Module 5 and 6

Module 5: Advanced issues in Offender Treatment

Lecture 1: Punishment
• What do we mean by punishment?
o Deterrence & retribution sentencing principles = punishment
o Impose longer prison sentences (including death)
o Use prison sentences instead of community sentences
o Punish smarter (e.g., boot camps, shock incarceration, curfews, electronic
monitoring)
• A hypothetical research study: do longer prison sentence work?
A Hypothetical Research Study: Do
Longer Prison Sentences Work?
40
30
30 25
%
20

10
0
Recidivism Rate (12 month follow-up)
Prison 36 months Prison 12 months Effect size
= -.05
o
o Longitudinal type of research
• An aside: What is a meta-analysis?
o A meta-analysis is a statistical technique that allows researchers to aggregate
the results of a number of pre-existing ‘like-minded studies into one common
statistical metric known as an effect size’
o Meta-analyses in criminal behavior usually summarize treatment outcome
studies or studies examining the correlates and/or predictors of crime
o Meta-analyses also examine moderators that may influence the average effect
size (e.g., age, sex)
• Does punishment reduce future crime? A meta-analysis says…
Does punishment reduce future
crime? A meta-analysis says…
Type of Sanction (k) N r 95% CI

Incarceration vs. 6, 267, 804 .00 .00 - .00

community (103)

More vs. less prison 68, 248 .03 .02 -.04

time (222)

k = # of effect sizes, N = total # of offenders, r = weighted mean effect

size, CI = confidence intervals
Source: Gendreau, Goggin & Cullen, 1999

• Does punishing smarter strategies reduce crime? A meta-analysis says…

 Do punishing smarter strategies
reduce crime? A meta-analysis says
Type of Sanction Sample Size Average Effect Size
Intensive supervision 19,404 .00
Arrest 7, 779 .01
Fine 7, 162 -.04
Restitution 8, 715 -.02
Boot camp 6, 831 .00
Shock incarceration 1, 891 .07
Drug testing 419 .05
Electronic monitoring 1, 414 .05
• Source: Gendreau, Goggin, Cullen & Paparozzi, 2001

• Operant condition research has revealed 3 key findings

o The more immediate the reward or punishment the more effective
o The more consistent rewards and punishment are dished out following the
behavior the more effective
o The more severe the punishment or the more appealing the reward, the more
effective
• So, does punishment work?
o No, punishment-based models do not change criminal behavior
o Why not?
No consistency
No immediacy
Questionable severity
Lecture 2: Restorative Justice
• What is restorative justice?
o An alternative approach to dealing with criminal behavior
o “crime is a wound, justice should be healing” (Zehr, 2002)
o Involves all stakeholder: victim, offender, community
o Offender recognizes the harm done, accepts responsibility and makes
reparations (voluntary)
o Goal is to restore victim/offenders to their “whole” selves
o Very holistic approach
o w/ traditional punishment, victims aren’t typically involved but with restorative
justice the victim, the offender and the community play a central role
• the process: typical steps
o encounter
victims, offender, community
o amends
offender expected to repair harm
o reintegration
restore victims and offenders to full contributing members of society
o inclusion
 all parties with a stake must be asked to the table
• types of approaches
o victim offender mediation (conferencing) – most important/common
o victim assistance
o restitution ($$)
o community service
• does restorative justice work?

Does restorative justice “work”?

Outcome Mean Effect Size 95% CI
Victim satisfaction .19 .08 - .30
Offender satisfaction .17 NA
Restitution compliance .33 -.02 to .63
Recidivism .07 .02 - .12
Note. Studies examined: victim/offender mediation

Source: Latimer, Dowden & Muise (2005)

