1

Evidence Based Practice in community corrections

Target intervention

Abstract Target intervention is a strategy used by criminal justice departments to reduce offender recidivism. The strategy involves utilization of the risk principle the criminogenic needs

principle the !esponsivity principle the dosage principle and the treatment principle. "o#ever target intervention involves dedication and commitment of the prison leadership in implementing such principles. Based on this research the utilization of such intervention principles has greatly helped $nited %tates reduce e&'prisoner recidivism. (n essence the $% prison department

utilizes such intervention strategies as education programs parole'based programs employment programs treatment programs and moral resonation therapy. These target intervention programs have helped correct criminals and mitigate recidivism of offenders in $%.

Target intervention

Table of Contents
*bstract ...........................................................................................................................................2 Table of +ontents.............................................................................................................................) 1., (ntroduction................................................................................................................................2., Evidence Based Practice in community corrections..................................................................2.1 Target interventions................................................................................................................ 2.1.1 !isk principle................................................................................................................... 2.1.2 The +riminogenic /eed Principle................................................................................... 2.1.) The !esponsivity principle.............................................................................................0 2.1.- The dosage principle.......................................................................................................0 2.1.1 Treatment principle.......................................................................................................1, 2.2 Practical application of the Target interventions principles................................................1, )., +onclusion...............................................................................................................................11 !eferences......................................................................................................................................12

Target intervention

1.0 Introduction *ccording to %ackett et al 3+ited in "ei#e et al. 32,114 Evidence Based Practice 3EBP4 refers to the conscientious une5uivocal and judicious deployment of contemporary superlative evidence in decision making concerning care for criminals or patients. EBP assists prisoners practitioners and patients adopt and make informed decisions #ith regard to health care delivery and behavioral change. Through EBP prison #ardens comprehend the efficacy of diverse methods of correcting the behavior of inmates as #ell as the effective use of resources. EBP ans#ers such 5uestions as is the right individual undertaking the right thing at the correct time6 (s an individual doing the right thing at the right place and in a correct manner6 "o#ever the ultimate 5uestion is #hether the achieved results are desirable or not. (n the light of 7omurad and +arey 32,1,4 reports that evidence based practice consists of si& key steps that include developing a 5uestion finding the evidence analyzing the evidence and integrating the evidence #ith o#n comprehension of the client situation. *dditional steps include application to practice and results monitoring and evaluation. This piece of #ork is aimed at discussing the application of evidence based practice in community corrections. 2.0 Evidence Based Practice in community corrections *ccording to +rime and 8ustice 3n.d4 community corrections have for long succumbed to lack of confirmed means of reducing offender recidivism. /evertheless studies depict that e&plicit clinic trials and cost benefit analysis have revived the hope of developing methods of recidivism reduction. This piece of #ork signifies that the use of certain techni5ues and interventions on offenders can reliably reduce recidivism. (n essence orthodo& supervision

Target intervention

approaches on offenders in many countries focuses on their accountability as #ell as that of their supervisors 3+rime and 8ustice n.d4. $nfortunately the concerned authorities do not provide the prison administration #ith resources tools and skills to help enhance the effectiveness of recidivism reduction. *ccording to +rime and 8ustice 3n.d4 the supervisory team progressively receives education on the importance of ensuring minimal contacts bet#een them and offenders. $nfortunately the trainers forget the importance of ensuring ma&imum contact bet#een offenders and their supervisors in ensuring optimal behavioral. This means that there is need for an integrated approach to behavioral change and recidivism among offenders. This #ould help in closing the gap bet#een the e&isting practices and Evidence based practice in offender correction #ithin the community. * simple representation of the integrated model is as illustrated in the follo#ing figure.

9igure 1: (ntegrated Evidence Based Practice model %ource: 3+rime ; 8ustice n.d4. The greatest challenge in conforming to the model is not unveiling the interventions rather evolving the current systems to conform to the ne# model. (n essence the novel evidence

