TAKING IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL:
Core Correctional Practices
Paula Smith, Ph.D.
School of Criminal Justice
College of Education, Criminal Justice and Human Services
University of Cincinnati
Presented at the
Annual Meeting of the IACCAC
Indianapolis, IN
November 2012

Correctional Paradigms
Rehabilitation Punishment

Rehabilitation Paradigm
Rehabilitation should be undertaken as part of a coherent paradigm and consists of three components:
Theoretical Framework (Criminological)
Empirical Support (Correctional)
Tools for Practitioners (Technological)

CRIMINOLOGICAL COMPONENT
Theoretical Framework

Psychology of Criminal Conduct
•
The psychology of criminal conduct is based on principles of human behavior that are rooted in behavioral, cognitive and social learning theories.
•
This approach seeks to provide an theoretical, empirical and practical understanding of criminal behavior .

CORRECTIONAL COMPONENT
The Contributions of Meta-Analysis and the
Principles of Effective Intervention

Principles of Effective Intervention:
The RNR Framework
RISK NEED RESPONSIVITY
WHO WHAT HOW
Deliver more intense intervention to higher risk offenders
Target criminogenic needs to reduce risk for recidivism
Use CBT approaches
Match mode/style of service to offender

The Risk Principle
If you intend to reduce recidivism, then it is critical to focus on the offenders who are most likely to re-offend!
Assess and identify higher risk offenders.
Deliver greater dosage of treatment to higher risk offenders.

The Risk Principle
Avoid including lower risk offenders in more intense (or restrictive) services as it is likely to increase recidivism rates.
WHY?
We disrupt protective factors.
We expose them to higher risk peers.
We also force them to interact with us…

The Need Principle
Criminal History
Antisocial Attitudes/Cognitive-Emotional States
Antisocial Peers
Temperamental and Personality Factors
______________________________________________________
Family and Marital Factors
Education and Employment
Substance Abuse
Leisure and Recreation

The Responsivity Principle
Use cognitive-behavioral strategies to decrease antisocial behaviors and increase prosocial behaviors.
Match the style and mode of service to key offender characteristics and learning styles.

Taking Stock of the
Principles of Effective Intervention
Smith, Gendreau and Swartz (2009)
•
There are more than 40 published meta-analyses of the correctional treatment literature.
•
Results have been replicated with remarkable consistency; there is considerable support for the
RNR framework across quantitative reviews of the literature.

Core Correctional Practices
Gendreau, Andrews and Theriault (2010)
Effective Reinforcement
Effective Disapproval
Effective Use of Authority
Cognitive Restructuring
Anti-Criminal Modeling/Structured Skill Building
Problem Solving
Relationship Skills/Motivational Interviewing

Relationship Skills in Mandated Treatment
Skeem et al. (2007)
CARING AND FAIRNESS
TRUST
AUTHORITATIVE (VERSUS AUTHORITARIAN)

Relationship Skills in Correctional Settings
Spiegler and Guevremont (2010)
…the therapist-client relationship is a necessary but not a sufficient condition of treatment (p. 9).

Core Correctional Practices
Staff members should view themselves as agents of change and support the goals of offender rehabilitation.

TECHNOLOGICAL COMPONENT
Technology Transfer and the
Diffusion of Innovation

Demonstration Projects vs. Routine Programs
•
Previous research has found a difference in the average effect size for demonstration projects vs.
routine programs in corrections.
–
Egg et al. (2000)
–
Lab and Whitehead (1990)
–
Lipsey (1999)
–
Lowenkamp et al. (2006)
–
Ortmann (2000)

Demonstration Projects vs. Routine Programs
•
The UC database now contains more than 680 evaluations of individual programs/correctional agencies.
•
Unfortunately, the vast majority (64%) do not receive a passing grade.

UC Program Evaluation Research:
Adult Residential Programs
•
We examined the program level characteristics correlated with outcome in three major studies involving several hundred programs and more than
40,000 offenders.

Adult Residential Programs:
Treatment
1.
Criminogenic needs are targeted.
2.
Cognitive-behavioral approaches are used.
3.
Facilitators use structured skill building exercises with clients.
Modeling and role playing skills
Graduated rehearsal
4.
Offenders are supervised in treatment and the community.
5.
Intensity and duration of services are varied by risk and need.

Adult Residential Programs:
Evaluation
1.
The program collects recidivism data on participants.
2.
The program has conducted an outcome evaluation.
3.
External quality assurance protocols have been established.
4.
File reviews are regularly conducted.
5.
Offenders complete pre/post tests to document change.

