What Works and What Doesnt in Reducing Recidivism: The Principles of Effective Intervention

1
What Works and What Doesnt in Reducing
Recidivism The Principles of Effective
Intervention

• Presented by
• Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D.
• Center for Criminal Justice Research
• Division of Criminal Justice
• University of Cincinnati
• www.uc.edu/criminaljustice

2
How To Digest This Information

• Think in terms of own agency
• Think in terms of outside agencies/vendors
• Think in terms of a system perspective

3
Evidence Based What does it mean?

• There are different forms of evidence
• The lowest form is anecdotal evidence, but it
  makes us feel good
• The highest form is empirical evidence results
  from controlled studies, but it doesnt make us
  feel good

4
Evidence Based Practice is

• Easier to think of as Evidence Based Decision
  Making
• 2. Involves several steps and encourages the use
  of validated tools and treatments.
• 3. Not just about the tools you have but also how
  you use them

5
Evidence Based Decision Making Requires

• Assessment information
• Relevant research
• Available programming
• Evaluation
• Professionalism and knowledge from staff

6
Another important concept is risk

• Risk Refers to risk of reoffending. Recidivism
  rates are compared over a standard and specified
  follow-up period.

7
What does the Research tell us?

• There is often a Misapplication of Research
  XXX Study Says
• - the problem is if you believe every study we
  wouldnt eat anything (but we would drink a lot
  of red wine!)
• Looking at one study can be a mistake
• Need to examine a body of research
• So, what does the body of knowledge about
  correctional interventions tell us?

8
FROM THE EARLIEST REVIEWS

• Not a single reviewer of studies of the effects
  of official punishment alone (custody, mandatory
  arrests, increased surveillance, etc.) has found
  consistent evidence of reduced recidivism.
• At least 40 and up to 60 of the studies of
  correctional treatment services reported reduced
  recidivism rates relative to various comparison
  conditions, in every published review.

9
Criminal Sanctions versus Treatment
Mean Phi
Reduced Recidivism
0.15
Increased Recidivism
-0.07
Treatment .15 (Number of Studies124)
CS -.07 (Number of Studies30)
10
People Who Appear to be Resistant to Punishment

• Psychopathic risk takers
• Those under the influence of a substance
• Those with a history of being punished

11
Most researchers who study correctional
interventions have concluded

• Without some form of human intervention or
  services there is unlikely to be much effect on
  recidivism from punishment alone
• The evidence also indicates that while treatment
  is more effective in reducing recidivism than
  punishment Not all treatment programs are
  equally effective

12
Behavioral vs. NonBehavioral
Reduced Recidivism
Increased Recidivism
Andrews, D.A. 1994. An Overview of Treatment
Effectiveness. Research and Clinical Principles,
Department of Psychology, Carleton University.
The N refers to the number of studies.
13
Meta-Analysis of Treatment for Femalesby Dowden
and Andrews
Dowden, C., and D. Andrews (1999). What Works
for Female Offenders A Meta-Analytic Review.
Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 45 No. 4.
14
Another important body of knowledge to understand
is the research on risk factors

• What are the risk factors correlated with
  criminal conduct?