Lecture 3: Evolution of Offender Rehabilitation

• Offender rehabilitation: the Past
o Genesis from ‘nothing works’ (Martinson, 1974) to ‘what works’(Andrews,
Zinger, Hoge, Bonta, Gendreau & Cullen, 1990) to ‘for who’, ‘why’ and for ‘how
long’
o Historically, psychologist treated offenders (1 on 1) – targeting mental health
issues – anxiety, depression, using an array of unstructured methods
Targeting specific mental health in psychological counselling does not
work
• Offender rehabilitation: the present
o Structured, skills-based with role-playing & homework
o Standardized ‘off-the-shelf’ program content
o Delivered by the highly trained and skilled para-professionals
o Targets motivation and criminogenic needs/dynamic risk factors
o Delivery mode: grounded in social learning theory and cognitive behaviorism,
group setting, firm, fair, empathic
• Offender rehabilitation: founding fathers
o The Canadian school of corrections – developed in late 80s, early 90s home-
grown, later exported internationally
o Key feature: development of evidence-based practice
o Don Andrews, Jim Bonta, Paul Gendreau, Steve Wormith
o Importance of data to support policies
o 3 principles
Risk – high risk offenders
Need – antisocial behavior and attitudes
 Responsivity – general and specific responsivity
Lecture 4: What Works- Risk, Need , Responsivity and Beyond
• Evidence-based principle of offender rehabilitation (Andrews, bonta, hoge, 1990)
o Risk – who to target
o Need- what to target
o Responsivity – how to do it
o Professional override*** - always exception to the rule
• Risk principle
o Two tenets
Risk can be reliably assessed
Match level of service to the offender’s level of risk to reduce recidivism
o As risk increase so should the quantity of rehabilitation (e.g. more assessment,
more frequent contact with parole officer, more programs, more program hours,
increased dosage)
o In practice
Risk Principle in Practice

# of program hours
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0

Low Risk Moderate Risk High Risk

•
• Need principle
o To reduce recidivism, treatment services must target criminogenic needs
(dynamic risk factors)- can change
o Criminogenic needs are a subset of an offender’s risk level. They are dynamic
attributes of the offender that when changed, are associated with changes in
recidivism
o Excludes non-criminogenic needs (depression, anxiety)
o The central eight
Criminal history -- static
Criminal personality
Criminal associates
Criminal attitudes
Substance misuse/abuse
Marital/family deficits
Education/employment deficits
Unstructured leisure time
• The responsivity principle
o General responsivity
Optimal treatment response will be achieved when structured behavioral
interventions (e.g., cognitive behavior therapy) are offered in a warm
and empathic manner using a firm but fair approach
 o Specific responsivity
Are case-specific factors that either hinder (e.g., post-traumatic stress) or
facilitate (e.g., strengths) treatment program
o The black box of responsivity
Skills based
Standardized ‘off-the shelf’ program content
Grounded in social learning theory
• Role playing, homework, reinforcement, build self-efficacy
Cognitive behaviorism (alter thinking)
Delivered in firm, fair and empathic manner
Adapt program delivery style to individual needs and group
characteristics (gender, culture)
• Core correctional practices
o Empathic (reflect concern for others)
o Directive (leads discussions, sets goals)
o Fair
o Respectful (don’t talk down to offenders)
o Reinforcement
o Good communicator
o Motivational interviewing*
• Meta-analytic support for RNR

Meta-analytic support for RNR

Effect size
0.3 0.28
0.25 0.23
0.2
0.19
0.15
0.1
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05 Risk Need Responsivity R-N-R (all
met)
Principle Met Principle Not Met

• Andrews and Bonta, 2006

• How do correctional interventions compare to other interventions?

How do Correctional Interventions
Compare to other Interventions?
Intervention Effect Size (r)

Psychotherapy .32

Bypass surgery .15

Aspirin (for heart attacks) .03

AZT for Aids .23

•
Source: Marshall & McGuire 2003

• Summary
o Punishment does not reduce crime
o Restorative justice may not impact crime but it enhances victim and offender
satisfaction and restitution compliance
 o Offender rehabilitation has evolved considerably in the last 30 years thanks to
Canadian researchers
o RNR is the best empirically based model of offender rehabilitation
Module 6: Adolescent Offenders
Lecture 1: Nature of Youth Crime
• Case Study: “typical” adolescent offender
o Greg started hanging out with a bad crowd
o One night during a party, Greg and his buddies ran out of alcohol. Someone
suggested they ‘hit’ the local corner store
o Greg was hesitant but he was intoxicated (hence easily persuaded) and didn’t
want to look like a wimp in front of his new friends
o The next thing he knew he was in the back of a police cruiser (they got away with
50.00$)
• Youth charge rate in Canada

