What Works and What Doesnt in Reducing Recidivism with Youthful OffendersPresented by:Edward J. Latessa, Ph.D.School of Criminal JusticeUniversity of Cincinnatiwww.uc.edu/criminaljustice

Evidence Based What does it mean?There are different forms of evidence:

The lowest form is anecdotal evidence; stories, opinions, testimonials, case studies, etc - but it often makes us feel good

The highest form is empirical evidence research, data, results from controlled studies, etc. - but sometimes it doesnt make us feel good

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

Evidence Based Decision Making RequiresAssessment information

Relevant research

Available programming

Evaluation

Professionalism and knowledge from staff

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?

A Large Body of Research Has Indicated..that correctional services and interventions can be effective in reducing recidivism for youthful offenders, however, not all programs are equally effective

The most effective programs are based on some principles of effective interventions

Risk (Who)

Need (What)

Treatment (How)

Program Integrity (How Well)

Lets Start with the Risk PrincipleRisk refers to risk of reoffending and not the seriousness of the offense.

You can be a low risk felon or a high risk felon, a low risk misdemeanant or a high risk misdemeanant.

Risk Level by Recidivism for the Community Supervision Sample Low 0-14 Medium = 15-23 High = 24-33 Very High 34+

Sheet1

Risk LevelLow RiskMedium RiskHigh RiskVery High RiskLow (PV)Low/medium (PV)Medium (PV)High Risk (PV)

9.134.358.969.219.932.950.550

To resize chart data range, drag lower right corner of range.

Chart1

9.134.358.969.2

Low Risk

Medium Risk

High Risk

Very High Risk

Risk Levels by Recidivism for Community Supervision Sample of Juvenile Offenders

Chart1

204260

Low Risk

Moderate

High

Sheet1

Low RiskModerateHigh

Risk level204260

To resize chart data range, drag lower right corner of range.

There are Three Elements to the Risk PrincipleTarget those youth with higher probability of recidivism

Provide most intensive treatment to higher risk youth

Intensive treatment for lower risk youth can increase recidivism

One important question is: what does more intensive treatment mean in practice? Most studies show that the longer someone is in treatment the great the effects, however:

Effects tend to diminish if treatment goes too long

#2: Provide Most Intensive Interventions to Higher Risk OffendersHigher risk offenders will require much higher dosage of treatmentRule of thumb: 100 hours for moderate risk200+ hours for high risk100 hours for high risk will have little if any effectDoes not include work/school and other activities that are not directly addressing criminogenic risk factors

Intensive Treatment for Low Risk Youth will Often Increase Failure Rates Low risk youth will learn anti social behavior from higher risk

Disrupts prosocial networks

The Risk Principle & Correctional Intervention Results from Meta Analysis Dowden & Andrews, 1999Reduced RecidivismIncreased Recidivism

Risk Level by New Commitment or New Adjudication: Results from Ohio Study of over 14,000 Youth

Another important body of knowledge to understand is the research on risk factors

What are the risk factors correlated with criminal and delinquent conduct?

Major Set of Risk/Need Factors

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

Cognitive Emotional StatesRageAngerDefianceCriminal Identity

Identifying Procriminal Attitudes, Values & Beliefs

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 othersProcriminal sentiments are what people think, not how people think; they comprise the content of thought, not the skills of thinking.

Neutralization & MinimizationsNeutralization 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)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

Major set Risk/needs continued:2. Procriminal associates and isolation from prosocial others

Major set Risk/Needs continued:3. Temperamental & anti social personality pattern conducive to criminal activity including:Weak SocializationImpulsivityAdventurousPleasure seeking Restless Aggressive EgocentrismBelow Average Verbal intelligence A Taste For RiskWeak Problem-Solving/lack of Coping & Self-Regulation Skills

Major set of Risk/Need factors continued:A history of antisocial behavior:Evident from a young ageIn a variety of settingsInvolving a number and variety of different acts

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 cohesivenessPoor parental supervision and discipline practicesOut right neglect and abuse

Major set of Risk/Needs continued:6. Low levels of personal educational, vocational or financial achievement

Major set Risk/Needs continued:7. Low levels of involvement in prosocial leisure activities

Allows for interaction with antisocial peersAllows for youth to have idle timeOffenders replace prosocial behavior with antisocial behavior

Major set Risk/Needs continued:8. Abuse of alcohol and/or drugs

It is illegal itself (drugs)Engages with antisocial othersImpacts social skills

NATIONAL STUDY OF NCAA DIVISION I FOOTBALL AND BASKETBALL PLAYERS BY CULLEN & LATESSA FOUND:Infractions were higher among student-athletes:Who were highly recruitedWho associated with fellow athletes that broke rules or saw nothing wrong with cheatingWho personally embraced values defining rule violations as acceptableWho did not have close relationships with their parents or coachesWho reported prior delinquent behaviorCullen, F., and E. Latessa (1996). The Extent and Sources of NCAA Rule Infractions: A National Self-Report Study of Student Athletes. A report to the National Collegiate Athletic Association. Division of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati.

