 

• What are the characteristics of juveniles who run away 

from home and care? How old are they? (There are 

important differences in maturity and independent 

living skills of juveniles ages 14 and younger, ages 15 

and 16, and those ages 17 and older.) What race or 

ethnicity are the juveniles? What gender are they? 

• What reasons do juveniles offer for running away? 

• How many juveniles have run away multiple times? 

• What prior contacts have police had with runaways, 

either as crime victims or suspects? 

Parents 

• What are the demographic and social characteristics 

of parents who report their child’s runaway episode to 

police? 

• What types of assistance do they expect police to 

provide? What other types of assistance (e.g., social 

services) are requested? 

• What strategies do parents use to locate their children? 

• How many of the missing persons reports are for 

repeat runaway episodes? 

• What prior contacts have police had with parents of 

runaways? 
Understanding Your Local Problem 17 

Foster Parents/Facility Staff 

• What proportion of runaway episodes is reported by 

substitute caretakers (e.g., foster parents, group home 

staff, etc.)? 

• Are the reports evenly distributed across the various 

homes or facilities in the area, or do certain ones 

account for a larger share of missing persons reports? 

• What are the homes’ and facilities’ policies for 

reporting juveniles who go missing? 

• What prior contacts, related to runaways, have police 

had with foster parents or juvenile facility staff ? 

Runaway Episodes 

• How far do runaways travel from home or care? 

• Do they have an intended destination when they 

depart? What is it? Do they go there? 

• What modes of transportation do runaways use? 

• What proportion stays at the homes of friends or 

relatives? 

• What proportion stays on the street? In what locations 

do they congregate? Do they try to avoid contact with 

adults? 

• What times of the day, days of the week, or season are 

runaway episodes most likely to occur? Are there any 

peaks in police contacts? 

• What kinds of experiences do runaways have? What are 

the key sources of danger? 

• How do pimps or drug dealers approach juveniles living 

on the street? How can juveniles safely decline their 

offers to be involved? 

• What proportion of runaways use illicit drugs? Which 

drugs? What purpose does their substance use appear 

to serve? 

• Are runaways involved in selling drugs? 

• What proportion of runaways is sexually active? Do 

they practice safer sex? If not, why not? 
18 Juvenile Runaways 

Offending 

• What degree of involvement do runaways have in 

criminal behavior? What types of offenses do they 

commit? 

• How many runaways are arrested? For what types of 

offenses? 

• What reasons do juveniles give for their involvement in 

criminal behavior? 

• What time of the day or day of the week are runaways 

most likely to commit crime? 

• Are any businesses adversely affected by runaways? 

Victimization 

• To what extent are runaways crime victims while absent 

from home or care? How many are victims of property 

crime? How many are victims of violent crime? 

• Who are the perpetrators? 

• When and where do these victimizations occur? 

• Are the runaways alone or in groups when victimized? 

• Are there any locations that juveniles consider to be 

particularly dangerous? 

Return 

• What proportion of runaways is willing to return home 

or to care? 

• What needs to happen for them to agree to return 

home? 

• If they do not want to return home, what kinds of 

alternative arrangements do they prefer? 

• What proportion of parents is not willing to allow their 

children to return home? 

• For what proportion of juveniles is returning home a 

risk of harm? 
Understanding Your Local Problem 19 

• Of the juveniles who return home, how long were they 

absent? 

• How did they return (e.g., returned on their own, 

escorted by police or other adults, etc.)? Was their 

return voluntary? 

• What proportion of runaways report being punished 

upon their return? 

Current Responses 

• What is the police department’s current policy for 

dealing with runaways? Are runaways ever held in 

secure detention facilities? 

• What are the procedures for taking reports, attempting 

to locate runaways, and following up upon return? 

• Once located by police, are juveniles permitted to 

refuse to return home? 

• Other than taking juveniles into custody, how do police 

respond to runaways? Are any of these responses 

particularly effective? 

• What social services are available to runaways? What 

role do police have in linking juveniles and families with 

these services? 

• How many runaways use services designed to protect 

them from harm while on the street (e.g., outreach, 

shelters, etc.)? Which services? What are the barriers to 

access? Do juveniles think the services are credible? 

• How many runaways use services designed to resolve 

the underlying family and personal conflicts that led 

to running away (e.g., counseling, family mediation or 

reunification services)? Which services? What are the 

barriers to access? Do juveniles think the services are 

credible? 

• How satisfied are juveniles with the police response? 

What would they like police to do differently? 
20 Juvenile Runaways 

• How satisfied are parents with the police response? 

What would they like police to do differently? 

• How satisfied are social service providers with the 

police response? What would they like police to do 

differently? 

Measuring Your Effectiveness 

Measurement allows you to determine to what degree 

your efforts have succeeded, and suggests how you 

might modify your responses if they are not producing 

the intended results. You should take measures of your 

problem before you implement responses, to determine 

how serious the problem is, and after you implement 

them, to determine whether they have been effective. 

All measures should be taken in both the target area and 

the surrounding area. (For more detailed guidance on 

measuring effectiveness, see the companion guide to this 

series, Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide 

for Police Problem-Solvers.) 

The problem of juvenile runaways is unlike other 

problems confronting police because the behavior 

indicates complex family troubles. Making a measurable 

impact on these underlying causes will require 

interventions that go far beyond those implemented 

by police. Police responses are unlikely to impact the 

underlying causes and instead are likely to focus on 

mitigating the harm that comes to or is caused by 

runaways while they are absent from home or care. Police 

are also likely to seek to shift responsibility for addressing 

the problem to social service agencies that are better 

equipped to offer such assistance. 
Understanding Your Local Problem 21 

The following are potentially useful measures of the 

effectiveness of responses to juveniles who have run away 

from home or substitute care. You can use the following 

“outcome” measures to determine the impact of the 

responses on the level of the problem: 

• reduced number of juveniles who run away from home 

or care 

• reduced number of repeat runaway episodes reported 

by parents or caretakers 

• increased number of runaways staying in safe locations 

(e.g., home of a friend or relative) 

• reduced number of runaways staying in dangerous 

locations (e.g., streets, abandoned buildings) 

• increased number of runaways accessing crisis services 

designed to reduce the harms associated with living on 

the street (e.g., shelters) 

• decreased number of runaways who report being 

victimized while absent from home 

• decreased number of runaways involved in criminal 

activity while absent from home 

• decreased number of runaways admitted to secure 

detention facilities 

• increased number of juveniles successfully reunited 

with parents or caretakers or increased number of 

juveniles placed in safe alternative living arrangements. 
22 Juvenile Runaways 

You can use the following “process” measures to 

identify the extent to which selected responses have been 

implemented as designed: 

• increased number of families who have participated in 

support or mediation to prevent runaway episodes 

• increased number of juveniles using hotlines and other 

counseling resources instead of running away 

• reduced number of runaway episodes reported to police 

by parents or caretakers (increased reports may be a 

positive indicator initially if you determine that parents 

have been reluctant to report episodes in which their 

children are at risk of harm) 

• decreased number of inappropriate missing persons 

reports from foster care homes or group homes 

• reduced number of police hours spent processing or 

transporting runaways once they are located 

• increased number of juveniles who receive follow-up 

services after they return from a runaway episode. 
Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways 23 

Responses to the Problem of 

Juvenile Runaways 

Your analysis of your local problem should give you 

a better understanding of the factors contributing to 

it. Once you have analyzed your local problem and 

established a baseline for measuring effectiveness, 

you should consider possible responses to address the 

problem. 

The following response strategies provide a foundation 

of ideas for addressing your particular problem. These 

strategies are drawn from a variety of research studies 

and police reports. Several of these strategies may apply 

to your community’s problem. It is critical that you tailor 

responses to local circumstances, and that you can justify 

each response based on reliable analysis. In most cases, 

an effective strategy will involve implementing several 

different responses. Law enforcement responses alone 

are seldom effective in reducing or solving the problem. 

Do not limit yourself to considering what police can do: 

carefully consider whether others in your community share 

responsibility for the problem and can help police better 

respond to it. 
24 Juvenile Runaways 

§ Refer to “Shifting and Sharing 

Responsibility for Public Safety 

Problems” for more information. 

General Considerations for an Effective 

Response Strategy 

Although more likely to focus on minimizing the harms 

that come to or are caused by runaways while they are 

absent from home, police can also be effective advocates 

in efforts to address the reasons juveniles run away (e.g., 

physical and sexual abuse) and to improve the quality of 

services designed to respond to juveniles upon their return 

(e.g., family mediation and preservation). Most researchers 

and practitioners agree that social service providers, rather 

than police, are primarily responsible for addressing this 

issue. Therefore, part of the police response may be to 

shift responsibility to other agencies better equipped to 

render services to runaways and their families.§ 

That said, police have a legitimate role in locating juveniles 

reported missing and in ensuring runaways’ safety when 

they spend time on the street.66 Police receive missing 

persons reports from parents, foster care providers, and 

group home staff. Further, their 24-hour street presence 

means they are most likely to encounter runaways, whether 

reported missing or not. Police should partner with other 

agencies to address the issue effectively, and a variety of 

agency-level responses will be required. 

