Search results

The purpose of this paper is to determine reconviction outcomes for 2,882 male and female offenders with significant alcohol and other drug (AOD) criminogenic needs, serving custodial sentences in New South Wales, between 2007 and 2011, who participated in the Getting SMART and/or the SMART Recovery® programs.

A quasi-experimental research design utilized data from 2,343 offenders attending Getting SMART; 233 attending SMART Recovery© and 306 attending both programs, compared to a propensity score-matched control group of 2,882 offenders. Cox and Poisson regression techniques determined survival times to first reconviction and rates of reconvictions, adjusting for time at risk.

Getting SMART participation was significantly associated with improved odds of time to first reconviction by 8 percent and to first violent reconviction by 13 percent, compared to controls. Participants attending both programs (Getting SMART and SMART Recovery©), had significantly lower reconviction rate ratios for both general (21 percent) and violent (42 percent) crime, relative to controls. Getting SMART attendance was associated with significant reductions in reconviction rates of 19 percent, and the reduction for SMART Recovery© attendance (alone) was 15 percent, the latter figure being non-significant. In all, 20 hours in either SMART program (ten sessions) was required to detect a significant therapeutic effect.

Criminal justice jurisdictions could implement this two SMART program intervention model, knowing a therapeutic effect is more likely if Getting SMART (12 sessions of cognitive-restructuring and motivation) is followed by SMART Recovery© for ongoing AOD therapeutic maintenance and behavioral change consolidation. SMART Recovery©, a not-for-profit proprietary program, is widely available internationally.

Getting SMART and SMART Recovery© have not previously been rigorously evaluated. This innovative two-program model contributes to best practice for treating higher risk offenders with AOD needs, suggesting achievable reductions in both violent and general reoffending.

This study evaluated the effectiveness of prison‐based cognitive skills programmes in England and Wales in reducing reconviction. Two‐year reconviction rates were compared for adult male offenders who had participated in a cognitive skills programme between 1996 and 1998 (N = 649) and matched adult male offenders who had not participated (N = 1,947). There were no significant differences in the rates of reconviction between the treatment and matched comparisons. This contrasts with a previous study of prison‐based cognitive skills programmes. Possible explanations for the current finding are discussed. For example, these results may merely reflect expected variation; international experience mirrors the variable reductions in reconviction rates found so far in the evaluation of prison‐based programmes. This evaluation relates to a period when programmes were expanded rapidly, and this may have affected the quality of programme delivery.

The purpose of this paper is to determine recidivism outcomes for 953 offending men with domestic violence histories, serving community-based sentences and enroled in the domestic abuse program (DAP), provided by Corrective Services New South Wales in Australia.

An intention to treat definition of DAP participation and a quasi-experimental and pseudo-prospective research design compared recidivism outcomes of the treatment group to a propensity score matched control group. Cox and Poisson regression techniques determined survival time to first reconviction and rates of reconvictions adjusted for time at risk.

DAP enrolment was associated with significant improvements in odds of time to first general reconviction (15 per cent) and first violent reconviction (by 27 per cent) compared to controls. Reconviction rates were significantly lower (by 15 per cent) for DAP enrolees. Programme completion was necessary for significant therapeutic effect; 62 per cent completed the programme.

This evaluation suggests the 20 session DAP is an effective intervention which could be adopted by other jurisdictions to modify criminal behaviours of domestically abusive men; potentially lessening the physical, emotional and financial impacts on victims and providing savings to government and criminal justice systems. The methodology, with refinements, could be adopted by other service providers to evaluate similar community-based therapeutic interventions in forensic settings.

First peer reviewed evaluation of the DAP. The programme contributes to evidence-based best practice interventions for domestically violent men.

The purpose of this paper is to determine recidivism costs and benefits for 1,030 community-based male offenders enrolled in a domestic abuse program (DAP) compared to an untreated control group (n=1,030) matched on risk factors.

The study time frame was October 1, 2007-June 30, 2010 with reconvictions measured to December 31, 2010. Follow up averaged 19 months. Controls received standard community supervision, but no domestic violence group interventions. Follow up measures included court costs for violent and non-violent reconvictions; re-incarcerations and community-based orders costs measured in days.

