Timing and Predictors of Non-Sexual Recidivism Among Youth Adjudicated for Sexual Offenses In Alabama

Significance and Background. Youth adjudicated for sexual offenses represent a distinct subgroup within the juvenile justice system and often receive specialized treatment and supervision. Prior research has largely focused on sexual reoffending, yet less is known about broader patterns of recidivism following release from custody. Evidence suggests that youth adjudicated for sexual offenses are more likely to reoffend with non-sexual delinquent behaviors than with new sexual offenses. Using administrative data, this study examines the timing and predictors of recidivism among youth who participated in the Alabama Bureau of Sex Offender Programs (ABSOP) following discharge from the juvenile justice system.

Methods. De-identified youth data were obtained from the Alabama Department of Youth Services (DYS) and the Administrative Office of Courts. The study included youth who participated in the ABSOP following adjudication for sexual offenses and were released from DYS custody in 2014 (n = 55), 2015 (n = 48), 2016 (n = 51), or 2018 (n = 52). The combined sample across cohorts consisted of 206 male youth aged 13 to 20 at release, representing 51 of Alabama’s 67 counties. Binary recidivism was defined as adjudication for a new non-sexual criminal offense (yes/no), with cumulative incidence assessed at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months post-discharge. Predictors included demographic, contextual, and criminogenic factors. Discrete-time survival analysis models, including logistic and complementary log-log models, were estimated using Stata version 15.1.

Results. Most youth were White (63.1%), from urban counties (56.3%), and had been charged with violent offenses (81.6%), while only a small proportion committed a technical violation (8.3%). They were approximately 17 years old at release and had spent about one year in custody before returning to the community. Over the three-year follow-up period, approximately 30% of youth were adjudicated for a new non-sexual offense. Model-based estimates indicated that the risk of reoffending was highest during the first six months after release, decreased during the subsequent six months, and showed modest variation across later intervals, including a slight increase during the second year and a decline during the third year. Discrete-time survival models indicated that age at release was the only significant predictor of recidivism. Each additional year of age was associated with lower odds of reoffending (OR = .68, p < .001). Findings were consistent across complementary log-log models (HR = .70, p < .001).

Implications. The results indicate that recidivism risk varies over time rather than steadily declining after release. Interventions may therefore need to address both the early reentry period and later stages of supervision when recidivism events may still occur. In addition, older youth were significantly less likely to recidivate, suggesting that younger youth may require more targeted supervision and support during reentry. From a practice perspective, reentry planning should prioritize the early months following release while maintaining continued monitoring during later stages of supervision. From a policy perspective, juvenile justice systems may benefit from investing in sustained reentry services and age-responsive interventions that provide additional support for younger youth.