Target intervention

based practice model in community corrections should utilize research based support and organizational infrastructure to achieve success 3+rime ; 8ustice n.d4. Bogue 32,,24 avers that the most effective EBP correction frame#ork involves listing the basic correction principles in the order of priority depending on their correlation. 9or instance during offender assessment the probability of re'offending and the criminogenic needs must be prioritized in that order. Therefore the deployment of resources should first be prioritized on the high'risk offenders and not the lo#'risk offenders. (n essence considering the propensity of an offender to reoffend is an important element in achieving an effective frame#ork in deal #ith criminogenic needs since resources are targeted on high'risk offenders. (n addition effective intervention of criminal activities #ithin the community should involve the utilizes of eight steps that include assessing actuarial risk or needs developing enhanced

intrinsic motivation target interventions skill training #ith directed practice increased positive reinforcement. <thers steps include ongoing support engagement #ithin innate communities measuring pertinent practices and providing feedback on measurement 3Bogue 2,,24. These steps are as discussed #ithin the follo#ing sections. "amblin 32,124 reports that actuarial need or risk assessment involves establishing and maintaining an inclusive scheme to screen the risk of the ongoing offenders as #ell as their needs. "o#ever the assessment approach should be valid and reliable if effective management is to be achieved. The adopted correction measures should be relevant and timely so that the principles of need risk and responsiveness are effectively achieved. (n vie# of "amblin 32,124 reliable offender assessment is achieved #henever the pertinent staffs is offered skills on ho# to officially administer corrective services. The offender assessment and screening tools must centre on identifying static and dynamic risk factors. (n addition the assessment methodology

Target intervention

should help in the development of profile for the criminogenic needs. The profile should be applicable to a designated community of population and should be underpinned by #ritten procedures. *s a general rule informal and formal assessment methods for offenders ought to reinforce each other. This is because their integration enhances case decisions formal

reassessments and the relations bet#een offenders and practitioners during supervision 3+rime ; 8ustice n.d4. <rdinarily information on the subject case is garnered informally via routine observations and interactions bet#een observers and offenders. This insinuates that informal offender assessment is as necessary as the formal offender assessment. (n the light of >iller and !ollnick 32,,24 in order to intrinsically enhance the morale of offenders the supervision team should develop cordial relationship #ith offenders. This relationship should be sensitive to personal needs thereby being constructive in correcting offenders. (n order to achieve infinite behavioral change it is the role of the practitioners?supervision team to intrinsically motivate the offenders to#ards adopting appositive change. (n this respect the propensity of behavioral change among offenders is strongly dependent on the interpersonal relation ship bet#een offenders medical practitioners probation officers and the staff 3>iller ; !ollnick 2,,24. Through motivational intervie#ing ambivalence feeling that come #ith behavioral change can be e&plored #ith a suitable method being utilized to help offenders overcome such a feeling to#ards the adoption of behaviors. >iller and !ollnick 32,,24 depict that motivational

intervie#ing techni5ues should be utilized to motivate offenders to adopt and maintain positive behavioral changes. Therefore persuasive motivation tactics should be avoided and instead motivational intervie#ing techni5ues adopted.

Target intervention 2.1 Target interventions

Target intervention involves deploying such principles as the risk principle need principle responsively principle dosage and the treatment principle in rehabilitating offenders and preventing recidivism. 2.1.1 Risk principle (n vie# of "amblin 32,124 the risk principle re5uires the prioritization of treatment resources and core supervision to offenders #hose re'offending risk is elevated. <rdinarily ma&imizing treatment resources and supervision on lo# risk offenders has no positive net impact on reducing recidivism rates 3+rime ; 8ustice n.d4. /evertheless deploying the same resources on high risk offenders e&ceptionally reduces potential harms and enhances public safety. This is based on the fact that high risk offenders need enhanced pro'social skills since they are likely to highly re'offend. Therefore diminishing their recidivism rates has much benefit to the community at large since it enhances their safety. Therefore a triumphant remediation of offenders re5uires the adoption of intensive cognitive behavior interventions that focus on the criminogenic needs of high'risk offenders 3!oney 2,114. 2.1.2 The Criminogenic Need Principle (n vie# of !oney 32,114 the criminogenic need principle re5uires that the greatest criminogenic needs of offenders should be addressed. This is based on the fact that the needs of offenders are varied though all of them are related to criminal behavior. The manner in #hich the criminogenic needs are addressed determines the degree of recidivism reduction. %ome of the criminogenic needs include substance abuse antisocial attitudes negative values and beliefs lo# self control criminal peers and dysfunctional families among others 3!oney 2,114.