Adjusting for time at risk, DAP enrollees had 29 percent fewer reconvictions, 46 percent fewer violent reconvictions, 34 percent fewer custodial days, but 23 percent more days on community orders. Costs: DAP enrollment avoided $2.52 M in custodial costs, but higher community correction costs (+$773 K) and court costs (+$5.8 K), reducing the DAP’s criminal justice system cost savings to $1.754 M ($8.92 M for the DAP group compared to $10.67M for controls). Cost benefits: when the 64 DAP program costs were deducted ($602 K), the net benefit to the New South Wales criminal justice system was $1,141 M, or $1,108 per enrollee, providing a net benefit/cost ratio of 2.89. If the DAP was completed, the net benefit was $1,820 per offender. These results compares favorably to economic evaluations of other community-based interventions.

Group interventions for domestically violent (DV) offenders can provide good investment returns to tax payers and government by reducing demand on scarce criminal justice system resources. The study provides insights into justice costs for DV offenders; a methodological template to determine cost benefits for offender programs and a contribution to cost-effective evidence-based crime reduction interventions.

Using a rigorous methodology, official court, custodial and community correction services costing data, this is the first Australian cost benefit analysis of a domestic violence group intervention, and the first to justify program expenditure by demonstrating substantial savings to the criminal justice system.

This study aims to explore the demographic and reconviction data of individuals who had engaged in an established Intensive Intervention and Risk Management Service, a community service within the offender personality disorder pathway (OPD).

Demographic information and reconviction data from the Police National Computer was accessed for all participants (n = 69) released to the service over a 10-year period (2008– 2018), 45 of who met criteria to be included in the study. Their intervention period spans custody to community, with an expected period of 2 years engagement upon release.

Participants in the service had experienced significant traumatic histories, with four or more adverse childhood experiences. Individuals had a mean of 17 convictions for violent and/or sexual offences and an average of 11 years in custody prior to release. The average length of intervention at Resettle in the community was almost 19 months, with an additional minimum of six months in-reach prior to release. A total of 60% of individuals were recalled back to custody at least once during their intervention, with this being more likely for those who had been convicted of a violent rather than sexual offence. Within the group who were reconvicted, the reconvictions were for less serious offences than the index offence, with only 16% being convicted of an indictable offence. Almost two-thirds (64.4%) did not receive a further conviction post-intervention in the follow-up period.

This follow-up study focused upon demographic and reconviction data from one established IIRMS. Although findings are not necessarily generalisable to other IIRMS and OPD pathway services, the demographic and reconviction data has important learning for how services may reflect upon engaging with individuals whose needs and risks had not previously been adequately met and managed upon release. This data are useful learning, for what may help individuals with complex needs upon release into the community after long sentences and how to best meet their needs. There are aspects of the Resettle IIRMS approach which could be applied to non-specialist services to encourage a holistic, compassionate and relational approach to reaching those with complex needs who pose significant risks to others.

This follow-up study has provided access to participants’ engagement with an established IIRMS. Although participants “opt in” to the service whilst in custody, engagement on release becomes a probation licence condition; a fixed boundary regarding attendance and engagement which, although enables robust risk management and reduces the likelihood of drop-out, also raises consideration about choice and control. The four day per week service provides an intensive intervention, for those with complex needs and limited prior experience of living safely (with minimal risk to self or others) in the community. Participants were previously offered little hope of release or effective support because of their risk, need, complexity and, in some cases, concern about whether their risk could be effectively managed. Although not a panacea for all, the results are suggestive of a service that is navigating the boundary between “care and control” to good effect for future resettlement and desistance.

The findings are important for service providers, commissioners and the public purse. The results are useful for the national development of IIRMS. The findings are also important for prisoners and people on probation to inform their decision-making regarding intervention choices and hope for what may be achievable.

Established in 2007, Vision Housing is a small London‐based specialist housing provider working primarily with ex‐offenders. This study seeks to evaluate the impact of Vision Housing's provision of housing and support on re‐offending rates.

The evaluation design compared expected re‐offending rates after one year calculated using offender group reconviction scale (OGRS3) with actual reoffending rates after one year based on data from the police national computer (PNC). “Re‐offending” was defined in line with the current Ministry of Justice definition based on “proven re‐offending”.

The predicted rate of proven re‐offending for 400 clients referred to Vision over 12 months was 40.7 per cent. Their actual proven re‐offending rate over 12 months was 37.0 per cent. This is 3.7 percentage points less than the predicted proven re‐offending rate, equivalent to a 9.1 per cent reduction in proven re‐offending. This result was statistically significant. Analysis also suggested that Vision Housing is more successful with women; offenders under the age of 35; offenders referred by the Prison and Probation Service; offenders with a higher predicted risk of proven re‐offending; and offenders who had committed more serious offences.

The evaluation conducted to date does not include a comparison group and therefore has relatively low levels of internal validity.