15
Factors Correlated With Risk
Mean r of studies Lower class
origins 0.06 97 Personal distress/psychopath
ology 0.08 226 Educational/Vocational
achievement 0.12 129 Parental/Family
Factors 0.18 334 Temperament/misconduct/pers
onality 0.21 621 Antisocial
attitudes/associates 0.22 168
Note A re-analysis of Gendreau, Andrews, Goggin
Chanteloupe (1992) by Andrews Bonta (1994)
16
Meta-Analysis of Risk Factors by Simourd Mean
Adjusted r
Risk Factor Adjusted R
Studies Lower social class .05 38 Personal
distress/psychopathy .07 34 Family
structure/parental problems .07 28 Minor
personality variables .12 18 Poor
parent-child relations .20 82 Personal
educational/vocational achievement .28 68 Temper
ament/misconduct/self control .38 90 Antisocial
attitudes/associates .48 106
Source Simourd, L. (1993) Correlates of
Delinquency A Look at Gender Differences. Forum
on Correctional Research. 626-31
17
Correlates of Criminal Conduct and Gender by
Simourd and Andrews
Factor Male Female Lower class
origins .04(58) .03(12) Personal
distress/psychopathology .09(157)
.08(19) Personal education/vocational
achievement .11(96) .13(7) Parental/family
factors .16(180) .16(43) Temperament/miscondu
ct/personality .18(461) .23(38) Antisocial
attitudes/associates .21(113) .23(12)
Simourd, L., and D.A. Andrews, 1994. Correlates
of Delinquency A Look at Gender Differences.
Forum on Corrections Research, Vol. 6 26-31
18
Simourd and AndrewsMean Adjusted r by Gender
Risk Factor Females Males Lower social
class .07 .06 Personal
Distress/psychopathy .10 .09 Family
structure/parental problems .07
.09 Minor personality variables .18
.22 Poor parent-child relations .20
.22 Personal educational/vocational achievement
.24 .23 Temperament or misconduct
problems .35 .36 Antisocial
attitudes/peers .39 .40
Source Simourd, L., and D.A. Andrews (1994)
Correlates of Delinquency A Look at Gender
Differences. Forum on Correctional Research.
626-31
19

• Research by Andrews, Gendreau and others has led
  to the identification of some major risk/need
  factors

20
Major Set of Risk/Need Factors

• Antisocial/prociminal attitudes, values, beliefs
  and cognitive-emotional states

21
Cognitive Emotional States

• Rage
• Anger
• Defiance
• Criminal Identity

22
Identifying Procriminal Attitudes, Values
Beliefs
Procriminal sentiments are what people think, not
how people think they comprise the content of
thought, not the skills of thinking.

• What to listen for
• Negative expression about the law
• Negative expression about conventional
  institutions, values, rules, procedures
  including authority
• Negative expressions about self-management of
  behavior including problem solving ability
• Negative attitudes toward self and ones ability
  to achieve through conventional means
• Lack of empathy and sensitivity toward others

23
Neutralization Minimizations
Offenders often neutralize their behavior.
Neutralizations are a set of verbalizations which
function to say that in particular situations, it
is OK to violate the law

• Neutralization Techniques include
• Denial of Responsibility Criminal acts are due
  to factors beyond the control of the individual,
  thus, the individual is guilt free to act.
• Denial of Injury Admits responsibility for the
  act, but minimizes the extent of harm or denies
  any harm
• Denial of the Victim Reverses the role of
  offender victim blames the victim
• System Bashing Those who disapprove of the
  offenders acts are defined as immoral,
  hypocritical, or criminal themselves.
• Appeal to Higher Loyalties Live by a different
  code the demands of larger society are
  sacrificed for the demands of more immediate
  loyalties.
• (Sykes and Maltz, 1957)

24
Major set Risk/needs continued

• 2. Procriminal associates and isolation from
  prosocial others

25
Reducing Negative Peer Associations

• Restrict associates
• Set and enforce curfews
• Ban hangouts, etc.
• Teach offender to recognize avoid negative
  influences (people, places, things)
• Practice new skills (like being assertive instead
  of passive)
• Teach how to maintain relationships w/o getting
  into trouble
• Identify or develop positive associations
  mentors, family, friends, teachers, employer,
  etc.
• Train family and friends to assist offender
• Set goal of one new friend (positive association)
  per month
• Develop sober/prosocial leisure activities

26
Major set Risk/Needs continued

• 3. Temperamental anti social personality
  pattern conducive to criminal activity including
• Weak Socialization
• Impulsivity
• Adventurous
• Pleasure seeking
• Restless Aggressive
• Egocentrism
• Below Average Verbal intelligence
• A Taste For Risk
• Weak Problem-Solving/lack of Coping
  Self-Regulation Skills

