effective interventions…lessons learned results and lessons learned from ohio the principles of...

Effective Interventions…Lessons Learned

Results and Lessons Learned from Ohio

The Principles of Effective Interventions


Credits

About the UCCI

The University of Cincinnati Corrections Institute (UCCI) is affiliated with the Division of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati.

About the Authors

This training was developed by Christopher T. Lowenkamp, Ph.D., assistant director, University of Cincinnati Corrections Institute.

Copyright © 2004 University of Cincinnati Corrections Institutute. All Rights Reserved.

Slide 2


Sections of Presentation

1. Overview of effective interventions

2. Risk Principle

3. Need Principle

4. Treatment Principle

5. Program Integrity

6. What we found in Ohio

7. Summary

Slide 3


Section 1Principles of Effective Interventions

Slide 4



Principles of Effective Interventions

= Risk Principle (Who)—Higher risk offenders

= Need Principle (What)—Criminogenic needs

= Treatment Principle (How)—Use behavioral approaches

= Specific Responsivity (How)—Matching

=Program Integrity(All of the above and then some)—Quality

Slide 5

Effective Interventions…Lessons LearnedSlide 6

Section 2Risk Principle



The Risk Principle

1. Target those offenders with a higher probability of recidivism

2. Provide most intensive treatment to higher risk offenders

3. Intensive treatment for lower risk offenders can increase recidivism

Play Audio:

Slide 7


Risk Factors and What It Means To Be High Risk—How to Target High Risk

1. Attitudes, values, and beliefs

2. Friends

3. History of antisocial behavior

4. Personality

5. Employment

6. Family

7. Substance abuse

Slide 8


The Risk Principle and Correctional Intervention

-4

19

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

High Risk Low Risk

Ch

an

ge I

n R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 9

Dowden & Andrews, 1999


The Risk Principle and Community Supervision

Slide 10

47

19

25

33

0

10

20

30

40

50

High Risk Low Risk

Recid

ivis

m R

ate

s

ISP Regular

Hanley, 2003


Section 3Need Principle

Slide 11



The Need Principle

1. Assess and identify criminogenic needs

2. Target criminogenic needs.

3. Must be focused intervention.

4. If this is followed recidivism rates can be lowered.

Slide 12


Criminogenic Needs

1. Family

2. Vocational skills and employment

3. Anger

4.Self control

5. Self management skills

6. Prosocial modeling

7. Antisocial attitudes

8. Substance abuse treatment

9. Reducing antisocial peer contacts

10. Relapse prevention

Slide 13

Andrews and Dowden, 1999


Non-Criminogenic Needs

1. Stress and/or anxiety

2. Self-esteem

3. Cohesiveness of peer group

4. Discipline

1. Vague emotional problems

6. Fear of official punishment

7. Physical activity

8. Creativity

Slide 14

Andrews and Dowden, 1999


The Need Principle Seems Straightforward, but…1. Look at the targets of programs from around the country

1. Offenders lack creativity2. Offenders need to get back to nature3. It worked for me4. Offenders lack discipline5. Offenders lack organization skills6. We just want them to be happy7. Treat offenders like babies and dress them in diapers8. Offenders need to have a pet in prison9. Offenders need acupuncture10.Offenders need a better diet11.Offenders need to learn how to put on makeup and dress

better12.Male offenders need to get in touch with their feminine

side

Slide 15

Latessa, Cullen, Gendreau, 2002


The Need Principle Seems Straightforward, but…

1. Look at “creative sentences” judges are coming up with around the country

1. Yoga

2. Tai Chi

3. Writing “I will not do stupid things” 2500 times

4. Dressing up like victim (in a dress) and being forced to walk around downtown

5. Jogging for an hour for trying to run from police

6. Listening to music or reading

7. Carrying a photograph of the victim in wallet

Slide 16

USA Today, February 23, 2004


The Need Principle and Correctional Intervention

31

0

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Target 1- 3 morecriminogenic needs

Target at least 4-6 morecriminogenic needs

Ch

an

ge I

n R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 17

Gendreau, French, and Taylor, 2002


Section 4Treatment Principle

Slide 18



The Treatment Principle

1. The most effective interventions are behavioral

1. Focus on current factors that influence behavior

2. Action oriented

3. Offender behaviors are appropriately reinforced

2. The most effective behavioral models are

1. Social learning—practice new skills and behaviors

2. Cognitive behavioral approaches that target criminogenic needs

Slide 19


Key Concepts of Cognitive Theories

– Thinking affects behavior

– Antisocial, distorted, unproductive irrational thinking causes antisocial and unproductive behavior

