1. Better Results, Stronger Communities
PATHFINDER
Better Results, Stronger Communities

2. Agenda for Working Group 2
1pm Introduction and Chair going forward (Chair)
1-15pm Working Group/Workshop proposals (Greg Claridge)
1-30pm Short-term wins (agency members)
2pm Presentation and Discussion: Overview of an Outcomes Framework (Leon Bakker)
2-55pm Next Steps/Wrap-up (Chair)

3. Working Groups and Workshops
Proposed Format and Participation of
Working Group:
Formal presentations - primary focus: outcomes in management decision-making
Approving project work plans and processes
Approving material for SG, and Learning Points
Attended by WG rep only (for discussion)

4. Working Groups and Workshops
Proposed Format and Participation of
Workshop:
Presentations and discussions - primary focus: to support STWs and develop learning points.
Identification of best practice, learnings
Issues identification
Management processes
Open to agency specialists
Summary of WS learning points

5. Working Groups and Workshops

6. Working Groups and Workshops
Proposed Learning Points Document:
Table of Contents:
Section 1
Generic short-term wins
Agency short-term wins?
Section 2
Purpose of each STW
Statement of attributes
Management and other issues
Key elements of process
Worked examples

7. Working Groups and Workshops
Communication:
Website:
Security/passwords
Launched next week
Discussion

8. Agenda for Working Group 2
1pm Introduction and Chair going forward (Chair)
1-15pm Working Group/Workshop proposals (Greg Claridge)
1-30pm Short-term wins (agency members)
2pm Presentation and Discussion: Overview of an Outcomes Framework (Leon Bakker)
2-55pm Next Steps/Wrap-up (Chair)

9. Short-Term Wins – Long-term Gains
Define & measure ‘mission critical’ outcomes (using ‘state’ or ‘situation’ outcome indicators)
Map causal logic linking outcomes to outputs
Assess impact of interventions / targeting
Assess cost-effectiveness (vs. outcomes achieved)
Managing to maximise outcomes (e.g. core/pilots)
Benchmarking with outcomes (business units / nations)
Focus strategic / annual plans on improving o/c
Redesign planning & operations to maximise o/c (incl. feedback & continuous improvement)

11. Agenda for Working Group 2
1pm Introduction and Chair going forward (Chair)
1-15pm Working Group/Workshop proposals (Greg Claridge)
1-30pm Short-term wins (agency members)
2pm Presentation and Discussion: Overview of an Outcomes Framework (Leon Bakker)
2-55pm Next Steps/Wrap-up (Chair)

12. Recidivism Why chose recidivism when
other outcomes such as cost-effectiveness or escapes exist?
Priority based on outcomes to the public
Large literature that had used various recidivism measures
Previous use within the Department in PS with baserate study and outcome studies (Reconviction Study
Available data source in EDS helped shape the measure chosen.
Had conducted research on risk prediction that resulted in recidivism predicters

13. CE Impetus When Corrections was spun off CE was
provided a brief which argued the importance
of a coherent strategy based on impacting on
recidivism as the purpose for the Department
PS Director provided a strategy based on the synergy available in the department if all Services worked together. Examples of previous successes when this occurred. Also Canadians were engaged in putting together an Integrated Structure that acted as a good model

14. Types of Recidivism Measure
Variety of possible choices
Offending
Arrest
Conviction (all – excludes diversion etc)
Convictions leading to imprisonment
Convictions that lead to Corrections supervised sentences
Different measures that need to be considered. What constitutes recidivism

15. Dimensions of Recidivism Index (RI)
Reconviction based on a single event
Time to Reconviction = 12 and 24 months
Seriousness = reconviction to a department managed sentence and imprisonment
For offences committed post release
Aggregated into services, age, ethnic, gender, offence and sentence length groups

16. Types of Recidivism
Once a definition has been developed operationalising it is also needed
Frequency of reconviction (Used in RI)
Seriousness of reconviction (Used in proxy)
Rate of reconviction (Not used)
Time to reconviction (Used in 12 and 24 months)
From when? Release date, sentence commencement? Over what time? For who?

17. Purpose of the Measure What do we use it for?
Benchmarking with other jurisdictions – means that we have to have a similar measure or a simple conversion (RI currently. Possibly RQ later)
Identify peaks, troughs and trends
Benchmarking is all well and good but different countries have different laws and sentences. Issues of comparing apples with apples
We assume that the justice system remains stable. However, this is not the case and we need to map the changes that will affect our measures.

18. Outcome Measure 2 (Rehabilitation Quotient)
Intervention effectiveness
Different requirements
Need control group of similar un-intervened?
How do we make sure they are similar?
Input into cost-benefit model
Importance of targeting and assessment
We use the RQ to measure treatment effectiveness based on the difference between a treatment group reconviction and reimprisonment rate and that for a group of mathced controls.
We can cost the intervention and identify the benefits obtained by looking at the reduction of future costs through interventions.
To do this most cost effectively we need to identify who the interventions work best with and thus have a model of the system needed to bring about outcomes.

20. INTERVENTION FRAMEWORK (Systems Analysis & Design)
Use outcomes of assessment system to enhance system and set intervention thresholds to maximise intervention outcomes (go beyond just measuring targeting errors)

21. Need … Effective Targeting (Justice Sector plus Societal Costs)
Top (Squares): Community-based Offenders
Societal
Cost
Bottom (Diamonds): Prison Inmates
Risk of Imprisonment (decile)

23. Data Quality Don’t under-estimate the importance of
getting familiar with the available data and all
its problems. Need time to make mistakes
without the pressure of meeting deadlines.

25. Police Clearance Statistics

26. Key Learning Points Manage expectations of senior managers
Know the right groups to measure for annual reporting
Keep your definitions stable over time – validate your measure against previous data
Develop links with other centres of excellence
Overestimate the time taken for IT
Map and measure the influence of other agencies on your outcome measures

27. Agenda for Working Group 2
1pm Introduction and Chair going forward (Chair)
1-15pm Working Group/Workshop proposals (Greg Claridge)
1-30pm Short-term wins (agency members)
2pm Presentation and Discussion: Overview of an Outcomes Framework (Leon Bakker)
2-55pm Next Steps/Wrap-up (Chair)