Minister for Children Karen Chhour described it as an important and worthwhile pilot which has given the young people involved a chance to turn their lives around.
But it is too early to tell if that has worked, given the year-long pilot only ended in July.
The positive aspects highlighted by Oranga Tamariki include that two thirds of the participants reduced the frequency or seriousness of their offending, violent offences dropped by two thirds and 59% showed overall improvement.
This was triple the rate of a matched comparison group which did not attend the pilot boot camp.
But the extent of the offending was such seven of the nine participants ended up back in youth residences "for a time", according to Oranga Tamariki.
In all, 11 teenagers from youth justice residences aged between 15 and 17 took part in all or part of the MSA pilot, including one who died in a car crash, and one who left early.
They were "volunteers" for the programme, since there is no law in place compelling such attendance.
At the end of last week, two of the programme participants were in Corrections facilities, one in a youth justice residence, and six were in the community. Only two of those in the community had not reoffended.
In the course of the programme, participants were required to spend three months in what was often referred to as a boot camp, followed by nine months in the community supported by whanau and mentors.
The 82-page report shows the rushed implementation of the programme and the small number of participants limited the value of the findings.
It is worth remembering how the programme came about.
It was a National Party policy aired in 2022. We described it at the time as smacking of the party scrabbling around in a lucky-dip drawer of odd-sock old policies to find something relevant to the Hamilton West by-election.
The message the party wanted the public to hear was that youth was running amok and it was all Labour’s fault for being weak on crime.
National had come up with a similar policy in the 2017 election, ignoring the fact its shorter boot camp programme in 2010 resulted in little impact on recidivism.
It did not matter to National, or its coalition partners Act New Zealand or New Zealand First, that evidence world-wide does not support boot camps.
The MSA fitted the narrative about being tough on crime, and they insisted this would be different.
Any good which has come out of the programme, seems to have little to do with the military camp aspect to it, something critics could have told the government before it embarked on this multi-million dollar project.
If the programme had not been rushed, perhaps it could have been more effective, but that would not have suited the dubious politics of the situation.
It is not good enough to excuse the considerable shortcomings of this pilot merely because it is a pilot.
The report highlighted how difficult it was for staff working within the programme, with social work staff not adequately prepared for their roles supporting the young people in the community.
Therapeutic support in the community was patchy and, in the residential phase, lack of staffing meant planned individual interventions could not be delivered.
Support for whanau began too late for significant change to be made before the young people returned home.
The pilot has not been a triumph, but it could provide some guidance on how more could be achieved in the community setting.
It remains to be seen whether the government has the wisdom to work out how best to do that, rather than cynically proceed with its Oranga Tamariki (Responding to Serious Youth Offending) Amendment Bill giving judges the power to make a young serious offender declaration and refer that person to an MSA. The Bill is awaiting its second reading.
With another election next year, we are not holding our breath.