Agency-Level Responses 

1. Appointing a local runaway coordinator. Given the 

overlap in responsibility between the police department 

and social service providers, some state and local 

jurisdictions have found it helpful to appoint a runaway 

coordinator. The coordinator convenes interagency 

meetings, plans and coordinates services, manages service 

delivery contracts, and monitors outcomes. Although they 

may or may not craft formal interagency protocols, the 

coordinators build bridges for these agreements to evolve. 
Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways 25 

2. Collaborating with social service agencies. Although 

police may locate and secure the return of juveniles who 

have run away, collaborating with other agencies can 

reduce the amount of police time spent on runaways 

and can ensure juveniles receive appropriate services.§ 

A framework should be developed for each agency’s 

response to reported runaway episodes, along with 

procedures for assisting runaways who are identified 

through other means. Such collaborations have helped 

jurisdictions comply with federal mandates prohibiting 

the secure detention of status offenders. Involving social 

service agencies in returning juveniles to their homes or 

placements can also defuse potentially volatile domestic 

situations.§§ 

These agreements should be formalized into 

memorandums of understanding between police and 

social service agencies. In addition to specific protocols 

for transporting youth and providing services, these 

agreements can also create specific protections for 

confidentiality and privacy, when appropriate. Formalizing 

these agreements will also promote sustainability so the 

interagency relationships and protocols are not dependent 

on the individuals who created them. 

3. Developing joint protocols with foster care providers 

and group homes. Those providing substitute care are 

sometimes quick to contact police when juveniles have not 

returned to the facility by a specified time.§§§ Many times, 

juveniles are simply late, rather than missing. Further, staff 

may not assess juveniles’ level of risk before identifying 

the event as an emergency. To avoid overwhelming police 

resources, some jurisdictions use protocols specifying a 

threshold for police contact when juveniles do not return 

to the facility as expected (e.g., call police only after 

midnight, only when juveniles have left the center without 

§ The Phoenix Police Department 

and the Tumbleweed Center initiated 

an outreach program designed to 

reduce police time spent managing 

runaways and to provide immediate 

and long-term assistance to 

runaways. When police come in 

contact with runaways, they connect 

with Tumbleweed staff using a crisis 

line, pager, or special police radio 

call received by staff monitoring 

the radio channel. Tumbleweed 

staff meet juveniles at the precinct 

and provide emergency shelter, 

transportation home, and follow-up 

services with the family. See http:// 

www.tumbleweed.org and Posner 

(1994) for more information. 

§§ See Posner (1994) for a more 

complete discussion of the many 

forms, benefits, and considerations 

for police-social service 

collaborations. 

§§§ Through an analysis of callsfor-service data, the Fresno Police 

Department found that 40 substitute 

care providers made a total of 1,024 

calls in a single year. Five providers 

were responsible for 50 percent of 

the calls. Joint protocols and training 

from centers who manage juveniles’ 

absences without police contact 

were employed to reduce the high 

utilization rates of the five providers 

(Fresno Police Department 1996). 
26 Juvenile Runaways 

permission, or only after staff have failed to locate the 

juveniles). The protocol should categorize the various 

types of absences and state required procedures for each 

§ Adapted from Florida situation.67 The circumstances surrounding the absences 

Department of Children and should be monitored and re-categorized as necessary. 

Families (2002). 

Linking foster care providers and group home staff with 

community police officers also has benefits:68 

• Police get to know the juveniles informally and possibly 

having more leverage in discouraging them from running 

away. 

• Police develop a greater appreciation for the types of 

problems juveniles and staff face. 

• Police respond to requests for assistance more consistently 

and follow up more meaningfully. 

4. Cross-training staff from multiple agencies. Impacting 

the trajectory of runaway episodes—the triggers, the 

departure, the potential risks, and the return—will 

involve coordinated interaction between police and social 

service providers. This interaction should rest on mutual 

understanding and respect for each agency’s objectives and 

core philosophy. Multidisciplinary training sessions help 

staff understand the complexity of the issue and the need 

for a partnership to address it. Training topics should 

include:§ 

• reasons why juveniles run away from home and 

substitute care 

• police investigative techniques and available tools 

• child abuse reporting laws 

• policies surrounding confidentiality 

• situations when secure detention may be required to 

protect the juveniles from harm 

• juvenile-centered treatment philosophy and advocacy 

• locally available resources and services 

• procedures for interagency communication. 
Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways 27 

5. Sharing information. Agencies must share relevant 

information about the juveniles, precipitating factors, 

associates, and companions for an effective response. 

Interagency agreements should specify the types of 

information needed to ensure the safety of juveniles who 

have run away and should develop procedures for efficient 

interagency communication. These interagency agreements 

can be difficult to negotiate when agency partners have 

different confidentiality standards. 

Parents are important partners in information sharing. 

They have the right to access information that agency 

staff may not be able to obtain. Some jurisdictions obtain 

parents’ written consent to access records from schools, 

social services, and other agencies.§ 

6. Assessing risk. If the primary role of police is to 

reduce the harm that comes to or is caused by runaways, 

they need a reliable way to assess the risks facing juveniles 

who are absent from home or substitute care. Cases 

should not be classified based solely on age or where the 

juvenile stays, but rather using a set of locally defined 

conditions that, when met, will trigger a priority police 

response. Common risk factors include:§§ 

• Ages 13 and younger. Children ages 13 and younger have less 

sophisticated decision-making skills and cannot protect 

themselves from exploitation and older juveniles.69 

• Out of safety zone for age, physical, or mental condition. This 

zone will vary depending on the juveniles’ characteristics. 

Juveniles with cognitive impairments may have difficulty 

communicating their needs and providing information 

required to access help. They are particularly at risk 

of exploitation. 

• Alcohol or drug dependent. Substance use compromises 

judgment and the ability to protect oneself from harm. 

§ Takas and Bass (1996) provide 

a sample parental consent form 

that features clear, simple language 

and specifies the types of records 

police may use. Police should work 

with local agencies to ensure the 

form meets their requirements for 

accessing information. Guidelines 

for approaching agency staff 

to request information are also 

provided. 

§§ Refer to National Center for 

Missing and Exploited Children 

(2005) for a sample policy 

incorporating these risk factors. 
28 Juvenile Runaways 

• At risk of foul play or sexual exploitation. The risk level will 

depend on the types of illegal activity occurring in the 

community, where the juveniles are believed to be staying, 

and the juveniles’ past experiences and maturity level. 

• Believed to be in life-threatening situation. This assessment will 

vary depending on the places the juveniles frequent and 

their experiences during past runaway episodes. 

• Absent more than 24 hours before reported to police. A delay in 

reporting may indicate parental neglect, but could simply 

be a misunderstanding of the law. Many parents believe 

missing persons reports require a waiting period. 

• In the company of dangerous companions. Some juveniles stay 

with older adults who may exploit their vulnerability; 

others associate with peers who use drugs or are involved 

in criminal activity. 

• Inconsistent with normal behavior patterns. An out-of-character 

departure may signal acute distress or the possibility of 

foul play. 

Classifying juveniles accordingly enables police to focus 

their resources on those juveniles at highest risk of being 

harmed and those most likely to commit crime while 

absent from home or care. Agreement from local partners 

about the types of cases to which police will dedicate 

resources also helps to promote a positive police image. 
Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways 29 

Specific Responses to Reduce Juvenile Runaways 

The specific responses to juvenile runaways are organized 

according to time sequence—before the juveniles run 

away, when the juveniles depart home or care, while the 

juveniles are absent, and when or if the juveniles return. 

Many things can be done to address the reasons juveniles 

run away from home or care, such as offering support 

and guidance to parents and improving the quality of 

institutional care. A vast research base details the variety 

of family counseling, case management, and social 

work strategies that are effective in preventing runaway 

episodes, assisting juveniles and families with underlying 

dysfunction, and easing conflict upon return. These social 

service-based strategies are not reviewed at length here 

because police will have little direct involvement in such 

things. 

Before They Run 

7. Providing prevention materials when responding to 

calls for service. Analyzing local call-for-service data may 

reveal that certain families have high levels of parent-child 

conflict. Responding officers can provide these families 

with information on conflict resolution strategies and 

resources for additional parent and juvenile support.§ 

Referrals should include parent support services, advice 

and counseling programs and school-based support for 

juveniles, and family preservation and mediation services. 

