Abstract Since the 1960s, research on crime, delinquency, and justice has achieved important milestones regarding program evaluation. The field has made significant strides in identifying and cataloging evidence-based programs, practices, and policies for juvenile and criminal justice. These efforts have helped refine our definition of “evidence-based programs.” Tracing the distinctive role that Federal science agencies have played in determining what works and in advancing evidence-based approaches to crime and justice, we highlight key milestones, distinctive features, and the changing landscape of justice research over the past half-century. We extend our examination of current efforts to discern future directions for evaluation and evidence work in our field. Our review of a half-century of justice evaluation to build evidence-based approaches in juvenile and criminal justice reveals an evolution in our field’s commitment to rigor, our standards of evidence, and our notions of “what works.” Our review suggests important directions for the future including the importance of program context, the trade-offs between implementation fidelity and experimentation, and the added value of supporting programs with decision-making tools and platforms. We close with some insights into how current approaches to evaluation may further evolve and grow, especially in the areas of implementation, program adaptation, and support for local capacity. The payoff is a deeper understanding of the potential and the limitations of evaluation evidence to determine what works and what doesn’t.

中文翻译：

---

推进司法领域的“行之有效”：联邦司法研究机构的过去，现在和将来的工作

摘要自1960年代以来，犯罪，犯罪和正义方面的研究已成为程序评估的重要里程碑。该领域在确定和分类基于证据的少年和刑事司法方案，实践和政策方面取得了长足的进步。这些努力有助于完善我们对“基于证据的计划”的定义。追溯联邦科学机构在确定有效方法和推进基于证据的犯罪与司法方法中所发挥的独特作用，我们着重介绍了过去半个世纪中的重要里程碑，独特特征以及司法研究的不断变化。我们扩展了对当前工作的检查，以识别该领域中评估和证据工作的未来方向。我们对半个世纪的司法评估进行了回顾，以建立基于证据的少年犯罪和刑事司法方法，这揭示了我们领域对严谨性的承诺，证据标准以及“行之有效”的观念的演变。我们的审查提出了未来的重要方向，包括计划背景的重要性，实施保真度和试验之间的权衡以及通过决策工具和平台支持计划的附加值。我们以一些洞察力结束了当前评估方法如何进一步发展和发展的见解，尤其是在实施，计划调整和对地方能力的支持方面。回报是对评估证据的潜力和局限性有更深入的了解，以确定什么有效，哪些无效。