Target intervention

+riminogenic needs assessment can be used to unveil the greatest needs so that they can be prioritized. (n essence the risk principle re5uires matching of the offenders risk level and the intervention techni5ues utilized. 2.1.3 The Responsivity principle This principle points out that personalize characteristics should be considered #hen matching intervention services to offenders. %ome of the individual characteristics include gender culture learning styles development stages and the motivational level 3!oney 2,114. The !esponsivity principle re5uires practitioners to offer offenders proven treatment in the endeavor to help them transform their criminogenic behavior. The use of such treatment methods as cognitive behavioral methodologies has proven to yield reduced recidivism among offenders. "o#ever the provision of befitting responsively measures involves matching communication style to offenders@ readiness level. (n addition the treatment method should match to the type of offender and their risk of re'offending 3"amblin 2,124. 2.1.4 The dosage principle The dosage principle re5uires adoption of pertinent dosage of service strategic supervision and the development of pro'social structure. 9urther the principle advises the adoption of relatively higher initial structures for high'risk offenders as compared to the lo#'risk offenders 3!oney 2,114. The principles necessitates that follo#ing offender release -, to =, A of their leisure time should be laden #ith outlined routine on appropriate services. "o#ever this should happen during the initial post release period that range bet#een three and eight months. %ome offender categories such as the mentally ill re5uire #ide'ranging and comprehensive

Target intervention services.

1,

(n the contrasting scenario uncoordinated and deficient services can develop

deleterious impact on the offenders. 2.1.5 Treatment principle *ccording to !oney 32,114 the treatment principle re5uires the application of proven treatment techni5ues that are mostly cognitive'behavioral in nature. Bia aggressive case management the practitioners should deploy strategic and proactive approaches to#ards offender supervision. (n vie# of "o#ell 32,,24 based on this principle targeted and timely delivery of treatment interventions results to long'term benefits to the community as a #hole and the offender as #ell. 2.2 Practical application of the Target interventions principles *ccording to !oca 32,,04 the $nited %tates department of justice reports that 2=A of offenders are rearrested again #ithin three years follo#ing their release. %urprisingly out of the rearrested percentage ),A are reconvicted of ne# crimes. This sho#s that in spite of the target intervention the rate of recidivism has predominantly remained high. !ecently many

organizations have started using evidence based intervention principles in reducing recidivism among offenders 3!oca 2,,04. %pringer et al. 32,,)4 reports that evidence based practice especially the target intervention principles have been utilized in reducing juvenile related crimes across the globe and especially in $%. Targeting on the high risky older adolescents has contributed to lessened recidivism after their ac5uittal from juvenile prisons. "amblin 32,124 depict that target intervention has been able to reduce recidivism among juvenile offenders by 12A. %ome of the interventions that included personal counseling behavioral programs and interpersonal skill development played a key part to#ards enhanced recidivism 3!oca 2,,04.

Target intervention

11

Besides home based intervention as #ell as skill training among institutionalized offenders #ere found to be effective. The intervention effects are as summarized in the follo#ing table. Table 1: Effects from interventions #ith non'institutionalized 8uvenile offenders

%ource: !oca 32,,04. (n the light of >cCuire 32,,24 Programming targeting has proved an effective tool in rehabilitating young offenders aged bet#een 1- and 2- years. "o#ever this techni5ue is e&ceptionally e&pensive and does not play a key role in reducing negative behaviors among adult offenders. The identified static risk factors among juveniles include prior convictions and their severity antisocial behavior history social failures child neglect and abuse education history and family dysfunction 3>cCuire 2,,24. *ccording to >ckean and !ansford 32,,-4 in 2,,) the $nited %tates national institute of corrections endeavored to outline the key elements of the intervention strategy. Dith regard to the risk principle the institute recommended that case management and target population should be based on the risk level. 9or the offenders #ith high risk of recidivism enhanced surveillance and supervision techni5ues should be deployed. These interventions can include digital

monitoring curfe# and the use of global positioning system. <n the other hand the lo# risk offenders need stabilization services that include transportation medication and housing among