The authors are not aware of any UK studies of the impact of housing on re‐offending that have successfully used a more methodologically robust evaluation design. Until such studies are carried out, the results of the current study should be of great interest to policy‐makers and those delivering rehabilitative services to ex‐offenders in partnership with third sector organisations.

This study has produced evidence of the impact of housing on recidivism and quantified that impact.

The purpose of this paper is to assess whether mental health symptoms affect one-year reoffending rates upon release from prison for participants engaging in substance dependence treatment in the UK.

A retrospective cohort study was used to assess reconviction outcomes upon release. The Comprehensive Addiction and Psychological Evaluation (CAAPE) was administered to 667 inmates admitted to the programme. The effect of mental health, drug use, and static risk factors on reoffending was assessed at one-year post release.

Logistic regression analysis showed that symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder at the start of substance dependence treatment increased the likelihood to reoffend, whilst Obsessive Compulsive Disorder symptoms and length of sentence decreased the likelihood to reoffend. Antisocial Personality Disorder symptoms show a trend towards increasing the likelihood to reoffend. In addition, previously established risk factors for reoffending, including dependence on heroin, crack/cocaine, and poly drug use significantly increased the likelihood of reconviction.

Depressive symptomatology pre-treatment could affect reoffending outcomes for participants in substance dependence treatment in prison. An integrative approach addressing both substance misuse and mental health factors is pivotal. Future efforts to address both simultaneously can be made to improve assessment, training, treatment, and through care for prisoners in substance dependence treatment.

Few studies have assessed the effect of mental health factors on reoffending outcomes for offenders in substance dependence treatment. A large sample was studied in an understudied population of UK prisoners in substance dependence treatment. The results have implications for clinical settings where mental health symptoms are not addressed concurrently with substance dependence. This finding can inform policy makers and practitioners who provide substance dependence treatment in prison.

The present study investigates the use of two actuarial assessment measures ‐ Risk Matrix 2000 (Thornton et al, 2003) and Static 99 (Hanson & Thornton, 2000) ‐ with individuals convicted of downloading child pornography on the internet. A UK community‐based sample of convicted internet sex offenders (n = 73) was assessed using both a standard and a revised version of RM2000 and Static 99 and assessed for rates of reconviction. None of the offenders in the sample were convicted of a further sexual crime between a one‐and‐a‐half and fouryear follow‐up. These results suggest reconviction rates for internet sex offenders are lower than for contact child sex offenders. It was found that both the standard version of RM2000 and Static‐99 overestimate the risk levels posed by internet offenders and that an adapted version of RM2000 may be a more realistic measure of risk level in this population. In addition, it was noted that a higher frequency of low‐risk offenders appeared to be accessing images of younger children and images depicting more serious victimisation than high‐risk offenders.

The assessment of risk of recidivism in sexual offenders is fundamental to clinical practice. It is widely accepted that, compared with actuarial measures of risk, unaided clinical judgment has generally been found to be of low reliability. Consequently, the literature has shown a surge in actuarial measures. However, a major difficulty in assessing risk in sex offenders is the low base rate, leading to an increased likelihood of making a false positive predictive error. To overcome this, risk assessment studies are increasingly using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC), which displays the relationship between level of risk and decision choice. This note summarises the methodological issues in measuring predictive accuracy in assessing risk of re‐offending in sexual offenders, and identifies from the literature both static and dynamic risk factors associated with sexual offence recidivism.

The chapter considers the change of position of the Home Office on the value of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in England and Wales which took place around 2003 after the end of the Crime Reduction Programme (CRP). Before the CRP Home Office researchers had shown little interest in RCTs; after it, they came close to arguing that no other kinds of evaluation research were worth doing. This represented a reversal of a position that had dominated Home Office thinking on the issue for almost 30 years – that RCTs were in general impractical and unlikely to produce clear-cut results. This view was based in part on the experience of RCTs in the 1970s, which led influential researchers to conclude that the method could not be transferred from medicine to criminal justice. But, disappointed with the lack of definite results from the CRP, the Home Office turned back to RCTs as a potential source of certainty about what works. The chapter considers two recent scholarly exchanges on the question, in relation to an evaluation of a community crime reduction programme, for which an experimental design was attempted but not achieved, and to Lawrence Sherman's recent advocacy of RCTs and his use of research on restorative justice as an example of the successful use of the method. The chapter argues that the restorative justice research, while of very high quality, does not provide as clear an example of the use of an RCT as Sherman claims, and concludes with some reflections on the inherent difficulties of criminal justice evaluation, and on the lack of a predictable, rational relationship between research quality and policy influence.