New Staff Orientation Reducing Recidivism Through Evidence-based Practices

What works in reducing or changing criminal behavior?

Let’s Look at History 1970s – “Nothing Works” 1980s – Deterrence and punishment 1990s – Meta-analysis “What Works” - Incapacitation with Treatment 2000s – Evidence-based practices

Best Practices, What Works, Evidence-based Practices What is the difference?

Best Practices Based on collective, individual experience Not necessarily based on scientifically tested knowledge Does not imply attention to outcomes, evidence, or measurable standards; often based on word of mouth evidence

What Works Points to general outcomes High risk offenders Cognitive-behavioral approach Criminogenic needs Meta-analytic Review Analysis of large number of studies

Cognitive-behavioral Approach Help the offender to change the attitudes and thinking patterns that contribute to criminal behavior Replace with pro-social and non- criminal thinking and behavior

Evidence-based Practices Getting at a specific result Cognitive-behavioral treatment is effective in reducing recidivism with high risk offenders. Coercive treatment works in reducing substance abuse Is measurable

Over 20 years of research has clearly demonstrated that correctional treatment programs can significantly reduce recidivism The most effective programs meet certain empirically derived principles

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)

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

Higher Risk versus Lower Risk Offenders: Results from Meta-Analyses of Behavioral Programs Source: Gendreau, P., French, S.A. and A. Taylor (2002). What Works (What Doesn’t Work) Revised Invited submission to the International Community Corrections Association Monograph Series Project.

Recent Study of Intensive Rehabilitation Supervision in Canada Bonta, J et al., A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation of an Intensive Rehabilitation Supervision Program., Vol. 27 No 3: Criminal Justice and Behavior

Need Principle By 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

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 Doesn’t Work) Revised Invited Submission to the International Community Corrections Association Monograph Series Project

Criminogenic Need Factors that contribute to criminal behavior: Dysfunctional family relationships Anti-social peers Anti-social attitudes, values and beliefs that support crime (e.g. non-conforming, anti-authority, hostility) Substance abuse Low self control

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

Behavioral vs. NonBehavioral Reduced Recidivism Increased Recidivism Andrews, D.A An Overview of Treatment Effectiveness. Research and Clinical Principles, Department of Psychology, Carleton University. The N refers to the number of studies.

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

Non-Behavioral 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.)

What Doesn’t Work (Not Research Supported) Targeting low risk offenders Targeting non-criminogenic needs Punishment sanctions only Shock incarceration/probation Insight-oriented psychotherapy Home detention with electronic monitoring only Encounter type program models Challenge/self-discipline programs Routine probation supervision practices

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

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

Determination of Risk Each offender was given a risk score based on 14 items that predicted outcome. Compared low risk offenders who were placed in a program to low risk offenders that were not, high risk to high risk, and so forth.

What did they find with regard to the Risk Principle?

HWH by Geographic Setting by Incarceration for Low Risk Offenders

HWH by Geographic Setting by Incarceration for High Risk Offenders

Recidivism by Risk Category and Group for Sex Offenders (n=390) Recidivism = incarcerated in a penal institution. Ohio ½ and CBCF study

Recidivism Rates for Parole Violators Ohio ½ and CBCF study

National Institute of Corrections Implementing Evidence-based Principles in Community Corrections Evidence-Based Principles Organizational Development Collaboration

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs Enhance Offender Motivation Target Interventions Address Cognitive-Behavioral Functioning Provide Positive Reinforcement Provide Ongoing Support Measure Outcomes Provide Quality Assurance

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs

Assess Offender Risk & Need What predicts criminal behavior? Anti social attitudes Anti-social peers Substance abuse Low self-control Anti-social attitudes and values (Gendreau 1992 & 1997, Andrews & Bonta, 1998, Harland, 1996, Sherman, 1998, McGuirre, , Elliot, 2001, Lipton, 2000)

Assess Offender Risk & Need How do we measure these predictors? Risk Instruments – Offender Screening Tool (OST) Field Re-assessment of the Offender Screening Tool (FROST) Modified Offender Screening Tool (M-OST) Stable & Static 99 SARA & DVSI Need Instruments – Adult Substance Use Survey (ASUS)

Assess Offender Risk & Need How should we use these results? Provides information to develop offender case plan Establishes supervision level Identifies targeted needs for intervention Provides baseline and measure of change in offender

Assess Risk & Needs Officer Responsibilities Review assessments with offender Incorporate into case plan Re-assess and measure change

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs Enhance Offender Motivation

For lasting change to occur, there needs to be a level of intrinsic motivation Research strongly suggest that motivational interviewing effectively enhances motivation for initiating and maintaining change behavior. (Miller & Rollnick, 2002; et. al.)