Target intervention

12

others 3>ckean ; !ansford 2,,-4. The treatment principle for offenders charged #ith substance abuse in $% has proven effective in reducing the rate of crime #ithin the community. The treatment method for the problem of substance abuse has been derived from the history of the substance abuse by each individual prisoner. !esearch sho#s that high recidivism rate for offenders previously convicted #ith substance abuse have made them not #in employment opportunities 3>ckean ; !ansford 2,,-4. >ckean and !ansford 32,,-4 assert that the major cause of crime in $% is related to drug abuse and drug trafficking. %ome of the offenders testify of having consumer illegal drugs for the gratification of the addition urge. <n the other hand most of the offenders convicted #ith substance abuse related crimes ackno#ledge of having sold such drugs for financial gains. "o#ever drug treatment methodologies have proven to reduce this form of criminal behavior and reduce recidivism after the offender release from prison. This form of treatment has also helped reduce the rate if substance abuse. "o#ever the treatment mode is suitable for the lo#' level drug abusers #hose substance abuse history is not substantial. * study reveals that the treatment program has helped reduce cases of recidivism by )2A. The same study has also revealed that the treatment cost for substance abuse is not costly and the cost benefit ration is more than one. This means that the money saved by offenders not getting involved in crimes again is enough to offset the treatment cost for such offenders 3>ckean ; !ansford 2,,-4. (n spite of the reported positive impact of the treatment method on offender recidivism such programs are inade5uate for prisoners and the released offenders. *s a result only 21A of the $% prisons provide such form of treatment to prisoners convicted #ith substance abuse crimes. This contributed to the reduction in substance abuse treatment cases from 21A in 1001 to 1,A in 100= 3>ckean ; !ansford 2,,-4. "o#ever programs are currently being developed to

Target intervention

1)

help alleviate the problem of deficiency of effective treatment for inmates. *nother intervention has been the use of employment programs in ensuring that inmates are provided #ith skills that can enable them gain job security upon release. Besides helping reduce the recidivism such employment creation programs are aimed at ensuring that the inmates get a means of earns revenues. Therefore the ac5uitted prisoners are able to gain self sufficiency thereby avoiding their involvement in other crimes in the endeavor to get money. *part from financial gains the employment program has helped in developing a stabilized routine ensuring that released inmates are occupied enough not to think of getting involved in criminal activities. Employment has proven to help ac5uitted offenders responsive to the demands of their employers thereby proffering them #ith social. "o#ever employment opportunities providing high pay returns have proven to reduce recidivism by high rates. >ckean and !ansford 32,,-4 points out that job training alone is not enough to enable ac5uitted prisoners abandon their negative behaviors. This means that apart from training prisoners should liaise #ith employers to ensure that ac5uitted prisoners are placed #ith regard to employment. This principle has been underpinned by the comprehensive and training *ct of 100) that helps released prisoners get employment opportunities. +urrently supporting programs have been developed under the department of labor to help prisoners #in jobs in community based organizations. (n light of >ckean and !ansford 32,,-4 alternate programs that have been used to reduce recidivism included the parole'based programs. This approach has proven effective in reducing recidivism especially #ithin the community after prisoners@ release. Prisoners are released on parole after they attain their ma&imum imprisonment sentence having sho#n good behavior #hile in prison. %uch inmates are put under the surveillance of the criminal justice

Target intervention

1-

system via the parole agents. Therefore the supervising agency through the guiding policies and practices help in reducing the recidivism rate among ac5uitted prisoners. Biolating the parole makes e&'prisoners return in prison and this has helped ac5uitted prisoners adopt and maintain positive follo#ing their release from prison. Based on the !esponsivity principle a majority of the $% based prisons have adopted education programs as a means of helping the cognitive development of inmates >ckean and !ansford 32,,-4 reports that educational programs are proven measures that ensure that inmate self'efficacy and accomplishment is achieved. *s a result they highly help in reducing recidivism among released prisoners. *ccording to >ckean ; !ansford 32,,-4 by the time most inmates join $% prisons they have only the basis education. *s a result the prison administration endeavors to encourage them to join higher education so that their cognitive development is enhanced. * high percentage of the inmates do not have a high school degree. Therefore efforts have been made to enroll such inmates in school so that they can ac5uire high school degrees. (n essence cognitive development has proven to reduce incidents of criminal activities and to reduce the recidivism rate. * study reveals that the introduction of education programs that offer CE7 courses have helped reduce recidivism rate by 20A. This has resulted to the government developing and implementing many education programs #ithin prisons to help reduce the chances of offenders re'offending after being released from prisons 3>ckean ; !ansford 2,,-4. *ccording to >ckean ; !anford 32,,-4 other approaches that the $% prison department uses to reduce recidivism include a scheme that involves a#arding monetary re#ards 3E21?month4 to e&'prisoners so that that can abstain from criminal activities. *dditional programs re5uire prison #ardens to be accountable #ith regard to recidivism. (n addition