27
Major set of Risk/Need factors continued

• A history of antisocial behavior
• Evident from a young age
• In a variety of settings
• Involving a number and variety of different acts

28
Major set of Risk/Needs Continued

• 5. Family factors that include criminality and a
  variety of psychological problems in the family
  of origin including
• Low levels of affection, caring and cohesiveness
• Poor parental supervision and discipline
  practices
• Out right neglect and abuse

29
Major set of Risk/Needs continued

• 6. Low levels of personal educational, vocational
  or financial achievement

30
Leisure and/or recreation

• 7. Low levels of involvement in prosocial
  leisure activities

31
Substance Abuse

• 8. Abuse of alcohol and/or drugs

32
Recent study of parole violators in Pennsylvania
found a number of criminogenic factors related to
failure

• Conducted by Pennsylvania Dept. of Corrections

33
Pennsylvania Parole StudySocial Network and
Living Arrangements Violators Were

• More likely to hang around with individuals with
  criminal backgrounds
• Less likely to live with a spouse
• Less likely to be in a stable supportive
  relationship
• Less likely to identify someone in their life who
  served in a mentoring capacity

34
Pennsylvania Parole Study Employment Financial
Situation Violators were

• Slightly more likely to report having difficulty
  getting a job
• Less likely to have job stability
• Less likely to be satisfied with employment
• Less likely to take low end jobs and work up
• More likely to have negative attitudes toward
  employment unrealistic job expectations
• Less likely to have a bank account
• More likely to report that they were barely
  making it (yet success group reported over
  double median debt)

35
Pennsylvania Parole Study Alcohol or Drug Use
Violators were

• More likely to report use of alcohol or drugs
  while on parole (but no difference in prior
  assessment of dependency problem)
• Poor management of stress was a primary
  contributing factor to relapse

36
Pennsylvania Parole StudyLife on
ParoleViolators were

• Had unrealistic expectations about what life
  would be like outside of prison
• Had poor problem solving or coping skills
• Did not anticipate long term consequences of
  behavior
• Failed to utilize resources to help them
• Acted impulsively to immediate situations
• Felt they were not in control
• More likely to maintain anti-social attitudes
• Viewed violations as an acceptable option to
  situation
• Maintained general lack of empathy
• Shifted blame or denied responsibility

37
Pennsylvania Parole Violator Study

• Successes and failures did not differ in
  difficulty in finding a place to live after
  release
• Successes failures equally likely to report
  eventually obtaining a job

38
Major Risk and/or Need Factor and Promising
Intermediate Targets for Reduced Recidivism

• Factor Risk Dynamic Need
• History of Antisocial Early continued Build
  noncriminal
• Behavior involvement in a number alternative
  behaviors
• antisocial acts in risky situations
• Antisocial personality Adventurous,
  pleasure Build problem-solving, self-
• seeking, weak self management, anger mgt
• control, restlessly aggressive coping skills
• Antisocial cognition Attitudes, values,
  beliefs Reduce antisocial cognition,
• rationalizations recognize risky thinking
  
• supportive of crime, feelings, build up
  alternative
• cognitive emotional states less risky
  thinking feelings
• of anger, resentment, Adopt a reform and/or
  
• defiance anticriminal identity
• Antisocial associates Close association
  with Reduce association w/
• criminals relative isolation criminals,
  enhance

Adopted from Andrews, D.A. et al, (2006). The
Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need
Assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52 (1).
39
Major Risk and/or Need Factor and Promising
Intermediate Targets for Reduced Recidivism