RECENT STUDY OF NCAA DIVISION I FOOTBALL AND BASKETBALL PLAYERS FOUNDViolations were unrelated to:

ECONOMIC DEPRIVATION: coming from an impoverished background and having a lack of money while in college do not appear to be major sources of rule infractions

ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT: how strongly winning was emphasized, success or failure of the program, league, region of the country, etc. were not factors

THREATS OF SANCTIONS: certainty and severity of punishment for violating rules were not related to infractionsCullen, F., and E. Latessa (1996). The Extent and Sources of NCAA Rule Infractions: A National Self Report Study of Student Athletes. A report to the National Collegiate Athletic Association. Division of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati

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

History of AntisocialEarly & continued Build noncriminal Behaviorinvolvement in a number alternative behaviorsantisocial actsin risky situations

Antisocial personalityAdventurous, pleasureBuild problem-solving, self-seeking, weak self management, anger mgt &control, restlessly aggressive coping skills

Antisocial cognitionAttitudes, values, beliefsReduce antisocial cognition,& rationalizations recognize risky thinking & supportive of crime, feelings, build up alternativecognitive emotional statesless risky thinking & feelingsof anger, resentment, &Adopt a reform and/or defianceanticriminal identity

Antisocial associatesClose association withReduce association w/ criminals & relative isolationcriminals, enhance from prosocial peopleassociation w/ prosocial peopleAdopted from Andrews, D.A. et al, (2006). The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need Assessment. Crime and Delinquency, 52 (1).

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

Family and/or maritalTwo key elements areReduce conflict, buildnurturance and/or caringpositive relationships, better monitoring and/orcommunication, enhance supervisionmonitoring & supervision

School and/or workLow levels of performanceEnhance performance,& satisfactionrewards, & satisfaction

Leisure and/or recreationLow levels of involvement Enhancement involvement & satisfaction in anti- & satisfaction in prosocialcriminal leisure activitiesactivities

Substance AbuseAbuse of alcohol and/orReduce SA, reduce the drugspersonal & interpersonalsupports 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).

Need PrincipleBy assessing and targeting criminogenic needs for change, agencies can reduce the probability of recidivismCriminogenic Anti social attitudesAnti social friendsSubstance abuseLack of empathyImpulsive behaviorNon-Criminogenic

AnxietyLow self esteemCreative abilitiesMedical needsPhysical conditioning

The Christopher Columbus Style of Program DesignWHEN HE SET OUTHe didnt know where he was going.WHEN HE GOT THEREHe didnt know where he was.WHEN HE GOT BACKHe didnt know where he had been.

Definitely NOT Criminogenic Needs

Caught in the act: Juveniles sentenced to Shakespeare

Adjudicated youth offenders rehearsed a scene from Shakespeares Henry V that they will perform tonight in Lenox. (Nancy Palmieri for The Boston Globe) By Louise Kennedy Globe Staff / May 18, 2010 LENOX Tonight, 13 actors will take the stage at Shakespeare & Company in Henry V. Nothing so unusual in that except that these are teenagers, none older than 17, and they have been sentenced to perform this play.The show is the culmination of a five-week intensive program called Shakespeare in the Courts, a nationally recognized initiative now celebrating its 10th year. Berkshire Juvenile Court Judge Judith Locke has sent these adjudicated offenders found guilty of such adolescent crimes as fighting, drinking, stealing, and destroying property not to lockup or conventional community service, but to four afternoons a week of acting exercises, rehearsal, and Shakespearean study.

Targeting Criminogenic Need: Results from Meta-AnalysesReduction in RecidivismIncrease in RecidivismSource: 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

Assessment is the engine that drives effective correctional programsNeed to meet the risk and need principle

Reduces bias

Aids decision making

Allows you to target dynamic risk factors and measure change

To Understand Assessment you need to Understand the Different Types of Risk Factors

Dynamic and Static FactorsStatic Factors are those factors that are related to risk and do not change. Some examples might be number of prior offenses, whether the youth has ever had a drug/alcohol problem.

Dynamic factors relate to risk and can change. Some examples are whether a youth is currently out of school or currently has a drug/alcohol problem.