Adult Residential Programs:
Overall Results
• Results indicated that there was a strong correlation between program level characteristics and reductions in recidivism (r = .60).
• All the areas matter, but assessment , treatment and implementation were particularly important.

UC Program Evaluation Research:
Adult Community-Based Programs
•
We examined the program level characteristics correlated with outcome in more than two hundred adult community-based programs and 13,000 offenders.
•
Sample included both misdemeanants and felons under community supervision.
•
Specific programs included day reporting centers, work release, ISP, and EM.

Director caseload
Staff input
Training
Caseload size
Funding
Process eval
Exclusions followed
Hours of tx per week
Manual
RP-supervision
Higher risk sample
Adult Community-Based Programs:
Program Level Characteristics
Director experience
Staff experience
Budget
Pre/post test
QA
# of groups available
Length of program
Manual followed
RP-treatment
75% of referrals for tx
Staff value/skill
Staff meetings
Community support
Outcome eval
Tx model
Exclusionary criteria
Separate groups by risk
Offender input
Quality aftercare
Success rate

Adult Community-Based Programs:
Four Factors
•
Proportion of higher risk offenders in program (at least 75% of offenders in programs were moderate or high risk)
•
Level of supervision for higher risk offenders (averaged longer periods of supervision than lower risk)
•
More treatment for higher risk offenders (at least 50% more time spent in treatment)
•
More referrals for services for higher risk offenders (at least 3 referrals for every 1 received by lower risk)

PROGRAM INTEGRITY – In all three studies…
• IT MATTERED.
• It can be changed.
• Good programs (based on sound theory) can substantially reduce recidivism. However, the same program poorly implemented can actually increase recidivism.

Program Implementation
Evidence-Based Practice
Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment
“They know the words but not the music.”
Edward Latessa (2010)

Program Implementation
“What Works” “How to Make It Work”

Specific Gaps in Program Implementation
ALL corrections professional should view themselves as agents of change.
It is critical to understand that short-term compliance does not necessarily translate into long-term behavioral change.
It is critical to take advantage of teachable moments in order to encourage offenders to generalize skills beyond the treatment setting.

Specific Gaps in Program Implementation
•
Administering a risk assessment ≠ Using the results
•
Identifying a domain ≠ Generating an individualized treatment plan
•
Implementing a structured treatment manual ≠ CBT program
•
Training staff ≠ Proficiency in skills related to service delivery

Overview of Implementation Projects
Phase I:
Curriculum Development/Program Design
Phase II:
Training
Phase III:
Implementation/Coaching
Phase IV:
Quality Improvement

Phase I:
Curriculum Development/Program Design
•
A Multidisciplinary Implementation Team (MIT) is established at each site to plan and monitor the implementation of new program elements.
•
The MIT should incorporate at least one member from each discipline/job title that has regular contact with program participants.
–
Administration
–
Supervisors
–
Clinicians and group facilitators
–
Case managers
–
Security staff
–
Training and/or quality assurance coordinators

Phase I:
Curriculum Development/Program Design
•
Sub-committees are developed to focus on four key implementation areas:
–
Assessment and case management
–
Structured treatment curricula and program schedule
–
Behavior modification system
–
Training and quality assurance
•
The UCCI plays an active role in this process to ensure that planned changes are consistent with evidence-based practices and the program model.

Phase II:
Training
•
Training hours and topics vary based on program needs.
•
The UCCI provides the majority of the training, but the MIT assists with instruction on specific program elements.

Phase III:
Implementation and Coaching
•
During this phase, modified program components are piloted with staggered implementation.
•
On-site and videoconference coaching are provided on a regular basis (weekly to monthly, depending on phase and need), and includes observation of service delivery with feedback.
•
Implementation teams meet regularly to monitor progress and provide feedback.

Phase IV:
Quality Improvement
•
MIT continues to meet in order to review progress and sort out logistics and make further modifications if needed.
•
On-site and videoconference coaching sessions continue to be provided at this stage.
•
The UCCI focuses on individuals responsible for supervision and oversight of the program in order to ensure fidelity over time.

Phase IV:
Quality Improvement
•
Several feedback mechanisms are also established:
–
Surveys of participant and staff satisfaction
–
Exit evaluations
–
Standardized assessments to measure client progress in treatment
–
Structured staff evaluations of skills associated with service delivery

Contact Information
Paula Smith, Ph.D.
Director, Corrections Institute
Center for Criminal Justice Research
University of Cincinnati
(513) 556-5836 paula.smith@uc.edu