– Thinking can be influenced and changed

– We can change how we feel and behave by changing what we think

Slide 20


Implications of Theories to Treatment

Slide 21


Ineffective Approaches

1. Talking cures

2. Drug education

3. Bibliotherapy

4. Self-help programs

5. Medical model

6. Self esteem

7. Punishing smarter programs

Slide 22


The Treatment Principle and Correctional Intervention

24

4

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Non-Behavioral Behavioral

Ch

an

ge I

n R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 23

Dowden and Andrews, 2000


Section 5Program Integrity

Slide 24



Program Integrity

1. Includes principles discussed and more

1. Staff, assessment practices, evaluation

2. Can be measured using the Correctional Program Assessment Inventory

1. Instrument measures implementation, assessment, treatment, staff, evaluation, and other miscellaneous factors related to program integrity

Slide 25


Program Integrity

1. Some research has been done linking the degree of program integrity (as measured by a CPAI based measure) to the program’s ability to reduce recidivism

2. Studies with juvenile programs and adult programs

Slide 26


ART Program Integrity and Program Effects

27

19

25

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Control ARTCompetently

Delivered

ART NotCompetently

Delivered

Ad

juste

d R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 27

Barnoski and Aos 2004


FFT Program Integrity and Program Effects

32

17

27

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Control FFTCompetently

Delivered

FFT NotCompetently

Delivered

Ad

juste

d R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 28

Barnoski and Aos 2004


Section 6Findings From Ohio

Slide 29



Ohio’s CBCF/HWH Study

1. Largest study of community based correctional treatment programs ever done

2. Total of 13,221 offenders—38 HWH and 15 CBCF

3. Two year follow up on all offenders

4. Recidivism measures included any new arrest and incarceration in a state prison

5. Also examined program characteristics

Slide 30


Experimental and Comparison Groups

1. Parole with HWH

2. Parole violators with HWH

3. Transitional Control with HWH

4. Furlough with HWH

5. CBCF Probation

6. Comparison group parole without HWH placement

Slide 31


Measure of Risk

1. Risk score based on 14 factors

2. Age, education, marital status, psychological problems, drug/alcohol problems, employment, criminal history, and current offense

3. Recidivism rate for low risk 18%, for high risk 58%

Slide 32


Section 6aWhat Did We Find With Regard to the Risk Principle?