According to the American Heart Association, there are a number of risk factors that increase your chances of a first heart attackFamily history of heart attacks

Gender (males)

Age (over 50)

Inactive lifestyle

Over weight

High blood pressure

Smoking

High Cholesterol level

Dynamic Risk Factors and Their ImportanceAlso called criminogenic needsChanging these factors changes the probability of recidivismProvide the basis for developing a treatment planAddress factors that will reduce riskLead to public safety

There are two types of dynamic risk factorsAcute Can change quickly

Stable Take longer to change

Prioritizing Interventions: What to Change and WhyCriminogenic targets reduce risk for recidivism

Non-criminogenic targets may reduce barriers but NOT risk

Examples of Assessment Tools for Youthful OffendersYouthful Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (MHS.com)

Youth COMPAS (Northpointeinc.com)

Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument YASI

Positive Achievement Change Tool (PACT)

Ohio Youth Assessment System

Youthful Level of Service/Case Management InventoryExamines 42 items across 8 domains- Offenses - Family- Peers- Substance abuse- School- Leisure - Personality- AttitudesScore and rating in each area and overall

Ohio Youth Assessment SystemNon-proprietary assessment process that spans from arrest through discharge from paroleProvides a common language regarding risk, need, and responsivityAssists youth in being matched with effective interventionsFive Tools DiversionDetentionDispositionResidentialReentry

Disposition Summary Report

Family Domain: Full Report

List three speeches that have changed your life

List three people who have changed your life

Treatment PrincipleThe most effective interventions are behavioral:

Focus on current factors that influence behavior

Action oriented

Offender behavior is appropriately reinforced

Type of Treatment and Effect Sizes for Youthful OffendersSource: Dowden and Andrews (1999), What Works in Young Offender Treatment: A Meta Analysis. Forum on Correctional Research.Non-BehavioralBehavioral00.050.10.150.20.25Effect Size0.040.24Reductions in Recidivism

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

Social LearningRefers 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

Some Family Based InterventionsDesigned to train family on behavioral approachesFunctional Family TherapyMulti-Systemic TherapyTeaching Family ModelStrengthening Families ProgramCommon Sense ParentingParenting Wisely

Effectiveness of Family Based Intervention: Results from Meta Analysis38 primary studies with 53 effect tests

Average reduction in recidivism= 21%

However, much variability was present (-0.17 - +0.83)Dowden & Andrews, 2003

Mean Effect Sizes: Whether or not the family intervention adheres to the principles

The Four Principles of Cognitive InterventionThinking affects behavior

Antisocial, distorted, unproductive irrational thinking can lead to antisocial and unproductive behavior

Thinking can be influenced

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

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

Significant Findings (effects were stronger if): Sessions per week (2 or more) - RISKImplementation monitored - FIDELITYStaff trained on CBT - FIDELITYHigher proportion of treatment completers -RESPONSIVITY Higher risk offenders - RISK Higher if CBT is combined with other services - NEED

Cognitive-BehavioralCognitive TheoriesSocial Learning TheoryWHAT to changeHOW to change itWhat offenders thinkHow offenders thinkModelPracticeReward

In 2007 we use these approaches to develop a program for Youth who had parole revoked and were returned to an institutionBased on Social Learning CBT modelTargeted moderate to high revoked youthDesigned to provide over 200 hours of structured txt.GoalsShorter length of stayReduced incidentsReduced recidivism

**DYS Revo Center Recidivism Rates 12 months later for Treatment versus Comparison group

Chart1

0.150.25

0.030.09

0.190.34

TX

COMP

Sheet1

REVOKEDDRCANY

TX15%3%19%

COMP25%9%34%

Category 33.51.83

Category 44.52.85

To resize chart data range, drag lower right corner of range.

**DYS Revo Center; Institutional Misconduct for Treatment versus Comparison Groups

Chart1

0.10.39

0.290.51

TX

COMP

Sheet1

TXCOMPSeries 3

ANY VIOLENCE10%39%2

ANY INCIDENT29%51%2

Category 33.51.83

Category 44.52.85

To resize chart data range, drag lower right corner of range.

**DYS Revo Center Length of Stay (Days) for All Participants

Chart1

88.9128.5

Treatment

Comparison

Sheet1

TreatmentComparisonSeries 3

Days88.9128.52

Category 22.54.42

Category 33.51.83

Category 44.52.85

To resize chart data range, drag lower right corner of range.

What Doesnt Work with Offenders?

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 ridersSay 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.

Ineffective Approaches with OffendersPrograms that cannot maintain fidelityPrograms that target non-criminogenic needsDrug prevention classes focused on fear and other emotional appealsShaming offendersDrug education programsNon-directive, client centered approachesBibliotherapyTalking curesVague unstructured rehabilitation programsPunishing smarter (boot camps, scared straight, etc.)

Fidelity PrincipleMaking sure the program is delivered as designed and with integrity:

Ensure staff are modeling appropriate behavior, are qualified, well trained, well supervision, etc.