The officer who responds to missing persons reports 

can provide similar information, along with guidance 

to help parents locate their children. Police efforts to 

generate awareness can be supplemented by school-based 

information campaigns designed to reach the larger 

audience of families whose children may run away but for 

whom police contact is not initiated.§§ 

§ See National Center for Missing and 

Exploited Children (2004), New York 

State, Missing and Exploited Children 

Clearinghouse (2001) for examples 

of brochures that police could offer 

when responding to calls for service 

or to a missing person report. See 

http://www.ontario.childfind.ca for an 

additional example. Click “Programs 

& Services” and then click the “Teen 

Runaway Prevention Program” link. 

§§ The National Runaway Switchboard 

has developed a prevention 

curriculum for use in schools that 

covers coping strategies and a frank 

discussion of the risks juveniles 

commonly face when they run away. 

See http://www.nrscrisisline.org and 

click the “Training & Prevention” link. 

Then click the “Runaway Prevention 

Curriculum” link to download the full 

curriculum. 
30 Juvenile Runaways 

nomads1800.com 

Hotlines refer juveniles to social services to 

shield them from the harms involved in living on 

the street. If desired, they also help runaways 

to contact their parents.

8. Using respite care. Runaway episodes are often 

triggered by escalating conflict at home that could be 

soothed if the family members were temporarily 

separated. Rather than using expensive detention facilities, 

police may transport juveniles to a respite care facility 

(e.g., a host home or small respite center).70 During a 

short stay (a few days to a few weeks), juveniles and their 

parents participate in counseling to begin to resolve the 

source of conflict and prevent future crises. Because of 

the short length of stay, respite care is considerably more 

cost-effective than placement in other juvenile 

institutions.71 

When They Run 

9. Using “Missing From Care” forms. When local 

protocols dictate that juveniles’ absences from care should 

be reported to police (see response #3 above), substitute 

care staff can provide police with information designed 

to help locate the juveniles and to highlight relevant risk 

factors. Relevant information includes:72 

• physical description 

• recent photograph 

• distinguishing marks, tattoos, or piercings 
Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways 31 

• date and time last seen 

• suspected destination and companions 

• address of family and other known contacts § See Simons and Willie (2000) • pertinent details from previous runaway episodes and Steidel (2000) for detailed 

• other relevant risk factors. discussions of investigation 

techniques useful for making this 

Division of Criminal Justice Services – determination. 

www.criminaljustice.state.ny.us. All rights reserved.(2005) 

Missing person’s posters can help to locate juveniles 

10. Determining whether absences are voluntary or 

involuntary. Sometimes it is not clear whether juveniles’ 

departures from home or care were voluntary, whether 

juveniles were abducted, or whether an injury prevented 

juveniles from returning home when expected. Some 

departments require police to assume juveniles are in 

jeopardy until they can confirm significant facts to the 

contrary.73 A variety of investigation techniques can 

be used to determine whether voluntary departures are 

consistent with children’s behavioral patterns.§ This 

classification allows police to respond to cases with an 

appropriate level of urgency. 
32 Juvenile Runaways 

11. Diverting cases to a community-based organization. 

Following a missing persons report, police can refer 

parents to a program that provides support during 

runaway episodes and that negotiates the juveniles’ return 

when appropriate. Using contact information provided 

by police, program staff initiate contact with parents. 

Twenty-four hour availability and free services may 

encourage parents to use the resource.74 Similarly, when 

runaways are apprehended, police can escort the juveniles 

to the program facility and notify the parents. Program 

staff receive the juveniles, await the parents’ arrival, and 

negotiate the return and follow-up care, allowing police to 

return to duty. 

While They Are Absent From Home or Care 

12. Referring juveniles to appropriate social service 

providers. Police encounter juveniles who have run away 

from home or care under many conditions. Those living 

on the street are at particular risk of harm and should be 

encouraged to access a variety of services to address their 

immediate and long-term needs. Outreach efforts should 

inform juveniles about the range of available services, 

which should include: 

• short-term shelter programs that provide safe overnight 

accommodations 

• drop-in services that provide food, clothing, crisis 

counseling, and medical attention 

• services that help juveniles contact their parents, if desired 

• counseling services for special issues such as sexual 

orientation, pregnancy, substance abuse, and mental illness 

• long-term counseling for family mediation and 

reunification 

• independent living programs for juveniles who cannot 

return home. 
Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways 33 

Juveniles who have run away from home or care often 

do not trust adults and authority figures and are easily 

deterred from seeking the services they need. Therefore, 

program credibility is essential and can be enhanced by:75 

• involving juveniles in the design and operation of 

programs 

• ensuring staff honor their commitments to juveniles, 

• confronting juveniles with the consequences of running 

away and challenging them to take responsibility 

• ensuring confidentiality 

• avoiding labeling and blaming juveniles. 

13. Implementing specialized patrol. Runaways who 

spend time on the streets are generally at higher risk 

of victimization and criminal involvement. Increasing 

the visibility of patrol in locations where juveniles 

congregate may deter criminal activity and also create an 

opportunity for police to contact and refer juveniles to 

services as needed.§ Specialized runaway units can also 

handle runaways contacted by other officers who lack the 

training or resources to intervene effectively.76 Further, 

specialized runaway officers can coordinate with other 

units investigating those who exploit runaways. 

14. Providing safe locations for juveniles. Local agencies 

and businesses (such as fire departments, libraries, 

community centers, convenience stores, and restaurants) 

can provide a temporary safe location for runaways who 

want to escape the street and other dangerous situations. 

A quiet and secure place to make contact with local 

services can mitigate the harms juveniles face while on 

their own.§§ 

§ The Port Authority Police’s 

Youth Services Unit patrols New 

York City’s bus terminal in search 

of runaways traveling by bus 

(Elique 1984). The team includes a 

plainclothes officer and is supported 

by a uniformed officer and a social 

worker who connect juveniles with 

a variety of services operated by 

social services and communitybased organizations. In 2004, the 

Youth Services Unit made over 

4,500 contacts with juveniles found 

loitering in the bus terminal, 225 

of whom were determined to be 

runaways (Port Authority Youth 

Services Unit 2004). Rather than 

tying up police time to transport the 

juvenile, the Youth Services Unit 

works in cooperation with Children’s 

Services staff who provide 

transportation as needed. 

§§ The YMCA’s Project Safe Place 

is a national network of businesses 

and agencies committed to providing 

a comfortable and secure place 

for juveniles to make contact with 

runaway service providers. Juveniles 

walk into a location displaying 

the “Safe Place” logo and are 

immediately put in contact with Safe 

Place volunteers who come to the 

location and help juveniles plan their 

next steps. Nearly 14,000 Safe Place 

locations nationwide have provided 

services to nearly 80,000 juveniles 

since 1983. See http://www. 

safeplaceservices.org/index.shtml for 

more information. 
34 Juvenile Runaways 

§ Greyhound’s Home Free program 

operates in partnership with the 

National Runaway Switchboard. 

Juveniles access the services by 

calling the toll-free switchboard, 

where staff coordinate issuing the 

ticket. See http://www.nrscrisisline. 

org/kids_homefree2.asp for more 

information. 

§§ The Alternative Solutions to 

Running Away (ASTRA) program 

operates in partnership with 

Gloucestershire, U.K. police, who 

refer families who made missing 

persons reports to the local program 

provider. The goal of the program 

is to reduce the incidence of 

repeat runaway episodes, which 

is accomplished by providing 

confidential, individual support to 

juveniles upon their return home 

and creating an action plan to help 

resolve the underlying problems 

(Great Britain, Office of the Deputy 

Prime Minister 2002). 

15. Using secure placement when appropriate. In a 

limited number of circumstances, secure placement 

may be needed to protect juveniles at immediate risk 

of serious harm. Suicidal juveniles or those engaging in 

high-risk behaviors (e.g., prostitution, reckless drug use, 

etc.) may benefit from short-term secure placements until 

appropriate long-term services can be mobilized. Secure 

placements can be found in the juvenile justice (e.g., 

juvenile detention center) and mental health (e.g., hospital) 

systems and should be extremely time limited. 