• Factor Risk Dynamic Need
• Family and/or marital Two key elements are Reduce
  conflict, build
• nurturance and/or caring positive
  relationships, better monitoring
  and/or communication, enhance
• supervision monitoring supervision
• School and/or work Low levels of
  performance Enhance performance,
• satisfaction rewards, satisfaction
• Leisure and/or recreation Low levels of
  involvement Enhancement involvement
• satisfaction in anti- satisfaction in
  prosocial
• criminal leisure activities activities
• Substance Abuse Abuse of alcohol and/or Reduce
  SA, reduce the
• drugs personal interpersonal
• supports for SA behavior,
• enhance alternatives to SA

Adopted from Andrews, D.A. et al, (2006). The
Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need
Assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52 (1).
40
This research has led to the identification of
some principles
41
Principles of Effective Intervention

• Risk Principle target higher risk offenders
  (WHO)
• Need Principle target criminogenic risk/need
  factors (WHAT)
• Treatment Principle use behavioral approaches
  (HOW)
• Fidelity Principle implement program as
  designed (HOW WELL)

42
Risk Principle

• Target those offender with higher probability of
  recidivism
• Provide most intensive treatment to higher risk
  offenders
• Intensive treatment for lower risk offender can
  increase recidivism

43
Results from a Recent Study of Treatment Dosage
in a Prison Setting

• 620 Incarcerated Males
• Three variations in Cognitive Behavioral
  Treatment
• 100 hours
• 200 hours
• 300 hours
• Comprehensive assessments were conducted and
  offenders assigned based on risk level and needs
• Recidivism defined as incarceration (either a new
  conviction or revocation) one year follow-up.
• Dosage of treatment appeared to be an important
  factor

Bourgon, G, and B. Armstrong (2006). Transferring
the Principles of Effective Treatment into a
Real World Setting. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 32 (1) 3-25.
44
Dosage Continued

• Reductions in recidivism increased between 1.2
  to 1.7 for each additional 20 hours of treatment
• For Moderate risk offenders with few needs, 100
  hours was sufficient to reduce recidivism
• A 100 hour program had no effect on high risk
  offenders
• For offenders deemed appropriate (i.e. either
  high risk or multiple needs, but not both), 200
  hours were required to significantly reduce
  recidivism
• If the offender is high risk has multiple needs
  it may require in excess of 300 hours of
  treatment to affect recidivism

45
The Risk Principle Correctional Intervention
Results from Meta Analysis
Reduced Recidivism
Increased Recidivism
Dowden Andrews, 1999
46
Recent Study of Intensive Rehabilitation
Supervision in Canada
Bonta, J et al., 2000. A Quasi-Experimental
Evaluation of an Intensive Rehabilitation
Supervision Program., Vol. 27 No 3312-329.
Criminal Justice and Behavior
47
RECENT STUDY OF COMMUNITY CORRECTIONAL PROGRAMS
IN OHIO

• Largest study of community based correctional
  treatment facilities ever done
• Total of 13,221 offenders 37 Halfway Houses and
  15 Community Based Correctional Facilities
  (CBCFs) were included in the study.
• Two-year follow-up conducted on all offenders
• Recidivism measures included new arrests
  incarceration in a state penal institution
• We also examined program characteristics

48
Experimental Groups

• 3,737 offenders released from prison in FY 99 and
  placed in one of 37 Halfway Houses in Ohio
• 3,629 offenders direct sentenced to one of 15
  CBCFs
• Control Group
• 5,855 offenders released from prison onto parole
  supervision during the same time period
• Offenders were matched based on offense level
  county of sentence

49
Determination of Risk

• Each offender was given a risk score based on 14
  items that predicted outcome.
• This allowed us to compare low risk offenders who
  were placed in a program to low risk offenders
  that were not, high risk to high risk, and so
  forth.