Youth Charge Rate in Canada

Per 100,000
6000
Total
5000
Violent
4000 Property
3000

2000 Violenceê 45%

(since 2001)
1000

0 Propertyê 74%
98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 (since 1998)
19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

o Source: Public Safety Canada (2015)

o Despite what the media suggests, youth crime is on the decrease

• Nature of youth court cases in Canada
Nature of Youth Court Cases in
Canada
% of youth court cases by principal charge
administration of justice/YCJA* 20.4
common assault/crimes agst persons 15
theft 11.7
break&enter 7.8
mischief 6.2
major assault 6
possess stolen property 5.7
drug offences 5.6
robbery 4.8
weapons 3.6
sexual assaults 3.6
homicide &related 0.1

• Source: Public Safety (2015) 0 5 10 15 20 25

• Nature of court-imposed youth sentences in Canada (Public safety, 2015)

 Nature of court-imposed youth
sentences in Canada (Public Safety, 2015)
%
60
50 48.5

40
30
20.9
20 14.9
10 8.5
2.8 4.5
0
Probation Custody Community Fine Defered Other
Service Order Custody and
Supervision
Order
*percentages represents most serious sentence

•
• The message
o Despite what the media implies
Youth crime (violent and non-violent) is steadily declining
Most youth crime is not serious, consequently probation and very short
custodial sentences are the norm
Lecture 2: Theories of Adolescent Offending
• Generalist theories vs adolescent specific theories

Theories of Adolescent Crime

Psychodynamic & Evolutionary/biological

Learning perspectives perspectives
(module 3) (module 2)

Developmental
life course
theory of criminal
conduct

Generalist theories vs. adolescent-specific theories

•
• Developmental Life Course Perspective: Key Elements
o Draws upon pre-existing theories
o Refers to a cluster of research/theories focused on understanding:
The pattern of antisocial behavior over the life course
How risk and protective factors have differential influences depending
upon age
o Defining methodological feature – longitudinal
• Developmental life course research: three key findings
o Age/crime curve: most crime is perpetrated by youth and young adults
o Different types/ typologies of offenders exist (e.g., life course persistent vs
adolescent limited)
o Different causal pathways exist for different types of offenders with different
prognoses
• Age crime curve example: Canadian charge rate (per 100 000) by age (statistics Canada,
2014)
Age Crime Curve Example: Canadian
Charge rate (per 100,000) by age (Statistics Canada,
2014)

•
• Youthful offender typology example (Moffitt, 1993)
o Adolescent limited
Late onset – post puberty
Majority of youth
Rebellious/minor crimes
Restricted to adolescence
Has prosocial skills (education) to achieve goals (respect etc)
o Life Course Persistent
Early on set (pre-puberty)
Small minority of youth
Serious & varied acts
Persists into adulthood
Lack skills to adopt prosocial alternatives to gain goals (respect, control,
material things)
• Causes and outcomes: life course persistent (LCP) Offender
o Cause
Interaction between vulnerable predisposition and criminogenic
environment
o Maintenance
Cumulative developmental forces account for continuity from childhood
to adulthood
o Prognosis
Poor, likely to maintain criminal lifestyle well into adult hood
o Domine/snowball effect
• Causes and Outcomes: Adolescent Limited
o Causes
Maturation gap results in desire to have what the life course persistent
offender has (respect, independence, material things)
o Maintenance:
Exposure to life course offenders & the nature of adolescence
 o Prognosis
Excellent, will grow out of eventually
Lecture 3: Understanding Strengths
• What are strengths?
o Positive aspects of a persons’ life (internal or external)
o Has the capacity to reduce risk for criminal involvement (i.e., promotive factors)
o Has the capacity to be particularly effective at buffering likelihood of recidivism
in an otherwise high-risk group (i.e., protective factors)
• Traditional risk assessment approach
o The commonly adopted risk/need model of assessment is deficit-based
o Focuses on identifying and targeting criminogenic needs
o Despite empirical support for this model, it provides an incomplete picture, BUT
need more research to fully understand potential contributions of strengths
Lecture 4: Adolescent Offender Assessment
• Adolescent offender assessment
o Assessing problem behavior
Self-report, testing + collateral
Internalizing (suicide, anxiety)
Externalizing (aggression, anger)
o Risk assessment
Interview + collateral
Youth level of service / case management Inventory (YLS/CMI 2.0, Hoge &
Andrews, 2011)
• Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Version 2 (MAYSI-2, GRISSON & BARNUM,
2006)
o 15-minute 54 item, self-report tools (y/n)
Alcohol/drug
Irritability/anger
Suicide ideation
Traumatic experiences
Somatic complaints
Thought disturbances
Depression/anxiety
• YLS/CMI 2.0 (Hoge & Andrews, 2011)
o 42 item risk/need tool
o Assesses central eight
o Strengths captured
o Responsivity factors captures
o Renders a total risk/need score (0 to 42)
• Now what?
o Categorize youth into one of 5 risk/need levels
o Custodial male
Low (0-19)
 Moderate (20-29)

