Applying a Socio-Ecological Framework to Thematic Analysis Using a Statewide Assessment of Disproportionate Minority Contact in the United States

In both a historical and contemporary context, ethnic minority youth have been overrepresented in the United States juvenile justice system (Piquero, 2008). Disproportionate minority contact (DMC) refers to the inequitable number of minority youth who encounter the juvenile justice continuum, to include their arrest, adjudication, and sentencing (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention [OJJDP], 2012). As states grapple with redressing policies and practices to reduce DMC, this disproportion remains a significant social problem in the United States. To support DMC reduction efforts, the OJJDP provided funding to numerous states to conduct statewide assessments of DMC. This paper demonstrates the use of socio-ecological systems theory in thematic analysis to identify mechanisms contributing to DMC in a statewide assessment project in North Carolina, USA. We apply socio-ecological systems theory to illustrate the dynamic interplay between micro- and macro-level factors contributing to DMC and discuss implications for the reduction of inequalities in the juvenile justice system. We embed this analysis in the values and principles of our disciplines and our roles as agents for social action. We articulate the intersection between social issues and theoretical and methodological considerations by providing an overview of the DMC project and socio-ecological systems theory. We then discuss a collaborative transdisciplinary research approach to characterize and summarize the insights of research participants centered on DMC reduction. We conclude with a description of the analytical process, strategies, and discuss implications for qualitative research framed in social justice issues. Overview of the DMC Research Project DMC occurs when the presence of ethnic minority (e.g., African American, Hispanic, Native American) youth in the juvenile justice continuum is higher than that of White youth. DMC is determined across multiple decision points in the juvenile justice continuum, to include arrests, court referrals, diversion, and detention (OJJDP, 2012). The U.S. federal government, through the OJJDP, has targeted disparities using policy initiatives spanning more than 40 years. The reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDP Act) in 2002 allotted federal support for research, training, evidence-based programs, and information dissemination regarding DMC. In response, North Carolina supported several committees in various regions in the state to focus on DMC reduction efforts. As part of an ongoing effort to meet OJJDP (federal) requirements, the North Carolina Governor's Crime Commission provided funding for an outside agency to lead a statewide assessment of factors contributing to DMC and recommendations for DMC reduction. A multidisciplinary research team from the Center for Community Safety in North Carolina was awarded the project to investigate the prevalence of ethnic disparities across the juvenile continuum and mechanisms contributing to DMC, using a multiple-methods research design. As part of the larger research project, qualitative and quantitative data were gathered from various locations across North Carolina. The multiple-methods design investigated two research questions: (a) What are the mechanisms contributing to DMC? and (b) At which decision point is DMC most significant? DMC continues to be a widely studied social problem, utilizing an abundance of theoretical models and both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. The initial disparities leading to DMC begin at the moment youth have contact with the juvenile justice system. Previous research demonstrates that disproportionate minority representation is not limited to secure detention and confinement (Short & Sharpe, 2005). Rather, disproportionality is evident at nearly all contact points on the juvenile justice system continuum (approved, diversion, closed cases, adjudication, dismissed cases, disposition, and probation). …