When or If They Return 

16. Using transportation aides and free transportation 

services. Police can conserve valuable time and resources 

by using civilian volunteers to transport juveniles to 

runaway shelters and other services. These resources are 

most useful when volunteers are on call 24 hours a day 

and when multiple volunteers located throughout the 

jurisdiction are on call at any given time.77 A few national 

airlines and bus companies offer free tickets to runaways 

from out of state who want to return home but cannot 

afford to do so.§ 

17. Referring to aftercare services as needed. Despite 

the likelihood that family problems triggered the runaway 

episode, most juveniles and families do not use any 

services when the juveniles return home.78 When police 

transport juveniles home or back to care, active referrals 

for follow-up services can help to resolve family problems 

and prevent subsequent runaway episodes. Rather than 

depending on the families to initiate contact, police can 

submit families’ names to a local service provider who 

makes contact with families and offers services.§§ Parents 

who receive such contacts often express relief and 

gratitude for the offer of help.79 
Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways 35 

18. Interviewing juveniles upon return. Interviews with 

juveniles upon their return can reveal important information 

for addressing family problems and preventing subsequent 

runaway episodes. Providing juveniles opportunities to talk 

and to have their feelings taken seriously sets an important 

example for parents about including juveniles in making 

decisions. Most practitioners agree that police should not 

conduct these interviews.80 Juveniles often do not trust 

authority figures, may be reluctant to disclose important 

facts, and are unlikely to feel that police can be impartial. 

Staff from local runaway programs are ideally suited to fill 

this role. 
36 Juvenile Runaways

Sample Questions for Follow-Up Interviews with Runaways 

1. How many times have you run away? (ask for details of 

events, experiences, interactions, and relationships while 

absent from home or care) 

2. What has gone on at home that contributed to your 

running away? 

Does anyone drink or use drugs? 

Does anyone fight? 

What is a good day for the family? What is a bad day? 

Does anyone ever hurt you? (carefully question about 

physical and sexual abuse) 

3. How much control do you or other people have over the 

things that made you run away? (ask how predictable this 

type of behavior is, who is responsible for the situation, 

how changeable those behaviors or events are) 

4. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the safest, how safe 

is it for you to return home? 

5. What would have to be different for you to want to stay 

home? (ask if things have always been this way at home 

and if not, when they changed and what made them 

change) 

6. What would you need to do to make this change happen? 

7. What would other people have to do to make this change 

happen? 

8. How possible are these changes? 

9. What do you want most for yourself ? 

10. What do you think you need first to get what you want? 

11. If you were in my place, what is the most important 

thing to say or do for a juvenile like you? 

Adapted ( ) from Janus et al 1987 .
Responses to the Problem of Juvenile Runaways 37 

Responses With Limited Effectiveness 

19. Handling cases over the telephone. An accurate § Connecticut state law requires assessment of the risks involved in juveniles’ absences police to confer with a juvenile 

is required for a sound response. This assessment is before informing parents or 

guardians of the juvenile’s best made in person, where access to juveniles’ parents, location. Police can transport a 

siblings, and personal effects can help police discover the juvenile home only with his or her 

nuances of each situation. permission (National Law Center on 

Homelessness and Poverty, 2003). 

20. Confining juveniles in secure detention facilities. 

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act 

of 1974 prohibits the secure confinement of status 

offenders, except in extreme circumstances to ensure their 

safety. Not only is the routine confinement of runaways 

illegal, it also does not address the underlying issues and 

can inflame tensions between the juveniles and their 

families.81 Secure detention is expensive and bed space is 

limited; therefore, it should be used only in response to a 

legitimate public or individual safety concern. 

21. Forcing juveniles to return home. Given the serious 

family dysfunction underlying many runaway episodes, 

forcing juveniles to return home may place them at 

further risk of harm and subsequent runaway episodes. 

Professionals agree that reunification is realistic for 

only a portion of runaways.82 Blanket policies requiring 

juveniles to be returned to their homes can be dangerous.§ 

Their absence from home is not necessarily their most 

serious or important problem, and an exclusive focus on 

reunification may conceal their real needs.83 
38 Juvenile Runaways 

22. Restricting privileges upon return. Responding to a 

runaway episode with harsh restrictions and punishment 

is likely to exacerbate the problem, particularly among 

those who run away from substitute care placements.84 

Instead, foster care parents and group home staff should 

negotiate new boundaries and privileges (e.g., additional 

weekend home passes) that address the issues underlying 

the runaway episode (e.g., desire to maintain ties with 

biological parents). 
Appendix 39 

Appendix: Summary of Responses to 

Juvenile Runaways 

The table below summarizes the responses to juvenile 

runaways, the mechanism by which they are intended to 

work, the conditions under which they ought to work 

best, and some factors you should consider before 

implementing a particular response. It is critical that you 

tailor responses to local circumstances, and that you can 

justify each response based on reliable analysis. In most 

cases, an effective strategy will involve implementing 

several different responses. Law enforcement responses 

alone are seldom effective in reducing or solving the 

problem. 

Response 

No. 

Page 

No. 

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

General Considerations for an Effective Response Strategy 

Agency-Level Responses 

1. 24 Appointing a 

local runaway 

coordinator 

)RUWLÀHV

interagency 

connections, 

ensures action 

plans are 

implemented 

...the coordinator 

has contacts at each 

DJHQF\DQGVSHFLÀF

expertise in runaway 

issues 

Building relationships and 

establishing credibility

WDNHVWLPHPD\QRWUHÁHFW

FXUUHQWVWDIÀQJSULRULWLHV

2. 25 Collaborating 

with social 

service 

agencies 

Attends to 

immediate 

safety issues as 

well as more 

complex issues 

underlying 

runaway 

behavior 

...social service 

agencies take 

responsibility for 

negotiating the return 

of juveniles’ and 

DJHQF\FRQÀGHQWLDOLW\

policies are 

compatible 

Crafting formalized 

agreements takes time; 

protocols lose their 

effectiveness if they are not 

supported by a range of 

follow-up services; differing 

treatment philosophies 

among agencies make 

FRQVHQVXVGLIÀFXOWWR

achieve; most programs 

have limited service 

capacities that may not be 

able to absorb increased 

referrals 
40 Juvenile Runaways

Response 

No. 

Page 

No. 

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

3. 25 Developing 

joint protocols 

with foster care 

providers and 

group homes 

&ODVVLÀHV

absences 

according 

to severity; 

determines 

appropriate 

threshold 

for police 

involvement; 

conserves 

police resources 

...substitute care 

providers and 

police agree on the 

appropriate priority 

level for each 

type of absence, 

inexperienced staff

DQGRIÀFHUVDUH

trained to classify 

cases accurately, and 

a risk assessment 

protocol is used 

,IDEVHQFHVDUHPLVFODVVLÀHG

as a low priority, may fail 

to protect juveniles from 

harm and may create a 

liability issue; protocols 

require consistency across a 

potentially large number of 

partners 

4. 26 Cross-training 

staff from 

multiple 

agencies 

Increases 

quality of 

interaction 

with runaways 

and families; 

...the training 

curriculum is jointly 

developed by 

representatives from 

agencies involved 

Training is not effective as a 

stand-alone strategy 

encourages 

mutual respect 

for differing 

agency 

objectives and 

mandates 

5. 27 Sharing 

information 

Improves 

ability to 

serve juveniles 

and families 

appropriately 

...agencies balance 

need for information 

with respect for

FRQÀGHQWLDOLW\

6WDIIDQGRIÀFHUVPXVWKDYH

a strategy for dealing with 

a potentially large volume 

of information; agreements 

to share information 

may deter some juveniles 

from revealing important 

information 

6. 27 Assessing risk &ODVVLÀHV

juveniles 

according to 

risk of harm 

and deploys 

limited police 

resources 

...police obtain 

interagency agreement 

on the types of cases 

to which resources 

will be dedicated 

and responding

RIÀFHUVDUHWUDLQHG

Juveniles who do not meet 

the threshold for police 

intervention may also be 

in jeopardy or may also 

threaten public safety 

accordingly in risk assessment 

procedures 
Appendix 41 

Response 

No. 

Page 

No. 

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

6SHFLÀF5HVSRQVHVWR-XYHQLOH5XQDZD\V

Before They Run 

7. 29 Providing 

prevention 

materials when 

responding to 

calls for service 

Offers 

assistance to 

families who 

are at risk of 

a runaway 

episode 

«DVXIÀFLHQWDUUD\RI

resources is available 

to support parents 

and juveniles 

Family engagement with 

services is not guaranteed; 

information does not reach 

families in need who do not 

come in contact with police 

8. 30 Using respite 

care 

Gives family 

members a 

break from 

each other so 

immediate crisis 

can be resolved 

without a 

runaway 

episode 

...professional 

counselors help 

family develop coping 

strategies to avert 

future crises and there 

is political support for 

placement alternatives 

to juvenile hall 

Respite care must have 

24-hour availability; family 

UHXQLÀFDWLRQLVQRWDOZD\V

safe or desirable 

When They Run 

9. 30 Using “Missing 

From Care” 

forms 

Improves 

quality 

of police 

investigation 

by highlighting 

relevant facts 

...the form is 

promptly submitted 

to correct police 

department 

representative 

Staff time spent completing 

may be unnecessary if 

juveniles return shortly after 

departure 

10. 31 Determining 

whether 

absences are 

voluntary or 

involuntary 

Ensures 

time-sensitive 

responses to 

abduction are 

implemented 

when necessary 

...police are 

well-trained in 

investigating missing 

persons reports 

and parents or staff 

are able to provide 

VXIÀFLHQWLQIRUPDWLRQ

about juveniles’ 

disappearances 

If absences are 

PLVFODVVLÀHGPD\IDLOWR

protect juveniles and may 

create liability issues 
42 Juvenile Runaways

Response 

No. 