Now what? High (30-36)

Very high (37-42)
o Clinician can over-ride
• Categorize youth into one Recidivism Rate by YLS risk/need level
of five risk/need levels: 80 75
• Custodial male: 60
45
• Low (0-19) 40
25
• Moderate (20 – 29) 20 15
• High (30 – 36) 0
• Very High (37 – 42) lo
w
rat
e
hi
gh
hi
gh
de
• Clinician can over-ride m
o
ve
ry

Lecture 5: Re-visiting How risk Assessment is Done

• Four types of risk assessment
Type of Factors Overall Recidivism
Evaluation Evaluation Estimates
Unstructured ? Professional No
Clinical Judgement
Judgement
Empirical- Empirically Mechanical Yes
Actuarial* Derived Actuarial
Structured Theory Professional No
Professional Judgement
Judgement
Mechanical Theory Mechanical No

• How would you classify the YLS/CMI 2.0?

o Empirical actuarial tool but technically an adjusted actuarial tool (see Brown et
al, p.101)
Lecture 6: Interventions with Adolescent Offenders
• levels of intervention
Type of Intervention Target Population Ultimate Goal
Primary (e.g. alchohol/drug Universal Prevent onset of problem
education within behavior; reduce risk
elementary school factors, enhance strengths
curriculum)
Secondary (prenatal & At-risk youth Prevent onset, reduce
infancy home visitations by emerging symptoms, target
nurses) existing risk factors
Tertiary (multisystemic Serious, chronic, delinquent Reduce further violence,
therapy) youth delinquency
• Multi-systematic Therapy (MST)
o Main goal
To empower parents to help make pragmatic changes in the youth’s and
the family’s natural environments
• Target the individual, family, peers, school and community
• Key- delivered in the community
• Average length 4 months, 60 hours
• Combined approaches (e.g., parenting training, cognitive
behavioural)
• MST meta-analysis (Curtis, Ronan, Borduin, 2004)
o Reviewed 11 MST studies that compared the effectiveness of MST with other
‘services as usual’
o 708 participants
o Bottom line: MST yielded positive outcomes in
Reduced criminal activity – moderate effects
Better family interactions – large effects
Better school attention – moderate effects
Individual and peers’ improvements – small effects
• What works? (Aos et al., 2001)

What works? (Aos et al., 2001)

Program (# of effects) Effect Net benefit per

Size* participant ($)
Nurse home visitation (2) .29 -2,067 to 15,918
Quantum Opportunities (1) .31 -8,855 to 16,428
Multisystemic Therapy (3) .31 31,661 to 131, 918
Functional Family Therapy (7) .25 14,149 to 59, 067
Multidimensional Treatment Foster (2) .37 21,836 to 87,622
Adolescent Diversion Project (5) .27 5,720 to 27,212
Intensive Probation (7) .05 176 to 6,812
Scared Straight Programs (8) -.13 -6,572 to -24,531
Juvenile boot camps (10) -.10 10,360 to -3,587
•
• What about therapist competency? (Barnoski, 2004)
o Functional Family Therapy (FFT)
Generates 2.77$ in savings (avoided crime costs) for each taxpayer dollar
spent on the program, regardless of therapist’s competence
Competent: 10.69 $ savings
Incompetent: -4.18$ negative returns
o Aggression replacement therapy
Overall: 6.71$ savings
Competent: 11.66$ savings
Incompetent: -3.10$ negative returns
o Thus, therapist competence is a moderator of program effectiveness
• Summary
o Youth crime is decreasing in Canada
o A small number of chronic offenders account for most crime
o Developmental researches have made important contributions
o Strengths are an important part of the puzzle
o Specialized assessment is used with youth
o Some treatment approaches work with adolescents and are also cost effective