Slide 33



The Risk Principle—All Offenders

Slide 34

-29

-24

-20

-16

-11-10-10

-5 -5 -5 -5

-1

02

3 3 35 5

67 7 7

89 9

10 1011 11

12 12 12

1516

17 17

21

25

Program A

Program B

Program F

Program D

Program J

Program E

Program I

Program C

Program G

Program P

Program W

Program U

Program KK

Program M

Program H

Program K

Program R

Program N

Program All

Program O

Program L

Program X

Program BB

Program Q

Program S

Program V

Program Z

Program MM

Program FF

Program II

Program CC

Program DD

Program JJ

Program GG

Program AA

Program Y

Program EE

Program HH

Program LL

0

10

20

30

-10

-20

-30

-40

Pro b

abil i

t y o

f R

e in c

arce

rati o

n


The Risk Principle—Low Risk

Slide 35

-36

-32

-29 -29

-21 -21 -21 -21

-16-15

-11 -11 -11

-7 -7-6

-5-4 -4 -4

-2 -2 -2-1

01 1 1

23 3

4 45

6

89

Program B

Program CC

Program F

Program KK

Program A

Program D

Program J

Program W

Program G

Program U

Program E

Program X

Program JJ

Program R

Program MM

Program I

Program FF

Program P

Program M

Program All

Program O

Program S

Program II

Program DD

Program V

Program N

Program Z

Program GG

Program K

Program BB

Program Q

Program L

Program LL

Program HH

Program Y

Program EE

Program AA

0

10

-10

-20

-30

-40

P rob

abili

ty o

f R

ein c

a rc e

ratio

n


The Risk Principle—Low/Moderate Risk

Slide 36

-36-34

-23-23

-19

-14 -14-12

-11 -11-10-10

-7-6

-4-3

-1 -1 -1

01

23 3

4 45 5 5

67

89 9

10 1011 11

13

Program B

Program F

Program A

Program D

Program J

Program KK

Program W

Program U

Program G

Program P

Program E

Program JJ

Program I

Program M

M

Program X

Program R

Program M

Program All

Program O

Program FF

Program V

Program N

Program S

Program BB

Program DD

Program L

Program Z

Program GG

Program Q

Program II

Program K

Program C

Program CC

Program EE

Program HH

Program Y

Program AA

Program H

Program LL

0

10

20

-10

-20

-30

-40

Prob

a bili

ty o

f R

einc

arc e

ratio

n


The Risk Principle—Moderate Risk

Slide 37

-28-26

-20

-17

-14-13

-7 -7-6

-3-2

-1

01 1 1

23 3

4 45 5

6 6 68 8

9 9 910

1213 13 13

1819

26

Program A

Program B

Program D

Program F

Program E

Program J

Program P

Program C

Program I

Program G

Program U

Program W

Program O

Program M

Program K

Program EE

Program N

Program R

Program All

Program X

Program L

Program V

Program BB

Program M

M

Program S

Program Q

Program JJ

Program H

Program KK

Program Z

Program CC

Program FF

Program DD

Program GG

Program Y

Program AA

Program II

Program HH

Program LL

0

10

20

30

-10

-20

-30

-40

Prob

a bili

ty o

f R

einc

arc e

ratio

n


The Risk Principle—High Risk

Slide 38

-34

-18 -17-15 -14

-10-8

-6 -5

-2 -2

2 3 3 35

7 8 8 810 10

12 12 12 13 1315

1921 22

24 25 2527

3032 33 34

Program A

Program B

Program C

Program D

Program E

Program F

Program G

Program H

Program I

Program J

Program K

Program L

Program O

Program M

Program N

Program P

Program Q

Program R

Program All

Program S

Program U

Program V

Program W

Program X

Program Y

Program Z

Program AA

Program BB

Program CC

Program DD

Program EE

Program FF

Program GG

Program HH

Program II

Program JJ

Program KK

Program LL

Program M

M

0

10

20

30

40

-10

-20

-30

-40

P rob

abil i

ty o

f R

ein c

a rc e

r ati o

n


Why Did This Happen?

1. Think about what it means to be low risk

2. Who else is in the HWH/CBCF programs around the state?

3. What happens to low risk offenders risk level?

Slide 39


Section 6bWhat Did We Find With Regard to the Need Principle?

Slide 40



The Need Principle

8

-2

5

-3

2

7

0 to 3 4 to 6 7 or more

Number of Criminogenic Services

Ch

an

ge i

n R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 41

Negative numbers indicate increases in recidivism. Overall correlations between the number of programs offered and treatment effect is 0.13, while the correlation between the number of criminogenic services offered and treatment effect is 0.23


Section 6cWhat Did We Find With Regard to the Treatment Principle?

Slide 42




-9

9

-10

-5

0

5

10

Ch

an

ge I

n R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 43

Other CognitiveBehavioral



2

-4

13

6

-5

0

5

10

15

Ch

an

ge I

n R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 44

Role Play Practice


Section 6dWhat Did We Find With Regard to Program Integrity?

Slide 45



Measure of Program Integrity

1. Measures based on CPAI

2. Measures based on staff surveys

3. Measures based on data from offender database

4. A total of 157 items on program integrity

Slide 46


Program Implementation

1. Director education and experience

2. Director being involved in training and delivering the program

3. Program valued by community

4. Program valued by the CJ community

5. Sustainable funding

Slide 47


Assessment

1. Receive appropriate clients

2. Assess risk factors

3. Assess need factors

4. Use standardized methods

5. Define risk and need levels

6. Reassess before termination with a standardized instrument

Slide 48


Treatment

1. Cognitive behavioral programming and targeting criminogenic needs

2. Role playing

3. Practice new skills

4. Supervised during treatment and in community

5. Varied service and length of stay by risk

6. Kept occupied 40-70% of time

7. Standard completion criteria

8. Provided aftercare

Slide 49


Staff Characteristics

1. Area of study

2. Program input

3. Personal qualities

4. Ongoing training

5. Percent with college degree

Slide 50


Evaluation

1. Recidivism follow-up

2. Outcome evaluations

3. External quality assurance

4. File reviews

5. Pre/post testing

Slide 51


Miscellaneous

1. Mixed facilities

2. Years in operation

3. Program capacity

4. Average age of offenders

5. All female facilities

Slide 52


Program Integrity—Relationship Between Program Integrity Score And Treatment Effect

22

10

-19

5

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

Ch

an

ge I

n R

ecid

ivis

m R

ate

s

Slide 53

0-30(2) 31-59(25) 60-69(10) 70+(1)