Target intervention

11

behavioral therapy has been utilized including the >oral resonation therapy that reduces crime by enhancing the reasoning abilities of individuals. This has helped individuals become less ego'centric and more apprehensive to the #elfare of others. 9urther >ckean and !ansford 32,,-4 assert that moral recognition therapy has been used to reduce incidents of repeated substance abuse and domestic violence among others. %tudies sho#s that the use of moral recognition therapy in ), of the $% states has helped reduce recidivism by 21'2,A. The effect of >!T has been reported for the last one decade and has culminated to improved inmate discipline as #ell as paroles on probation. The program has proven cost effective since every E1 investment on its implementation accrues E11.-. as savings. .0 !onclusion (n a recap evidence based practice has proven to be useful in reducing criminal activities #ithin the community. (n addition target intervention principles have confirmed as useful tools in reducing recidivism of prisoners follo#ing their ac5uittal from prisons. "o#ever these interventions do not only help prisoners transform after they are released from prisons but also #hile in prisons. (n the $% conte&t education programs parole'based programs employment programs treatment programs and moral resonation therapy among other interventions have helped reduce recidivism among e&'prisoners. "o#ever there is a need for enhanced evaluation of crime intervention programs to ensure that those programs that contribute to highly reduced recidivism rate are implemented at large.

Target intervention

12

"eferences Bogue B. 32,,24. *n evolutionary model for e&amining community corrections. !eport to +T 8udicial Branch +ourt %upport %ervices 7ivision /ovember 2,,2. +rime ; 8ustice 3n.d4.(mplementing Evidence'Based Practice in +ommunity +orrections: The Principles of Effective (ntervention. *ccessed from http:??###.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov?*dultProbation?docs?EBPPrinciples.pdf F2,th %eptember 2,1)G. 7omurad 9 ; +arey > 32,1,4. (mplementing Evidence' Based Practices. *ccessed from http:??###.cepp.com?documents?(mplementingA2,EvidenceA2,BasedA2,Practices.pdf F2,th %eptember 2,1)G. "amblin C 32,124.Evidence'Based Principles for Effective +orrectional (nterventions. *ccessed from http:??doc.#i.gov?documents?#eb?about?overvie#?BeckyA2,Houng A2,!ecidivismA2,!eductionA2,12A2,!eport.pdf F2,th %eptember 2,1)G. "ei#e % et al. 32,114. Evidence Based Practice: attitudes kno#ledge and behavior among allied health care professionals. (nt 8 for Iuality in "ealth +areJ 2)324: 10.'2,0. "o#ell % 32,,24. Evidence Based Practice in +ommunity +orrections: The British +olumbia E&perience. "istorical and +ultural +onte&t: The British +olumbia Probation %ervice before 100=. *ccessed from http:??###.icclr.la#.ubc.ca?Publications?2,,.?BookA2,on A2,+ommunityA2,+orrections?1,A2,%tephenA2,"o#ellA2,EvidenceA2,Based A2,Practice.pdf F2,th %eptember 2,1)G.

Target intervention >cCuire 8. 32,,24. Evidence'based programming today. Paper presented (nternational +ommunity +orrections *ssociation conference Boston >* /ovember 2,,2. >ckean K ; !ansford + 32,,-4. +urrent %trategies for !educing !ecidivism. +entre for (mpact !esearch. *ccessed from http:??###.impactresearch.org?documents?recidivismfullreport.pdf F2,th %eptember 2,1)G. >iller D ; !ollnick % 32,,24. >otivational intervie#ing: Preparing people for change. /e# Hork /H: Cuilford Press.

1=

!oca 32,,04. (ntervention Dork #ith "igh'!isk Houng People: 9oundational Elements Cuiding Principles (deas and Iuestions for 7iscussion. * !eport by Police <fficers Houth Dorkers and 7H% <fficials. *ccessed from http:??###.rocainc.org?pdf?resources?internal?(ntervention>anual.pdf F2,th %eptember 2,1)G. !oney ! 32,114.>odule 1: Transition from jail to community. <nline Kearning Tool Lit. Targeted (ntervention %trategies. *ccessed from http:??###.urban.org?projects?tjc?toolkit?module1?>odule1.pdf F2,th %eptember 2,1)G. %pringer 7.D. >c/eece +.* ; *rnold E.>. 32,,)4. %ubstance *buse Treatment for +riminal <ffenders: *n Evidence'Based Cuide for Practitioners. Dashington 7.+.: *merican Psychological *ssociation.