Page 

No. 

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

11. 32 Diverting 

cases to a 

communitybased 

organization 

Transfers 

responsibility 

for family 

services to an 

agency better 

equipped to 

provide them; 

addresses 

...program staff are 

available 24 hours a 

day, services are free, 

and program staff 

handle all processing 

and paperwork 

6WDIÀQJKRXUSURJUDPV

FDQEHGLIÀFXOWDQG

expensive 

underlying 

causes of 

problem 

While They Are Absent From Home or Care 

12. 32 Referring 

juveniles to 

appropriate 

social service 

providers 

Transfers 

responsibility 

for juveniles 

and family 

services to an 

agency better 

equipped to 

provide them; 

addresses 

...full array of 

services is available, 

services are credible 

and easily accessible, 

DQGFRQÀGHQWLDOLW\LV

maintained 

Adequate funding for

VHUYLFHVLVGLIÀFXOWWR

ensure; police involvement 

may deter juveniles from 

using services 

underlying 

causes of 

problem 
Appendix 43 

Response 

No. 

Page 

No. 

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

13. 33 Implementing 

specialized 

patrol 

Increases 

likelihood of 

detection 

for juveniles 

involved 

in criminal 

activity; may 

deter those 

...police approach 

juveniles in nonthreatening manner 

or allow social service 

workers to take the 

lead, runaways are 

HDVLO\LGHQWLÀDEOH

and tend to cluster 

Specialized patrols consume 

police manpower that could 

be used to address more 

serious threats to public 

safety; police involvement 

may deter juveniles from 

using services 

wishing 

to exploit 

juveniles; 

provides 

opportunity to 

refer juveniles 

to services that 

in certain locations, 

DQGVXIÀFLHQW

resources are available 

to divert juveniles 

from juvenile justice 

involvement 

can address 

underlying 

problem 

14. 33 Providing safe 

locations for 

juveniles 

Removes 

juveniles from 

dangerous 

locations; 

encourages 

contact with 

services that 

...program is well 

publicized and 

service staff respond 

immediately 

Services will reach only 

juveniles who actively seek 

help, and many runaways do 

not; must include follow-up 

services with families for 

meaningful change to occur 

can address 

underlying 

problems 

15. 34 Using secure 

placement 

when 

appropriate 

Removes 

juveniles from 

dangerous 

locations or 

situations 

...the placement 

is not within the 

juvenile justice system 

and stabilization is 

achieved quickly 

so juveniles can be 

released to long-term 

Secure placements 

are expensive; overly 

broad use of secure 

FRQÀQHPHQWYLRODWHV

federal status offender 

deinstitutionalization 

mandates 

care 
44 Juvenile Runaways

Response 

No. 

Page 

No. 

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

When or If They Return 

16. 34 Using 

transportation 

aides and free 

transportation 

services 

Transports 

juveniles 

home without 

consuming 

police resources 

...services are easily 

accessible to police 

and program staff 

respond promptly 

Workload is sporadic; 

recruiting volunteers can be 

GLIÀFXOWSURFHVVWRVHFXUH

free transportation can be 

cumbersome 

17. 34 Referring 

to aftercare 

services as 

needed 

Transfers 

responsibility 

for juveniles 

and family 

services to an 

agency better 

equipped to 

provide them; 

addresses 

underlying 

causes of 

problem 

...police have range 

of referral options, 

multiple efforts are 

made to engage family 

in treatment, and both 

juveniles and parents 

have advocates 

working on their 

behalf 

Parents who are not 

particularly concerned 

about their children’s 

absence are not likely to 

engage with services 

18. 35 Interviewing 

juveniles upon 

return 

Gathers 

information 

that can be 

helpful when 

responding to 

subsequent 

runaway 

episodes; gives 

juveniles an 

opportunity to 

voice concerns 

...interviews are not 

conducted by police, 

interviewer takes 

time to establish 

rapport, juveniles are 

interviewed shortly 

after their return, and 

multiple interviewers 

are available so 

juveniles can select 

someone with whom 

they are comfortable 

Juveniles may not disclose 

relevant information; 

information revealed must 

be acted upon for process 

to remain credible 

Responses With Limited Effectiveness 

19. 37 Handling 

cases over the 

telephone 

Assumes quality 

investigation 

can be 

accomplished 

without 

personal 

contact 

Information may lack 

important details required 

for accurate risk assessment; 

suggests to parents that case 

is not being taken seriously 
Appendix 45 

Response 

No. 

Page 

No. 

Response How It Works Works Best If... Considerations 

20. 37 &RQÀQLQJ

in secure 

detention 

facilities 

Assumes all 

runaways are 

a danger to 

themselves or 

public safety 

Most juveniles are not a 

threat to themselves or 

others; secure detention 

bed space is limited and 

expensive; does not address 

underlying issues; can

LQÁDPHIDPLO\WHQVLRQV

21. 37 Forcing 

juveniles to 

return home 

Assumes 

UHXQLÀFDWLRQ

is safe and 

appropriate for 

all juveniles and 

that all parents 

will welcome 

Returning home may place 

the juveniles at further risk 

of harm; may increase the 

likelihood of subsequent 

runaway episodes 

their children 

home 

22. 38 Restricting 

privileges upon 

return 

Assumes 

juveniles will 

obey new rules 

Punitive responses can 

exacerbate the problem and 

trigger subsequent runaway 

episodes; may reinforce 

juveniles’ perception that 

parents or caretakers do 

not take concerns seriously; 

does not address underlying 

issues 

Endnotes 47 

Endnotes 

1 Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

2 Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

3 Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

4 Smeaton and Rees (2004). 

5 Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

6 Posner (2000). 

7 Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak (1990). 

8 General Accounting Office (1989). 

9 Posner (1992); Rees (2001). 

10 Kipke et al. (1997). 

11 Kaplan (2004). 

12 Wade and Biehal (1998). 

13 Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak (1990); Hammer,

Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002).

14 Wade and Biehal (1998).

15 Snyder (2001).

16 Smart (1991); Posner (1992); Collins et al. (1993);

Joe (1995); Newiss (1999); National Law Center on 

Homelessness and Poverty (2003). 

17 Posner (1992). 

18 Maxson, Little, and Klein (1988); Posner (1992). 

19 Joe (1995). 

20 Posner (1992). 

22 Posner (1992); Newiss (1999). 

22 Brennan, Huizinga, and Elliott (1978); Abrahams 

and Mungall (1992); Posner (1992); Plass and Hotaling 

(1995); Rees (2001); Slesnick (2004). 

23 Brennan, Huizinga, and Elliott (1978); Powers,

Eckenrode, and Jaklitsch (1990); Abrahams and

Mungall (1992); Posner (1992); Wade and Biehal

(1998); Posner (2000); Rees (2001); Mitchell (2003);

Slesnick (2004).

24 Abrahams and Mungall (1992); Posner (2000); Slesnick 

(2004). 
48 Juvenile Runaways 

25 Abrahams and Mungall (1992); Posner (1992); 

Schaffner (1999). 

26 Abrahams and Mungall (1992); Posner (1992); Wade 

and Biehal (1998); Riley et al. (2004); Slesnick (2004). 

27 Brennan, Huizinga, and Elliott (1978); 

Hammer et al. (2004). 

28 Posner (1992); Wade and Biehal (1998); Riley et al. 

(2004); Slesnick (2004). 

29 Rees (2001). 

30 Rees (2001); Smeaton and Rees (2004). 

31 Fasulo et al. (2002). 

32 Abrahams and Mungall (1992); Wade and Biehal 

(1998); Rees (2001); Fasulo et al. (2002); Finkelstein et 

al. (2004); and Kaplan (2004). 

33 Abrahams and Mungall (1992); Wade and 

Biehal (1998). 

34 Laycock (1977); Abrahams and Mungall (1992). 

35 Abrahams and Mungall (1992); Posner (1992); 

Kaplan (2004). 

36 Abrahams and Mungall (1992); Posner (1992); Wade 

and Biehal (1998); Gibbs and Sinclair (2000); Mitchell 

(2003); Finkelstein et al. (2004). 