Section 7Summary

Slide 54



Risk

1. Assessment should be done as early on in the CJ process as possible

2. Assessment should be conducted using a standard risk and need assessment

3. Sentences should be based on that assessment

4. Supervision should be based on that assessment

5. Referrals for service should be based on that assessment

6. Should be targeting HIGH RISK OFFENDERS for most intensive services

Slide 55


Need

1. Supervision and programming should focus on targeting criminogenic needs

2. Sentences should focus on the need principle whenever possible

3. Needs to be targeted should be identified by risk/need assessment—not a one size fits all approach

Slide 56


Treatment

1. Programming should be behavioral, cognitive-behavioral, or based on social learning

2. Should use role playing and practice

3. Should provide supervision during sessions

4. Probation departments around the country are now delivering cognitive-behavioral interventions on their own rather than relying on external resource providers

Slide 57


Program Integrity

1. IT MATTERS

2. It can be measured

3. It can be changed

4. Good programs (based on sound theory) can substantially reduce recidivism, however, the same program poorly implemented can actually increase recidivism!

Slide 58


Section 7How Does Community Supervision Fit?

Slide 59



Specific Responsivity

Easiest to think of as “barriers” to treatment

Motivation is becoming one of the more important considerations

Motivational enhancement, motivation interviewing, or pre-treatment programming


Stages Of Change

Pre- Contemplation

Termination

Relapse

Contemplation

Preparation

Action

Maintenance

Prochaska’s “Stages of Change” Taken from: Miller, Duncan and Hubble (1999), “The Heart & Soul of Change”, American Psychological Association.


Agency Response

Pre-contemplation

Contemplation

Preparation

Action

Maintenance

Raise doubts, examine discrepancies

Tip decisional balance toward change

Clarify goals, TX plan, reduce barriers, enlist support

Engage in TX, support change, new reinforcers

Support lifestyle changes, relapse prevention


Motivational Enhancement

Motivation to change can be increased through– Assessment– Case planning– Or other early meeting– Offenders in jail are probably pretty motivated to

change


Assessment

• Good assessment needs to be conducted to effectively sentence, supervise, and intervene with offenders

• Pretrial programs that offer services to reduce risk of reoffending need to survey criminogenic risk factors


Community Supervision

• Assessment

• Motivational enhancement

• Provision of treatment services

• System approach

– Responsibility for some but not all

– Takes into account what other agencies in process need and do with offenders

– Takes into account what needs to be done by the system to reduce offending behavior and increase public safety


Section 8Implementation?

Slide 66



Implementing a New Idea

• Consider how dramatic a shift these ideas are

• Need to consider organizational attributes

• There are assessments for this

• Research suggests that dealing with these issues assists in technology transfer

• Integrating research with practice

• Exposure

• Adoption

• Implementation

• Practice

D. Dwayne Simpson. 2002. Organizational readiness for treatment innovations. Texas Christian University. www.ibr.tcu.edu.


Exposure

• Accomplished through training

• Involves

• Staff

• Lecture

• Self study

• Workshop

• Consultant

• Must have motivation to change and resources

• Convenience (time and place) also an issue



Adoption

• Reception and perception of perceived utility

• Decision to go with it

• Adequacy of training

• Perceived ease of use

• How well it fits with other roles, agency, and staff abilities



Implementation

• Adequate resources and appropriate atmosphere for change

• Climate for change

• Clarity of mission and goals

• Staff cohesion

• Communication

• Openness to change

• Institutional supports

• Monitoring

• Feedback

• Rewards that reinforce positive change



Practice

• Long term use

• Staff attributes

• Professional growth

• Efficacy

• Influence

• Adaptability



Assessments

• Organizational Readiness for Change

• Motivation for Change

• Resources

• Staff Attributes

• Organizational Climate

• Program Training Needs

• Training Areas

• Barriers to Training

• Available Resources



Organizational Readiness for Change

•Motivation for Change•Program Needs•Training Needs•Pressures for Change

•Resources•Offices•Staffing•Training•Computer Access•e-Communications

•Staff Attributes•Growth•Efficacy•Influence•Orientation•Adaptability

•Organizational Climate•Mission•Cohesion•Autonomy•Communication•Stress•Change



Summary

• Have a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn’t to reduce criminal recidivism

• Should be implemented across all aspects of the corrections system

• Agencies should collaborate and take a systems approach• Prior to moving forward assess staff and agency before

jumping in• Assess and overcome barriers

• Have a plan and let staff guide that plan to some degree• Share the plan• Realistic• What will change

• Evaluate what has been accomplished• Quality assurance

• Evaluate impacts• Outcomes


Always Remember……….

As Max Planck the physicist lamented:

“….a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

Even with the most resistant staff and agencies there is still hope

effective interventions…lessons learned results and lessons learned from ohio the principles of...

Documents

need principle slide

creativity slide

somequality slide

summary slide

substance abuse slide

community supervision

relapse prevention slide

risk factors