|
Kelley Heifort, MN DOC Community Reentry Director
MNSIRR is making strides to use “what works to change lives.” One of the first steps is assessing programs to see how closely our current work is aligned with evidence-based practices. MNSIRR partnerships have trained and certified over 40 government staff in sharing the responsibility of assessing programs around the state; these include both corrections contracted and non-contracted programs. The assessments help provide a roadmap of improvements which will help programs become more successful at reducing recidivism. Working closely with corrections and social service programs, we’re making investments in the training staff and community service providers around evidence-based practices. Specifically, Risk, Needs and Responsivity Factors (R-N-R) to help Minnesota build the best programs and responses to reducing repeat criminal offending. When we assess what’s driving criminal behavior, and intently target those behaviors for changes, programs and service interventions can make even bigger impacts toward change. This month’s news highlights the assessment tool Corrections Program Assessment, as well as providing information on R-N-R. Finally, one of the biggest impacts on the process of changing offender behavior, the greatest value, is the professionalism and skills of staff in supporting that change.
Risk, Needs and Responsivity
Chris Busche, MNSIRR Regional Coordinator
The concept of the RNR Model first began in the United States in the 1980's. This period of criminal justice was focused on "getting tough on crime" and increasing punitive sanctions for most offenses, including "truth in sentencing" and "three strikes" laws. These coincided with a rapid expansion of local, state and federal correctional facilities in addition to soaring budgets for corrections agencies to accommodate the rapid increase of correctional clientele.
At the same time, there were researchers and corrections professionals closely examining the outcomes of this new era of corrections in America. One outcome of research remained consistent during this period: correctional sanctions alone did not reduce the likelihood an incarcerated individual would return to prison, also known as recidivism. Yet, studies showed rehabilitative efforts, such as treatment, effectively reduced recidivism. In particular, treatment which focused on the individual psychology of criminal conduct (antisocial personality, pro-criminal attitudes, substance use, etc.) produced the best outcomes.
Given the research on individual psychology and criminal behavior, researchers D.A. Andrews and James Bonta identified three principles (RNR Model) in the early 1990's to guide effective assessment and treatment of offenders.
Risk Principle – The level of services provided to an offender should match the offender's risk of reoffending.
Need Principle – Offenders should be assessed for criminal risk factors and treatment should be tailored to those factors.
Responsivity Principle – Provided treatment, typically cognitive-behavioral in nature, should be given in a way that is responsive to an offender's learning style, motivation, abilities and strengths.
What does the RNR Model mean for corrections professionals today? It is an evidence based standard of providing correctional services. It helps guide effective prioritization of services to offenders in the reality of limited budgets and resources. It also provides a framework of assessment and treatment which maximizes beneficial outcomes for offenders and staff alike. In order to help staff better understand and incorporate the RNR Model in their daily job duties, each principle will be broken down and examined further with future articles. Please stay tuned for more discussion on the RNR model.
Sources:
Andrews, D.A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating Criminal Justice Policy and Practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 16.1, 39-55.
Schweitzer, M., & Pitocco, K. (2015). What Works in Reducing Recidivism. University of Cincinnati Corrections Institute.
Corrections Program Checklist
Pete Sutter, MNSIRR Regional Coordinator
The MNSIRR Vision is that “Every offender will have access to the services, supports and resources he or she needs to succeed in the community upon release, thereby reducing recidivism and increasing public safety.” In an effort to realize that vision, MNSIRR has employed tools and strategies that adhere to the science of recidivism reduction. We are focused on building our capacity to deliver effective interventions across the state.
Our vision is not just a fleeting thought of an inert mission, it informs our decisions at the highest level and is meant to be an actionable and dynamic call to action. As corrections professionals, we are agents of change, and are responding to the requirements of justice and helping those that need it most. This is a large part of what gives our work meaning.
To those ends, DOC and other correctional agencies are engaged in assessing the services we utilize using a tool called the Evidence Based Correctional Program Checklist Assessment (CPC). It, and its several variations, allow us to assess our ability to work with high risk offenders and determine how well our delivery system aligns with evidence based practices (EBP). Alignment with EBP is essential to reducing recidivism, and is the reason we assess our programs. This article will briefly discuss what the CPC is, why we use it and how the MNSIRR is using the CPC assessment in making change.
The CPC is a tool developed by University of Cincinnati for assessing correctional intervention programs.1 It is used to ascertain how closely correctional programs meet the known principles of effective intervention. Several recent studies conducted by the University of Cincinnati on both adult and juvenile programs were used to develop and validate the indicators on the CPC. These studies found strong correlations with outcome between both domain areas and individual items (Holsinger, 1999; Lowenkamp and Latessa, 2003, Lowenkamp, 2003; Lowenkamp & Latessa, 2005a; Lowenkamp and Latessa, 2005b).
The CPC is divided into two basic areas; content and capacity. The capacity area is designed to measure whether a correctional program has the capability to deliver evidence based interventions and services for offenders. There are three domains in the capacity area including: Leadership and Development, Staff, and Quality Assurance. The content area focuses on the substantive domains of Offender Assessment and Treatment, and the extent to which the program meets the principles of risk, need, responsivity and treatment (RNR). There are a total of seventy-seven indicators, worth up to 83 total points that are scored during the assessment.
Each area and all domains are scored and rated as either "highly adherent to EBP" (65% to 100%); "adherent to EBP" (55% to 64%); “Low Adherence to EBP" (46% to 54%); or "Very Low Adherence to EBP" (45% or less). The scores in all five domains are totaled and the same scale is used for the overall assessment score. It should be noted that not all of the five domains are given equal weight, and some items may be considered "not applicable," in which case they are not included in the scoring.
There are many advantages to assessing programs with the CPC:
1. It is applicable to a wide range of programs (adult, juvenile, community, institutional, etc.).
2. It is validated and measures accurately program components essential to reducing recidivism
3. It Measures both the integrity and quality of a program
4. It identifies both the strengths and weaknesses of a program
5. Allows for benchmarking across time through continuous assessments, and by comparison with other assessed programs
6. Result are obtained quickly
Most importantly though is that along with a scaled score, a list of recommendations is produced to address program weaknesses and helps programs engage in meaningful continuous quality improvement.
MNSIRR is using the CPC as part of a collaborative effort in partnership with State of MN, Hennepin, Ramsey, Washington, Anoka, Scott and Stearns County. There are currently 61 Assessors across the state trained and certified in the tool and actively engaged in assessing programs.
Statewide, three variations of the CPC are in use:
1. The CPC, (Used to assess programs)
2. CPC-GA, (Used to assess groups) and
3. CPC-CSA (Community Supervision Agencies)
It is important to have a snapshot of the entire correctional system in order to have the biggest impact on recidivism as possible. Therefore, we are using these tools to assess programs that exist both within our state and county departments, and those offered by contracted vendors and community service providers. Once an assessment is complete, the work of making meaningful change begins.
Post assessment, MNSIRR is using the findings to assist our three regional coordinators working on recidivism reduction. Chris Busche, Kevin Fawcett and Charles Sutter use these assessments to help programs set goals, action plan around those goals and help secure the resources and training programs need to implement recommendations. With a little luck and hard work, we will be able to reach our goal of cutting the recidivism rate of our highest risk offenders by 30 percent.
There will be many among us that will scoff at these optimistic efforts; those who may let inertia take hold and allow the fear of change to prevent meaningful progress. For those involved in MNSIRR, we know the vision is clear, recidivism reduction is important and the CPC is an guiding tool which will help us reach our goals.
Exploring “What Works”
|