50
Reduced Recidivism
Increased Recidivism
51
(No Transcript)
52
(No Transcript)
53
(No Transcript)
54
Need PrincipleBy assessing and targeting
criminogenic needs for change, agencies can
reduce the probability of recidivism

• Criminogenic
• Anti social attitudes
• Anti social friends
• Substance abuse
• Lack of empathy
• Impulsive behavior

• Non-Criminogenic
• Anxiety
• Low self esteem
• Creative abilities
• Medical needs
• Physical conditioning

55
Targeting Criminogenic Need Results from
Meta-Analyses
Reduction in Recidivism
Increase in Recidivism
Source Gendreau, P., French, S.A., and A.Taylor
(2002). What Works (What Doesnt Work) Revised
2002. Invited Submission to the International
Community Corrections Association Monograph
Series Project
56
Assessment is the engine that drives effective
correctional programs

• Need to meet the risk and need principle

57
Why is it Important?

• Helps you meet the risk principle
• Tells you who needs the most intervention
• Helps prevent iatrogenic effects
• Helps you meet the need principle
• Tells you what criminogenic needs to target
• Helps guide decision making
• Helps reduces bias
• Improves placement of offenders
• Helps better utilize resources
• Helps you know if offender has improved
• Can lead to enhanced PUBLIC SAFETY

58
Classification Assessment of Offenders

• Primary measures have been identified
• Best predictors of criminal behavior
• Static factors past criminal behavior
• Dynamic factors crime producing needs
• Best assessment method is the actuarial
  (statistical) approach
• Best practices allow for risk management and risk
  reduction through effective treatment
• Latest generation of instruments allow for
  measurement of change in offender

59
Comparison of Clinical vs. Statistical Prediction
of Recidivism
60
Statewide LSI-R Adult Offender Data for Community
Corrections
61
Some Common Problems with Offender Assessment

• Assess offenders but process ignores important
  factors
• Assess offenders but dont distinguish levels
  (high, moderate, low)
• Assess offenders then dont use it everyone
  gets the same treatment
• Make errors and dont correct
• Dont assess offenders at all
• Do not adequately train staff in use or
  interpretation
• Assessment instruments are not validated or normed

62
Treatment Principle

• The most effective interventions are behavioral
• Focus on current factors that influence behavior
  
• Action oriented
• Offender behavior is appropriately reinforced

63
Most Effective Behavioral Models

• Structured social learning where new skills and
  behaviors are modeled
• Cognitive behavioral approaches that target
  criminogenic risk factors
• Family based approaches that train family on
  appropriate techniques

64
Social Learning Refers to several processes
through which individuals acquire attitudes,
behavior, or knowledge from the persons around
them. Both modeling and instrumental
conditioning appear to play a role in such
learning
65
Effectiveness of Family Based Intervention
Results from Meta Analysis

• 38 primary studies with 53 effect tests
• Treatment Group Recidivism 39.5
• Control Group Recidivism 60.5
• ES .21
• However, much variability was present
• (-0.17 - 0.83)
• Dowden Andrews, 2003

66
Mean Effect Sizes Whether or not the family
intervention adheres to the principles
67
The Four Principles of Cognitive Intervention

• Thinking affects behavior
• Antisocial, distorted, unproductive irrational
  thinking causes antisocial and unproductive
  behavior
• Thinking can be influenced
• We can change how we feel and behave by changing
  what we think

68
Reasons that CBT can be Effective in Reducing
Recidivism

• Based on scientific evidence (cognitive
  behavioral theories)
• Based on active learning (not talk therapy)
• Focus on the present (how offenders currently
  think and behave)
• Based on learning (most crime is learned)
• Target major criminogenic needs (e.g. attitudes,
  values, beliefs)
• Provides structure to groups and programs
  (manualized treatment)

69
Reasons that CBT is Popular in Corrections

• Can be done in any setting
• Existing staff can be trained on CBT
• Relatively cheap to deliver
• Wide range of curriculums are available

70
Recent Meta-Analysis of Cognitive Behavioral
Treatment for Offenders by Landenberger Lipsey
(2005)

• Reviewed 58 studies
• 19 random samples
• 23 matched samples
• 16 convenience samples
• Found that on average CBT reduced recidivism by
  25, but the most effective configurations found
  more than 50 reductions