37 Abrahams and Mungall (1992); Posner (1992). 

38 Posner (1992); Finkelstein et al. (2004); Kaplan (2004); 

Wade and Biehal (2004). 

39 Posner (1992); Slesnick (2004). 

40 Finkelstein et al. (2004); Kaplan (2004). 

41 Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak (1990); Hammer, 

Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

42 Schaffner (1999). 

43 Brennan, Huizinga, and Elliott (1978). 

44 Brennan, Huizinga, and Elliott (1978); Hammer, 

Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

45 Posner (1992); Biehal and Wade (2002); Hammer, 

Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 
Appendix Endnotes 49 

46 Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak (1990) 

47 Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak (1990) 

48 Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

49 Posner (1992); Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

50 Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak (2002). 

51 Brennan, Huizinga, and Elliott (1978); Finkelstein et 

al. (2004). 

52 Brennan, Huizinga, and Elliott (1978); Kipke et al. 

(1997); Flowers (2001); Safyer et al. (2004). 

53 Van Leeuwen et al. (2004). 

54 Mayers (2001); Safyer et al. (2004). 

55 Smart (1991); Kipke et al. (1997); Wade and 

Biehal (1998). 

56 Posner (2000); Mayers (2001); Office of Applied 

Studies (2004); Van Leeuwen et al. (2004). 

57 Posner (2000); Mayers (2001); Van Leeuwen 

et al. (2004). 

58 Collins et al. (1989); Posner (2000); Slesnick (2004). 

59 Collins et al. (1989); Booth, Zhang, and Kwiatkowski 

(1999); Flowers (2001); Mayers (2001); 

Slesnick, (2004). 

60 Mayers (2001). 

61 Posner (2000). 

62 Brennan, Huizinga, and Elliott (1978). 

63 Safyer et al. (2004). 

64 Safyer et al. (2004). 

65 Safyer et al. (2004). 

66 Kaplan (2004). 

67 Kaplan (2004); Newiss (1999). 

68 Wade and Biehal (1998). 

69 Unger et al. (1998). 

70 Rees (2001); Quraishi, Segal, and Trone (2002); Great 

Britain, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2002). 

71 Quraishi, Segal, and Trone (2002). 

72 Southwark Social Services, Children’s Division (2004). 
50 Juvenile Runaways 

73 National Center for Missing and Exploited 

Children (2005). 

74 Riley et al. (2004). 

75 Caputo, Weiler and Kelly (1994); O’Conner and 

MacDonald (1999); Kurtz et al. (2000). 

76 Posner (1994). 

77 Posner (1994). 

78 National Center for Missing and Exploited 

Children (2000). 

79 Rees (2001). 

80 Great Britain Cabinet Office, Social Exclusion Unit 

(2001); Biehal and Wade (2002); Great Britain, Office 

of the Deputy Prime Minister (2002); Smeaton and Rees 

(2004); Kaplan (2004). 

81 Finck and Hughes (1997). 

82 Yates et al. (1991); Safe on the Streets Research 

Team (1999). 

83 Finkelhor, Hotaling, and Sedlak (1990). 

84 Wade and Biehal (1998); Finklestein et al. (2004). 
References 51 

References 

Abrahams, C., and R. Mungall (1992). Runaways: Exploding 

the Myths. London: National Children’s Home. 

Biehal, N., and J. Wade (2002). Children Who Go Missing; 

Research, Policy and Practice. London: Department of 

Health. 

Booth, R., Y. Zhang and C. Kwiatkowski (1999). “The 

Challenge of Changing Drug and Sex Risk Behaviors 

of Runaway and Homeless Adolescents.” Child Abuse 

and Neglect 23(12):1295-1306. 

Brennan, T., D. Huizinga and D. Elliott (1978). The Social 

Psychology of Runaways. Lexington (Massachusetts): 

Lexington Books. 

Caputo, T., R. Weiler and K. Kelly (1994). Phase II of 

the Runaways and Street Youth Project: The Saskatoon 

Case Study. Final Report. User Report: Responding to 

Violence in Society, No. 1994-12. Ottawa (Ontario): 

Solicitor General of Canada, Policing Division. 

Collins, J., L. Powers, M. McCalla, C. Ringwalt and R. 

Lucas (1993). Law Enforcement Policies and Practices 

Regarding Missing Children and Homeless Youth: Research 

Summary. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention. 

Collins, J., M. McCalla, L. Powers and E. Stutts (1989). 

The Police and Missing Children: Findings from a National 

Survey. Research Triangle Park (North Carolina): 

Research Triangle Institute. 
52 Juvenile Runaways 

Elique, J. (1984). “The Juvenile Runaway Phenomenon: A 

Law Enforcement Agency’s Unique Approach.” FBI 

Law Enforcement Bulletin 53(2):1-6. 

Fasulo, S., T. Cross, P. Mosley and J. Leavey (2002). 

“Adolescent Runaway Behavior in Specialized Foster 

Care.” Children and Youth Services Review 24(8):623-640. 

Finck, J., and D. Hughes (1997). “Re-running a Failed 

Program: The Use of Sanctions to Solve Family 

Problems.” In: M. Forst (ed.), The Police and the 

Homeless: Creating a Partnership Between Law Enforcement 

and Social Service Agencies in the Development of Effective 

Policies. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas. 

Finkelhor, D., G., Hotaling and A. Sedlak (1990). Missing, 

Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children in America – 

First Report: Numbers and Characteristics National Incidence 

Studies. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 

Finkelstein, M., M. Wamsley, D. Currie and D. Miranda 

(2004). Youth Who Chronically AWOL From Foster Care: 

Why They Run, Where They Go, and What Can Be Done. 

New York: Vera Institute of Justice. 

Florida Department of Children & Families (2002). 

Operation SafeKids: Results, Findings & Recommendations. 

Tallahassee: Department of Children & Families. 

Flowers, R. (2001). Runaway Kids and Teenage Prostitution: 

America’s Lost, Abandoned, and Sexually Exploited 

Children. Westport (Connecticut): Greenwood Press. 
References 53 

Fresno Police Department (1996). “Group Homes: A 

Multiagency Approach to a Citywide Problem.” 

Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award for 

Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. 

General Accounting Office (1989). Homelessness: Homeless 

and Runaway Youth Receiving Services and Federally Funded 

Shelters. Washington, D.C.: General Accounting Office. 

Gibbs, I., and I. Sinclair (2000). “Bullying, Sexual 

Harassment and Happiness in Residential Children’s 

Homes.” Child Abuse Review 9(4):247-256. 

Great Britain. Cabinet Office. Social Exclusion Unit 

(2001). Consultation on Young Runaways: Background Paper. 

London: Great Britain Cabinet Office. 

Great Britain. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 

(2002). Young Runaways: Report by the Social Exclusion 

Unit. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. 

Hammer, H., D. Finkelhor, A. Sedlak, and L. Porcellini 

(2004). National Estimates of Missing Children: Selected 

Trends 1988-1999. NISMART: National Incidence 

Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and 

Thrownaway Children. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 

Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and 

Delinquency Prevention. 

Hammer, H., D. Finkelhor and A. Sedlak (2002). 

Runaway/Thrownaway Children: National Estimates and 

Characteristics. NISMART: National Incidence Studies 

of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway 

Children. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention. 
54 Juvenile Runaways 

Joe, K. (1995). “The Dynamics of Running Away, 

Deinstitutionalization Policies and the Police.” Juvenile 

and Family Court Journal 46(3):43-55. 

Kaplan, C. (2004). Children Missing from Care: An Issue Brief. 

Washington, D.C.: Child Welfare League of America. 

Kipke, M., T. Simon, S. Montgomery, J. Unger and E. 

Iverson (1997). “Homeless Youth and Their Exposure 

to and Involvement in Violence While Living on the 

Streets.” Journal of Adolescent Health 20(5):360-367. 

Kurtz, P., E. Lindsey, S. Jarvis and L. Nackerud (2000). 

“How Runaway and Homeless Youth Navigate 

Troubled Waters: The Role of Formal and Informal 

Helpers.” Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal 

17(5):381-402. 

Laycock, G. (1977). Absconding from Borstals. London: Her 

Majesty’s Stationery Office. 

Maxson, C., M. Little and M. Klein (1988). “Police 

Response to Runaway and Missing Children: A 

Conceptual Framework for Research and Policy.” 

Crime & Delinquency 34(1):84-102. 

Mayers, M. (2001). Street Kids & Streetscapes: Panhandling, 

Politics, & Prophecies. New York: Peter Lang. 

Mitchell, F. (2003). “‘Can I Come Home?’ The 

Experiences of Young Runaways Contacting the 

Message Home Helpline.” Child and Family Social Work 

8(1):3-11. 
References 55 

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children 

(2005). Law Enforcement Policies and Procedures for Reports 

of Missing and Abducted Children: A Model. Arlington 

(Virginia): National Center for Missing and 

Exploited Children. 