Enhance Offender Motivation Officer Responsibilities: Use evidence-based verbal and non-verbal communication skills: Attending, reflections, summarizations, open- ended questions, etc. Explore offender’s attitude toward change Avoid non-productive arguing and blaming Encourage praise, be optimistic

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs Enhance Offender Motivation Target Interventions

Risk Principle: Prioritize supervision and treatment resources for high risk offenders Need principle: Target intervention to criminogenic needs Treatment Principle: Behavioral approach Responsivity Principle Match treatment type to offender Matching treatment provider to offender Matching style and methods of communication with offender’s stage of change readiness

Target Interventions Dosage Evidence shows that high risk offenders initially need 40% to 70% of their time in the community occupied over a three to nine month period Incomplete dosage can have a negative effect and waste resources

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. Overall, the treatment group received an average of 150 hours of treatment, which reduced recidivism 10% Dosage of treatment however, appears to be an important factor:

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 For High risk offenders with multiple needs, longer programs are required to significantly 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), it appears that 200 hours are 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

Target Interventions Treatment Principles: Proactive and strategic case planning Treatment, particularly cognitive-behavioral should be applied Targeted, timely treatment provides the greatest long-term benefit Does not necessarily apply to lower risk offenders and can have detrimental effects (Andrews & Bonta, 1998, Petersilia, 1997 & 2002, Taxman & Byrne, 2001)

Officer Responsibilities Based on risk & needs assessment, make appropriate referrals to address needs (Responsivity) Set appropriate limits and provide clear direction to the offender Know the treatment dosage of your referral. (Dosage)

Lessons Learned  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

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs Enhance Offender Motivation Target Interventions Address Cognitive-Behavioral Functioning

Address Cognitive-behavioral Functioning Cognitive treatment addresses deviant thinking patterns Behavioral modification programs are designed to shape and maintain appropriate behavior until they become habit Consistently found to be an effective rehabilitative strategy

Address Cognitive-behavioral Functioning Officer Responsibilities Understand anti-social thinking and appropriate communication techniques Positively reinforce pro-social attitudes and behaviors Make appropriate referrals using evidence- based information

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

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

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

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs Enhance Offender Motivation Target Interventions Address Cognitive-Behavioral Functioning Provide Positive Reinforcement

Research shows that people tend to comply in the direction of most rewards and least punishments Research indicates a ratio of four positive to every one negative reinforcement is optimal for promoting behavior change. Increasing positive reinforcement should not be done if it undermines swift, certain, and real responses for negative and unacceptable behavior

Officer responsibilities: Convey optimism that the offender can change Encourage and praise any evidence of pro- social behavior Reinforce offender change talk and self- efficacy Provide Positive Reinforcement

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs Enhance Offender Motivation Target Interventions Address Cognitive-Behavioral Functioning Provide Positive Reinforcement Provide Ongoing Support

Research indicates that successful interventions include the use of family members, spouses, and supportive others in the offenders environment to positively reinforce desired new behaviors Relapse prevention training should be part of treatment and supervision plan

Provide Ongoing Support Officer Responsibilities: Officers need to learn and apply relapse prevention techniques Identify and establish relationships with offender’s positive support systems in the community Recognize triggers for relapse and make timely intervention

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs Enhance Offender Motivation Target Interventions Address Cognitive-Behavioral Functioning Provide Positive Reinforcement Provide Ongoing Support Measure Outcomes

Documentation of case information and measuring outcomes is the foundation for evidence-based practices Measuring outcomes identifies whether your evidence-based practices are effective and achieving the desired results Critical component of the County’s business principles known as Managing For Results (MFR) MFR integrates planning, budgeting, and performance measurement

Measure Outcomes Officer Responsibilities: Maintain case documentation, written and automated Complete risk/needs assessment at least every six months, assess offender change and modify case plan accordingly Compile accurate statistical information Use outcome measures and statistical information to manage caseloads

Eight Evidence-Based Principles for Effective Interventions Assess Offender Risk and Needs Enhance Offender Motivation Target Interventions Address Cognitive-Behavioral Functioning Provide Positive Reinforcement Provide Ongoing Support Measure Outcomes Provide Quality Assurance

Continuous process of feedback and analysis that ensures organization is effectively using evidence-based practices Performance measurement Staff development & training Hiring practices Performance evaluation Policies & procedures Etc.

Maricopa County’s Quality Assurance System MANAGING FOR RESULTS Planning for results Budgeting for results Reporting results Evaluating results Decision making

Key Results Standard probationers not committed to DOC IPS probationers not committed to DOC Successful completion of probation Successful completion of pretrial release Presentence reports without a continuance

“Budgets can no longer support programs and supervision practices that have not proven to be effective.” Thomas White

Your role in providing Quality Assurance Understand and apply evidence- based principles Attend training Ask for feedback and supervision/coaching Follow policies and procedures Become familiar with evidence-based practices literature Practice, Practice, Practice