71
Factors Not significant

• Type of research design
• Setting - prison (generally closer to end of
  sentence) versus community
• Juvenile versus adult
• Minorities or females
• Brand name

72
Significant Findings (effects were stronger if)

• Sessions per week (2 or more)
• Implementation monitored
• Staff trained on CBT
• Higher proportion of treatment completers
• Higher risk offenders
• Higher if CBT is combined with other services

73
Effects based on Cognitive targets

• Cognitive restructuring
• Anger control
• Individual attention in addition to group
  sessions
• Landenberger, N, and M. Lispey (2005). The
  Positive Effects of Cognitive Behavioral Programs
  for Offenders A Meta Analysis of Factors
  Associated with Effective Treatment. Journal of
  Experimental Criminology.

74
Evaluation of Thinking for a ChangeLowenkamp and
Latessa (2006)

• Tippecanoe County Indiana
• Probation T4C vs. Probation
• 136 Treatment cases
• 97 Comparison cases
• Variable follow up (range 6 to 64 months average
  26)
• Outcomearrest for new criminal behavior

75
Multivariate Model

• Controlled for
• Risk (prior arrests, prior prison, prior
  community supervision violations, history of drug
  use, history of alcohol problems, highest grade
  completed, employment status at arrest)
• Age
• Sex
• Race
• Time at risk or length of follow up time

76
Results

• Conducted two multivariate models
• Compared all T4C participants to comparison group
• Compared only successful terminations from T4C to
  comparison group
• Significant in recidivism rates (defined as any
  new criminal arrest) between treatment and
  comparison group

77
Adjusted Recidivism Rates Comparing T4C
Participants to Comparison Group
78
Some Examples of Cognitive Behavioral
Correctional Curriculums

• Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage It (CALM
  and CALMER)
• Aggression Replacement Therapy (ART)
• Criminal Conduct and Substance Abuse Treatment
  (adult adolescent version)
• Thinking for a Change (T4C)
• Choices, Changes Challenges

• Persistently Violent Curriculum
• Corrective Thinking/Truthought
• Reasoning and Rehabilitation
• Moral Reconation Therapy
• Drug Abuse Treatment Program (FBOP)
• Moving On (Female Offenders)

79
Recent Study of Non-Residential Community
Correctional Programs in Ohio involving over
13,000 Offenders

• Included both misdemeanants and felons under
  community supervision
• Programs included day reporting centers, work
  release, ISP, and electronic monitoring programs

80
FOUR FACTORS WERE SIGNIFCICANTLY RELATED TO
OUTCOME

• Proportion of higher risk offenders in program
  (at least 75 of offenders in programs were
  moderate or high risk)
• Level of supervision for higher risk offenders
  (high risk offenders averaged longer periods of
  supervision than low risk)
• More treatment for higher risk offenders (at
  least 50 more time spent in treatment)
• More referrals for services for higher risk
  offenders (at least 3 referrals for every 1
  received by low risk)

81
Changes in Recidivism by Program Factors for
Probation Programs
Reductions in Recidivism
Increased Recidivism
82
Change in Recidivism by 4 Point Factor Score for
Probation Programs
Reduced Recidivism
Increased Recidivism
83
Reducing Prison Jail Misconducts

• Findings from a 2006 meta analysis of 68 studies
  involving 21,467 offenders
• Outcomes included violent misconduct, nonviolent
  misconduct, and institutional adjustment
• Sample included 73 male, 8 female 19 coed.
• Included both adult and juvenile samples

84
(No Transcript)
85
(No Transcript)
86
(No Transcript)
87
(No Transcript)
88
(No Transcript)
89
Core Components of Relapse Prevention

• Offense Chain teaches offender to recognize
  offense cycle or cues (triggers)
• Relapse rehearsal to develop skills
• Advanced rehearsal increases difficulty
• Identify high risk situations how to deal with
  them
• Teaches how to deal with failure situations
  constructively
• Self-efficacy instills feelings of
  self-confidence
• Coping Skills are developed
• External support systems are trained in model so
  offender is properly reinforced
• Aftercare focusing on supplementing program
  material