——— (2004). Just In Case: Guidelines in Case Your Child 

Might Someday Be a Runaway. Arlington (Virginia): 

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. 

——— (2000). Missing and Abducted Children: A Law 

Enforcement Guide to Case Investigation and Program 

Management. Arlington (Virginia): National Center for 

Missing and Exploited Children. 

National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty 

(2003). Alone Without a Home: A State-by-State Guide to 

Laws Affecting Unaccompanied Youth. Washington, D.C.: 

National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. 

New York State Missing and Exploited Children 

Clearinghouse (2001). Runaway Children. Albany: 

New York State Missing and Exploited Children 

Clearinghouse. 

Newiss, G. (1999). Missing Presumed...? The Police Response 

to Missing Persons. Police Research Series Paper 114. 

London: Home Office. 

O’Conner, B., and B. MacDonald (1999). “A YouthFriendly Intervention for Homeless and StreetInvolved Youth.” Reclaiming Children and Youth 

8(2):102-106. 
56 Juvenile Runaways 

Office of Applied Studies (2004). Substance Abuse Among 

Youth Who Had Run Away From Home. The National 

Survey on Drug Use and Health. Rockville (Maryland): 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration. 

Plass, P. and G. Hotaling (1995). “The Intergenerational 

Transmission of Running Away: Childhood 

Experiences of the Parents of Runaways.” Journal of 

Youth and Adolescence 24(3):335-348. 

Port Authority Youth Services Unit (2004). Youth Services 

Unit Annual Report, 2004. New York: The Port 

Authority of New York and New Jersey. 

Posner, M. (2000). “Hungry Hearts: Runaway and 

Homeless Youth in the United States.” In R. 

Mickelson (Ed.), Children on the Streets of the Americas: 

Homelessness, Education and Globalization in the United 

States, Brazil and Cuba. New York: Routledge. 

——— (1994). Working Together for Youth: A Guide to 

Collaboration Between Law Enforcement Agencies and 

Programs That Serve Runaway and Homeless Youth. 

Norman (Oklahoma): University of Oklahoma, 

National Resource Center for Youth Services. 

——— (1992). The Runaway Risk Reduction Project 

Assessment Report. Newton (Massachusetts): Education 

Development Center. 

Powers, J., J. Eckenrode and B. Jaklitsch (1990). 

“Maltreatment Among Runaway and Homeless 

Youth.” Child Abuse & Neglect 14(1):87-98. 
References 57 

Quraishi, F., H. Segal and J. Trone (2002). Respite Care: A 

Promising Response to Status Offenders at Risk of CourtOrdered Placements. New York: Vera Institute of Justice. 

Rees, G. (2001). Working With Young Runaways: Learning 

From Practice. London: The Children’s Society. 

Riley, D., G. Greif, D. Caplan and H. MacAulay (2004). 

“Common Themes and Treatment Approaches in 

Working with Families of Runaway Youths.” American 

Journal of Family Therapy 32(2):139-153. 

Robertson, J. (1992). “Homeless and Runaway Youths: A 

Review of the Literature.” In M.J. Robertson and M. 

Greenblatt (Eds.), Homelessness: A National Perspective. 

New York: Plenum Press. 

Safe on the Streets Research Team (1999). Still Running: 

Children on the Streets in the UK. London: The 

Children’s Society. 

Safyer, A., S. Thompson, E. Maccio, K. Zittel-Palamara, 

and G. Forehand (2004). “Adolescents’ and Parents’ 

Perceptions of Runaway Behavior: Problems and 

Solutions.” Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal 

21(5):495-512. 

Schaffner, L. (1999). Teenage Runaways: Broken Hearts and 

“Bad Attitudes.” New York: Hawthorn Press. 

Simons, A., and J. Willie (2000). “Runaway or Abduction? 

Assessment Tools for the First Responder.” FBI Law 

Enforcement Bulletin 69(11):1-7. 
58 Juvenile Runaways 

Slesnick, N. (2004). Our Runaway and Homeless Youth: A 

Guide to Understanding. Westport (Connecticut): Praeger. 

Smart, D. (1991). “Homeless Youth in Seattle.” Journal of 

Adolescent Health 12:519-527. 

Smeaton, E., and G. Rees (2004). Running Away in South 

Yorkshire: Research into the Incidence and Nature of the 

Problem in Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley and Doncaster. 

Sheffield, U.K.: Safe at Last. 

Snyder, H. (2001). Law Enforcement and Juvenile Crime. 

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: National Report 

Series Bulletin. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department 

of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention. 

Southwark Social Services, Children’s Division (2004). 

Absent Children Procedure. Southwark, U.K.: Southwark 

Social Services. 

Steidel, S. (2000). Missing and Abducted Children: A LawEnforcement Guide to Case Investigation and Program 

Management. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 

Prevention. 

Takas, M. and D. Bass (1996). Using Agency Records to 

Find Missing Children: A Guide for Law Enforcement. 

Washington, D.C.: 1996. 
References 59 

Unger, J., T. Simon, T. Newman, S. Montgomery, M. 

Kipke and M. Albornoz (1998). “Early Adolescent 

Street Youth: An Overlooked Population With 

Unique Problems and Service Needs.” Journal of Early 

Adolescence 18(4):325-348. 

Van Leeuwen, J., C. Hopfer, S. Hooks, R. White, J. 

Petersen and J. Pirkopf (2004). “A Snapshot of 

Substance Abuse Among Homeless and Runaway 

Youth in Denver, Colorado.” Journal of Community 

Health 29(3):217-230. 

Wade, J., and N. Biehal (1998). Going Missing: Young People 

Absent from Care. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley. 

Yates, G., J. Pennbridge, A. Swofford and R. MacKenzie 

(1991). “The Los Angeles System of Care for 

Runaway/Homeless Youth.” Journal of Adolescent Health 

12:555-560. 

About the Author 61 

About the Author 

Kelly Dedel 

Kelly Dedel is the director of One in 37 Research, Inc., a criminal 

justice consulting firm based in Portland, Oregon. As a consultant 

to federal, state, and local agencies, she contributes to research on 

the juvenile and criminal justice systems by 1) developing written 

tools to enhance practice or inform public policy; 2) conducting 

investigations of confinement conditions in juvenile correctional 

facilities; and 3) undertaking rigorous evaluations of various juvenile 

and criminal justice programs to assess their effectiveness. She has 

provided evaluation-related technical assistance to more than 60 

jurisdictions nationwide for the Bureau of Justice Assistance. In 

this capacity, she has worked with a broad range of criminal justice 

programs implemented by police, prosecutors, public defenders, 

juvenile detention and confinement facilities, local jails, community 

corrections, and prisons. She consults with the Justice Department as 

a monitor/investigator of civil rights violations in juvenile correctional 

facilities, most often in the areas of education and protection from 

harm. Among her other research interests are prisoner reentry, 

risk assessment and offender classification, and juveniles in adult 

correctional facilities. Before working as a consultant, she was a 

founder and senior research scientist at The Institute on Crime, 

Justice, and Corrections at The George Washington University, and 

a senior research associate at the National Council on Crime and 

Delinquency. Dedel received bachelor’s degrees in psychology and 

criminal justice from the University of Richmond, and a doctorate 

in clinical psychology from the Center for Psychological Studies, in 

Berkeley, California. 

Recommended Readings 63 

Recommended Readings 

• A Police Guide to Surveying Citizens and Their 

Environments, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1993. This 

guide offers a practical introduction for police practitioners 

to two types of surveys that police find useful: surveying 

public opinion and surveying the physical environment. It 

provides guidance on whether and how to conduct costeffective surveys. 

• Assessing Responses to Problems: An 

Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers, 

by John E. Eck (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 

Community Oriented Policing Services, 2001). This guide 

is a companion to the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series. 

It provides basic guidance to measuring and assessing 

problem-oriented policing efforts. 

• Conducting Community Surveys, by Deborah Weisel 

(Bureau of Justice Statistics and Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services, 1999). This guide, along with 

accompanying computer software, provides practical, basic 

pointers for police in conducting community surveys. The 

document is also available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs. 

• Crime Prevention Studies, edited by Ronald V. Clarke 

(Criminal Justice Press, 1993, et seq.). This is a series of 

volumes of applied and theoretical research on reducing 

opportunities for crime. Many chapters are evaluations of 

initiatives to reduce specific crime and disorder problems. 
64 Juvenile Runaways 

• Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing: The 

1999 Herman Goldstein Award Winners. This 

document produced by the National Institute of Justice 

in collaboration with the Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services and the Police Executive Research Forum 

provides detailed reports of the best submissions to the 

annual award program that recognizes exemplary problemoriented responses to various community problems. A 

similar publication is available for the award winners from 

subsequent years. The documents are also available at 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij.

