1. RNR Simulation Tool Phillip Barbour Master Trainer for Center for Health and Justice at TASC (CHJ) 1

2. Risk, Needs, Responsivity (RNR) and Recidivism: An Update on Theory Center for Advancing Correctional Excellence (ACE!) George Mason University www.gmuace.org/tools BJA: 2009-DG-BX-K026; BJA: 2010-DG-BX-K077; SAMHSA: 202171; Public Welfare Foundation 2

3. Faye S. Taxman, Ph.D University Professor Center for Advancing Correctional Excellence Criminology, Law and Society George Mason University 10519 Braddock Road Suite 1900 Fairfax, VA 22032 James M. Byrne, Ph.D. Professor University of Massachusetts, Lowell Griffith University April Pattavina, Ph.D. Discrete Event Model Associate Professor University of Massachusetts, Lowell Avinash Singh Bhati, Ph.D. Simulation Model Maxarth, LLC Michael S. Caudy, Ph.D. Stephanie A. Maass, M.A. Erin L. Crites, M.A. Lauren Duhaime, B.A. Amy Murphy, MPP Joseph Durso, M.A. Gina Rosch Special Acknowledgements: Bureau of Justice Assistance ▫BJA: 2009-DG-BX-K026 Center for Substance Abuse Treatment ▫SAMHSA: 202171 Public Welfare Foundation Special Thanks to: ▫Ed Banks, Ph.D. ▫Ken Robertson 3

4. What affects recidivism? The good, the bad, and the ugly! 4  Understand Risk  Understand What Affects Recidivism

5. 5 67% Reducing Recidivism: The RNR Framework Target individual risk Target needs that are amendable to change Offer quality programs Engage offenders in change process

6. What is Risk? 6 Risk is the likelihood that an offender will engage in future criminal behavior (recidivate). Risk does NOT refer to dangerousness or likelihood of violence Static Risk Factors have a demonstrated correlation with criminal behavior ▫Historical – based on criminal history ▫Cannot be decreased by intervention

7. CJ Risk Matters …(3 year, all offenses) Ainsworth, Crites, Caudy, & Taxman, 2011 7 Risk is static factors: history of arrests, age of onset, history of incarceration, history of escapes, etc.

8. Age & Rearrests Langan & Levin, 2002 8

9. Gender Matters Ainsworth, et al 2011 9

10. Evidence-Based Practices Lead to Better Outcomes Education (Psycho-Social) Non-Directive Counseling Directive Counseling Motivational Interviewing Moral Reasoning Emotional Skills 12 Step with Curriculum Cognitive Processing Cognitive Behavioral (Social Skills, Behavioral Management, etc.) Therapeutic Communities (TC) Contingency Management/Token Economies Intensive Supervision Boot Camp Case Management Incarceration TASC DTAP (Diversion to TX, 12 Month Residential) Treatment with Sanctions (e.g. Break the Cycle, Seamless System, etc.) Drug Courts RNR Supervision In-Prison TC with Aftercare 10

11. Better Outcomes via Tx Matching 11 Caudy, et al (2011). Using Data to Examine Outcomes: A review of Kansas Department of Corrections. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University.

12. 12 http:// www.gmuace.org/tools /

13. The RNR Simulation Tool Provide decision support tools for the field that enhance existing practices ▫Individual level ▫Program feedback ▫System building capability Program Tool focuses on: ▫Classifying programs to target specific needs ▫Rating key program features ▫Linking to meta-analyses/systematic reviews 13

14. Compiled National Database (20,000+) or Develop Your Own Database Reflect Expected Reductions in Recidivism (from Meta-Analysis) Base Recidivism Rate Risk & Need Information Destabilizers—performance inhibitors Programs Expected outcomes

15. Model to Improve Outcomes: Big Picture Current recidivism hovers around 67% ▫3 year re-arrest rate How can we make a dent in this at the system and individual level? 15 Offender Individual Risk & Need Factors Organizational Culture Program Quality Implementation Correctional Programming Individual Outcomes (Reduced Recidivism) Focus of EBP Research Focus of RNR & RNR Simulation Tool

16. 16

17. RNR via Andrews & Bonta Andrews & Bonta Antisocial personality patterns History of antisocial behavior Antisocial peers Antisocial attitudes Family/marital factors Employment/educational deficits Lack of prosocial leisure activities Substance Abuse Updated research  Responsivity, Recidivism, & Clinical Relevance  Substance dependence vs. abuse  Spectrum of needs can override risk (3+)  Change is a function of problem severity  History of antisocial behavior is risk (cannot be changed)  Recidivism reduction is function of targeting specific needs within programs 17

18. Major Criminogenic Needs Severe Substance Use Disorders ▫A pattern of harmful use of any substance for mood-altering purposes ▫Includes 6 or more of the following:  Increased tolerance, withdrawal, increased time spent using, difficulty quitting or cutting back, or continued use despite negative consequences ▫Not the same as substance abuse ▫Drug of choice matters 18

19. Major Criminogenic Needs Criminal Thinking/Lifestyle ▫A pattern of thinking that rationalizes and supports criminal behavior ▫Involvement with criminal lifestyle ▫Should be assessed using a validated instrument 19

20. What is Responsivity? Treatment to address criminal behavior should be cognitive and/or behavioral based programming that has been shown to effectively reduce recidivism. Deliver controls and treatment in a manner that is consistent with individuals’ learning styles ▫Considers age, gender, culture, intelligence, motivation, etc. ▫Translate Risk & Need into Program Placement/Case Decisions ▫Needs trump risk when there is 3+ needs ▫Destabilizers require more social controls 20

