A mixed methods study analyzed initial and reevaluation reports of 73 youths deemed incompetent to stand trial to understand how community interventions affect their functional abilities. The subjects, predominantly male and aged 9-19, underwent structured quantitative chart reviews alongside qualitative coding. Upon reevaluation, 51 youths were still considered incompetent, while 22 were found competent. No significant age differences were noted between those who remained incompetent and those who improved. Higher IQ scores were linked to better outcomes in understanding, appreciation, decision-making, and assisting legal counsel. Thematic analysis revealed that stable living situations and family dynamics positively influenced the remediation of competence. Additionally, school performance and mental health at the time of evaluation might indicate competency levels and reveal skill deficits. The findings underscore the complexities surrounding juvenile adjudicative competence and suggest that interventions aimed at stabilizing home, school, and family environments could be beneficial, especially when targeted remediation options are limited.