• Not Rocket Science? Problem-Solving and Crime 

Reduction, by Tim Read and Nick Tilley (Home Office 

Crime Reduction Research Series, 2000). Identifies and 

describes the factors that make problem-solving effective 

or ineffective as it is being practiced in police forces in 

England and Wales. 

• Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical Theory 

for Crime Prevention, by Marcus Felson and Ronald V. 

Clarke (Home Office Police Research Series, Paper No. 98, 

1998). Explains how crime theories such as routine activity 

theory, rational choice theory and crime pattern theory 

have practical implications for the police in their efforts to 

prevent crime. 

• Problem Analysis in Policing, by Rachel Boba (Police 

Foundation, 2003). Introduces and defines problem 

analysis and provides guidance on how problem analysis 

can be integrated and institutionalized into modern 

policing practices. 
Recommended Readings Appendix 65

• Problem-Oriented Policing, by Herman Goldstein 

(McGraw-Hill, 1990, and Temple University Press, 1990). 

Explains the principles and methods of problem-oriented 

policing, provides examples of it in practice, and discusses 

how a police agency can implement the concept. 

• Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime Prevention, 

by Anthony A. Braga (Criminal Justice Press, 2003). 

Provides a thorough review of significant policing research 

about problem places, high-activity offenders, and repeat 

victims, with a focus on the applicability of those findings 

to problem-oriented policing. Explains how police 

departments can facilitate problem-oriented policing by 

improving crime analysis, measuring performance, and 

securing productive partnerships. 

• Problem-Oriented Policing: Reflections on the 

First 20 Years, by Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of 

Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 

2000). Describes how the most critical elements of 

Herman Goldstein's problem-oriented policing model have 

developed in practice over its 20-year history, and proposes 

future directions for problem-oriented policing. The report 

is also available at www.cops.usdoj.gov. 

• Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in 

Newport News, by John E. Eck and William Spelman 

(Police Executive Research Forum, 1987). Explains the 

rationale behind problem-oriented policing and the 

problem-solving process, and provides examples of 

effective problem-solving in one agency. 
66 Juvenile Runaways 

• Problem-Solving Tips: A Guide to Reducing 

Crime and Disorder Through Problem-Solving 

Partnerships by Karin Schmerler, Matt Perkins, Scott 

Phillips, Tammy Rinehart and Meg Townsend. (U.S. 

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 1998) (also available at www.cops.usdoj. 

gov). Provides a brief introduction to problem-solving, 

basic information on the SARA model and detailed 

suggestions about the problem-solving process. 

• Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case 

Studies, Second Edition, edited by Ronald V. Clarke 

(Harrow and Heston, 1997). Explains the principles and 

methods of situational crime prevention, and presents over 

20 case studies of effective crime prevention initiatives. 

• Tackling Crime and Other Public-Safety Problems: 

Case Studies in Problem-Solving, by Rana Sampson 

and Michael S. Scott (U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 

Community Oriented Policing Services, 2000) (also available 

at www.cops.usdoj.gov). Presents case studies of effective 

police problem-solving on 18 types of crime and disorder 

problems. 

• Using Analysis for Problem-Solving: A Guidebook 

for Law Enforcement, by Timothy S. Bynum (U.S. 

Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 2001). Provides an introduction for 

police to analyzing problems within the context of 

problem-oriented policing. 

• Using Research: A Primer for Law Enforcement 

Managers, Second Edition, by John E. Eck and Nancy G. 

LaVigne (Police Executive Research Forum, 1994). Explains 

many of the basics of research as it applies to police 

management and problem-solving. 
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 67 

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides series: 

1. Assaults in and Around Bars. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-00-2 

2. Street Prostitution. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-01-0 

3. Speeding in Residential Areas. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-02-9 

4. Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes. 

Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-03-7 

5. False Burglar Alarms. Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-04-5 

6. Disorderly Youth in Public Places. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-05-3 

7. Loud Car Stereos. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-06-1 

8. Robbery at Automated Teller Machines. Michael S. Scott. 2001. 

ISBN: 1-932582-07-X 

9. Graffiti. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-08-8 

10. Thefts of and From Cars in Parking Facilities. Ronald V. 

Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-09-6 

11. Shoplifting. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-10-X 

12. Bullying in Schools. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-11-8 

13. Panhandling. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-12-6 

14. Rave Parties. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-13-4 

15. Burglary of Retail Establishments. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-14-2 

16. Clandestine Drug Labs. Michael S. Scott. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-15-0 

17. Acquaintance Rape of College Students. Rana Sampson. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-16-9 

18. Burglary of Single-Family Houses. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 

2002. ISBN: 1-932582-17-7 

19. Misuse and Abuse of 911. Rana Sampson. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-18-5 
68 Juvenile Runaways 

20. Financial Crimes Against the Elderly. 

Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-22-3 

21. Check and Card Fraud. Graeme R. Newman. 2003. 

ISBN: 1-932582-27-4 

22. Stalking. The National Center for Victims of Crime. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-30-4 

23. Gun Violence Among Serious Young Offenders. Anthony A. 

Braga. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-31-2 

24. Prescription Fraud. Julie Wartell and Nancy G. La Vigne. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-33-9 

25. Identity Theft. Graeme R. Newman. 2004 ISBN: 1-932582-35-3 

26. Crimes Against Tourists. Ronald W. Glesnor and Kenneth J. Peak. 

2004 ISBN: 1-932582-36-3 

27. Underage Drinking. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2004 ISBN: 1-932582-39-8 

28. Street Racing. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-42-8 

29. Cruising. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-43-6 

30. Disorder at Budget Motels. Karin Schmerler. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-41-X 

31. Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets. Alex Harocopos and Mike 

Hough. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-45-2 

32. Bomb Threats in Schools. Graeme R. Newman. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-46-0 

33. Illicit Sexual Activity in Public Places. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-47-9 

34. Robbery of Taxi Drivers. Martha J. Smith. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-932582-50-9 

35. School Vandalism and Break-Ins. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. 

ISBN: 1-9325802-51-7 

36. Drunk Driving. Michael S. Scott, Nina J. Emerson, Louis B. 

Antonacci, and Joel B. Plant. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-57-6 

-XYHQLOH5XQDZD\VKelly Dedel. 2006 ISBN: 1932582-56-8 
Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 69 

Response Guides series: 

• The Benefits and Consequences of Police 

Crackdowns. 

Michael S. Scott. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-24-X 

• Closing Streets and Alleys to Reduce Crime: Should 

You Go Down This Road? Ronald V. Clarke. 2004. 

ISBN: 1-932582-41-X 

• Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety 

Problems. Michael S. Scott and Herman Goldstein. 

2005. ISBN: 1-932582-55-X 

Problem-Solving Tools series: 

• Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory 

Guide for Police Problem-Solvers. John E. Eck. 2002. 

ISBN: 1-932582-19-3 

• Researching a Problem. Ronald V. Clarke and Phyllis A. 

Schultz. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-48-7 

• Using Offender Interviews to Inform Police Problem 

Solving. Scott H. Decker. 2005. ISBN: 1932582-49-5 

• Analyzing Repeat Victimization. Deborah Lamm 

Weisel. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-54-1 

Upcoming Problem-Oriented Guides for Police 

Problem-Specific Guides 

Domestic Violence 

Mentally Ill Persons 

Student Party Disturbances on College Campuses 

Bank Robbery 

Witness Intimidation 

Drive-by Shootings 
70 Juvenile Runaways 

The Exploitation of Trafficked Women 

Problem with Day Laborer Sites 

Child Pornography on the Internet 

Crowd Control at Stadiums and Other Entertainment Venues 

Traffic Congestion Around Schools 

Theft from Construction Sites of Single Family Houses 

Robbery of Convenience Stores 

Theft from Cars on Streets 

Problem-Solving Tools 

Partnering with Businesses to Address Public Safety Problems 

Risky Facilities 

Implementing Responses to Problems 

Designing a Problem Analysis System 

Response Guides 

Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns 

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design 

Video Surveillance of Public Places 

For more information about the Problem-Oriented Guides for 

Police series and other COPS Office publications, please call 

the Department of Justice Response Center at 800.421.6770 

or visit COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov. 



FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 

1100 Vermont Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20530 

To obtain details on COPS programs, call the 

COPS Office Response Center at 800.421.6770 

Visit COPS Online at the address listed below. 

: 

j 

e12051223

: 1-932582-56-8 

 Updated Date February 2006 

ISBN

www.cops.usdo .gov