Make sure barriers are addressed but target criminogenic needs

Make sure appropriate dosage of treatment is provided

Monitor delivery of programs & activities, etc.

Use curriculum driven behavioral programs

Reassess youth in meeting target behaviors

Barriers to ChangeWhat often gets in the way

Lack of Strong LeadershipAdministratorsGive change lip service, but do not really want to change approach

No identified overseer of changes or unstable leadership

Want to pick and choose elements they like

Reluctant to challenge staff

Too busy to get involved in the treatment

Dont understand the model or have the skills

Failure to develop detailed program description and program manual

Mid level supervisors Feel threatened (fear staff will know more than they do) Dont have the skills or competencies Failure to ensure staff are following program description or program manual Are not part of the decision making Afraid to challenge staff Us against them mentality (form alliance with staff to resist change)

StaffNatural resistance to change

Maybe true believers in existing model (often because it worked for them)

Dont have the skills or competencies

Requires work (I wasnt hired for this)

Are not challenged by supervisors

AssessmentDo not take assessment seriouslyIgnore Responsivity factorsAssess offenders then dont use it everyone gets the same treatmentDo not develop and/or update treatment plansDo not reassessMake errors and dont correctDo not adequately train staff in use or interpretationAssessment instruments are not validated or normedDo not budget for assessment cost

Treatment (Learn the words but not the music)Do just enough to pass the testJust take the parts they like or are easyResist feedback on delivering treatment as designedResists changes to the treatment schedule (particularly when the dosage is increased)Quick to conclude that changes to treatment arent working (if a participant fails or treatment component requires modification)Consistency in high fidelity program delivery

Lack of On-Going Quality AssuranceDrift from model

Introduction of new program elements that are not always consistent with the model

Failure to have QA processes (including ongoing observation of service delivery with feedback)

Failure to respond to findings from QA processes

Failure to evaluate

Other barriers

Outside influences (i.e. political, financial, personal)

Failure to develop internal capacity

So, what are some of the characteristics of effective programs?

Program Leadership and Development FindingsEffective programs associated withAmple supervision by PDQualified PD (education & experience)PD involved in training & delivering the programLiterature reviews conducted & program based on effective modelStable fundingStrong support for the program

Staff Characteristics FindingsEffective programs associated withSkills by which staff are selectedproblem solving, assertive/directive, firm but fair, job skillsClinical supervision by qualified staffClinical meetingsHeld weekly, case files reviewed, PD/CM/security staff attendIncorporate ongoing training60-90 hours of initial training Percent with college degree in human service areaHave program input

Offender Assessment FindingsEffective programs associated withExclusionary criteriaRisk assessedSpecific need factors assessedResponsivity assessed (3 or more factors)Use standardized assessment toolsTraining on risk assessment both formal and OTJReassess before termination with a standardized instrument

Treatment Characteristics FindingsEffective programs associated withRange of criminogenic needs targeted:Attitudes, relationship skills, vocational, self-control, lying/stealing/cheatingBased on cognitive behavioral model Group interventions incorporate positive attributesRegular use of role play, ample dosage , training on curriculumUse of graduated practiceGroup size does not exceed 10/1

Treatment Characteristics Cont.Appropriate use of rewardsSanctioning types and process appropriateBased on anti-social behavior, explanation provided, individualized, undesirable, written policy in placeOffenders supervised during treatment and in communityVaried service and length of stay by riskKept occupied 40-70% of time Standard completion criteriaProvided aftercare

Quality Assurance/Evaluation FindingsEffective programs associated withFrequency of group observation (3 or more times/year) Periodic file reviewPre/post testingStaff evaluationReceptive to supervision, ability to handle crisis situations, avoid negative interactions with clients and empatheticInternal audits conducted External QA occursOutcome evaluations & recidivism follow-up

Some thing rememberAssess risk and assign youth to programs accordinglyDesign programs around the researchMake sure dosage is adequateRemover barriers but focus on criminogenic risk factorsUse curriculum driven behavioral programsTrain staff and monitor service delivery

*****Cognitive theory and social learning theory work together to form the cognitive-behavioral approach. Together, they dictate (1) WHAT about offenders should be targeted in order to change their behaviors and (2) HOW to go about making the changes.

The integration of cognitive theory with the social learning processes yields cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). From cognitive theories we see that how and what a person thinks affects his or her behavior. To change peoples behavior from antisocial to prosocial, cognitive theory tells us that by changing offenders thoughts and thinking patterns, we are likely to reduce their future criminal behavior. Social learning theory presents the processes underlying how a person comes to adopt and maintain thoughts and behaviors. By using these same learning processes we can teach and reinforce the cognitive skills and prosocial cognitions that will foster a crime-free life. *****