Laws, D. R. (1999) Relapse Prevention The State
of the Art. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
1285-302.
90
(No Transcript)
91
(No Transcript)
92
(No Transcript)
93
(No Transcript)
94
(No Transcript)
95
Cognitive Behavioral Approaches Based on Social
Learning Theory
Cognitive Restructuring (What we think content)
Cognitive Skills Development (How we think
process)
Behavioral Strategies (Reinforcement and modeling
prosocial behavior
96
Treatment should be Behavioral in Nature

• Use rewards and punishers effectively
• Train, practice, rehearse offenders in prosocial
  alternatives
• Completion criteria should be based on
  acquisition of prosocial skills

97
These approaches help us.

• Structure our interventions
• Teach and model new skills
• Allow offenders to practice with graduated
  difficulty
• Reinforce the behavior

98
(No Transcript)
99
Community Based versus Institutional Programs
Results from Meta-Analyses of Programs Based on
Principles of Effective Treatment
Reduction in Recidivism
Source Gendreau, P., French, S.A., and A.
Taylor (2002). What Works (What Doesnt Work)
Revised 2002. Invited Submission to the
International Community Corrections Association
Monograph Series Project.
100
What Doesnt Work with Offenders?
101
Lakota tribal wisdom says that when you discover
you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is
to dismount. However, in corrections, and in
other affairs, we often try other strategies,
including the following

• Buy a stronger whip.
• Change riders
• Say things like This is the way we always have
  ridden this horse.
• Appoint a committee to study the horse.
• Arrange to visit other sites to see how they ride
  dead horses.
• Create a training session to increase our riding
  ability.
• Harness several dead horses together for
  increased speed.
• Declare that No horse is too dead to beat.
• Provide additional funding to increase the
  horses performance.
• Declare the horse is better, faster, and
  cheaper dead.
• Study alternative uses for dead horses.
• Promote the dead horse to a supervisory position.

102
Ineffective Approaches

• Drug prevention classes focused on fear and other
  emotional appeals
• Shaming offenders
• Drug education programs
• Non-directive, client centered approaches
• Bibliotherapy
• Freudian approaches
• Talking cures
• Self-Help programs
• Vague unstructured rehabilitation programs
• Medical model
• Fostering self-regard (self-esteem)
• Punishing smarter (boot camps, scared straight,
  etc.)

103
Fidelity Principle

• Make sure evidence based programs are implemented
  as designed

104
Effective programs evaluate what they do

• Quality assurance processes (both internal and
  external)
• Assess offenders in meeting target behaviors
• Track offender recidivism
• Have an evaluator working with the program

105
(No Transcript)
106
(No Transcript)
107
(No Transcript)
108
Program Integrity and Recidivism

• Every major study we have done has found a strong
  relationship between program integrity and
  recidivism
• Higher integrity score greater the reductions
  in recidivism

109
Program IntegrityRelationship Between Program
Integrity Score And Treatment Effect for
Community Supervision Programs
Reduced Recidivism
Increased Recidivism
110
Program IntegrityRelationship Between Program
Integrity Score And Treatment Effect for
Residential Programs
Reduced Recidivism
Increased Recidivism
70
31-59
60-69
0-30
111
Impact of Program Factors Predicting Felony
Adjudication for Juvenile Programs
112
Lessons Learned from the Research

• Who you put in a program is important pay
  attention to risk
• What you target is important pay attention to
  criminogenic needs
• How you target offender for change is important
  use behavioral approaches

113
Important Considerations

• Offender assessment is the engine that drives
  effective programs
• helps you know who what to target
• Design programs around empirical research
• helps you know how to target offenders
• Program Integrity make a difference
• Service delivery, disruption of criminal
  networks, training/supervision of staff,
  support for program, QA, evaluation