21. Stabilizers Supportive Family Stable Employment Education > HS Diploma Stable Housing Location in non-Hot Spots Destabilizers Alcohol Abuse Drug Abuse Family Dysfunction Poor Mental Health Status Employment-Related Issues Literacy Related Problems Housing Instability Location in Hot Spots CJ RISK Criminogenic Needs Substance Tolerance for “Hard Drugs” 3+ Criminal Lifestyle—attitudes, family, peers, personality, substance abuse 21 Gender & Age

22. What Information do I Need? Static Risk ▫From a validated risk assessment tool ▫Based on criminal history ▫Demographics ▫Age and gender ▫Criminogenic Needs ▫Substance Use ▫Criminal thinking/lifestyle Stabilizers and Destabilizers ▫Clinically-relevant factors 22

23. The RNR Program Tool for Adults  Define target behaviors that drive program classification  Understand program group classification system 23

24. 24

25. Program Groups Six program groups based on specific target behaviors 25  RiskType of NeedType of Stabilizers 

26. PROGRAM GROUP MECHANISM OF ACTIONRESEARCH EVIDENCE Group A Severe Substance Use/Dependence Treatments to reduce use of heroin, cocaine, amphetamines, and methamphetamine Holloway, Bennett, & Farrington, 2006; Prendergast, Huang, & Hser, 2008; Prendergast, Podus, Chang & Urada, 2002; Lipton, Pearson, Cleland & Yee, 2008; Mitchell, Wilson & MacKenzie, 2007 Group B Criminal Thinking Cognitive restructuring to change maladaptive thinking and behavior patterns Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Lipsey, Landenberger & Wilson, 2007; Wilson, Bouffard & MacKenzie, 2005; Little, 2005; Tong & Farrington, 2006 & 2008 Group C Self-Improvement and Management Developing social and problem solving skills to address MH, SA, and self-control. Botvin & Wills, 1984; Botvin, Griffin, & Nichols, 2006; Martin, Dorken, Wamboldt & Wootten, 2011 Group D Social and Interpersonal Skills Structured counseling and modeling of behavior to reduce interpersonal conflict and develop more positive interactions. Botvin & Wills, 1984; Beckmeyer, 2006; Wilson, Gallagher & MacKenzie, 2000; Visher, Winterfield & Coggeshall, 2005 Group E Life Skills Stabilize education, housing, employment, and financial concerns. Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Beckmeyer, 2006

27. Program Groups for SUD Treatment Offenders with SUDs have unique Tx needs ▫Program Group A: Addicts ▫Program Group C: Abusers with Lifestyle Factors Operationalized essential features ▫Program content, dosage, implementation fidelity Example: Group A – most intensive ▫Individual profile: all CJ risk levels; dependence on hard drugs; multiple criminogenic needs and destabilizers ▫Program profile: cognitive restructuring techniques; adequate dosage to address high SUD need; clinical staff; evidence-based curricula; medication-assisted treatment 27

28. Essential Features of Effective Programs 28

29. Principles of Effective Interventions Rehabilitative efforts have a greater impact on recidivism There is no magic program ▫There is no one program or program type identified that will consistently have a large impact on recidivism We do know something about common features of effective correctional practice ▫What really works? McGuire, 2002; Lipsey & Cullen, 2007 29

30. Program Quality Matters Most programs score < 50% (unsatisfactory) Program quality (Implementation, Risk-Need Assessment, Orientation) related to Recidivism Lowenkamp, Latessa, & Smith, 2006; see also Nesovic, 2003 30

31. Program Tool Factors Target Population Program Goals Program Theory Client Level Factors ▫Spectrum of Needs/Severity of Program Needs ▫Developmental Factors (e.g., age, gender, cognitive, physical) Program Structure Program Dosage (a lot unknown, clinical literature) Implementation Issues ▫Staffing ▫Fidelity Monitoring, Training ▫Quality Assurance 31

32. Substance Abuse Treatment Program 32

33. 33

34. 34

35. 35

36. 36

37. 37

38. 38

39. Example Scores 39 DomainMax ScoreMATDrug Tx Center Re-entry Program Drug CourtOutpatient Tx PROGRAM GROUP  AABAB Risk1500 5 Need1510 15 Responsivity1513101513 Implementation25171821 Dosage207991810 Restrictiveness10 6485 Total Score1006053799069

40. New! Specialty Court Output 40

41. 41

42. 42

43. Building a Responsive System  Identify Core Principles of Responsivity  Identify Key Stakeholders 43

44. Core Principles of Responsivity Individual ▫Match programming and controls to risk and need ▫Involve the offender in the assessment of risk-need information & selection of options ▫Focus on motivation to change ▫Provide feedback reports to offenders on progress System ▫Focus on correctional culture to increase receptiveness to treatment ▫Measure client outcomes to gauge performance and share with partner agencies ▫Increase communication and build systems of care 44

45. What does a “Responsive Jurisdiction” look like? Screening and assessment ▫Identify risk and primary criminogenic needs ▫Link assessment info to specific case plans Treatment matching High-quality, evidence-based programming ▫Sound implementation ▫Enough dosage to make change Capacity to address population needs ▫Alignment between needs and services ▫Collaboration between CJ and Tx 45

46. Identifying Key Stakeholders Judges Prosecutors Defense Attorneys Probation/Parole Officers Program Directors/Administrators and Treatment Staff 46

47. Jurisdiction Capacity Limitations CJ agencies often lack capacity for responsivity. Lack of information within correctional agencies about the specific nature and availability of community-based programs. Lack of quality decision-support tools to help them assess both individual-level and system capacity issues 47

48. 48

49. Group AGroup CGroup DGroup EGroup FGroup B

50. Thank you!! www.gmuace.org/tools This project received funding from Bureau of Justice Assistance, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, and Public Welfare Foundation. Views expressed here are ours and not the positions or policies of the funders. 50