WHAT WORKS What does WHAT WORKS have to do with my work? Ross Feenan Manager, Offender Assessments CSNSW

What Works – now moving in 2 separate ways RNR plus Good Lives Model Desistance model What Works For Who & When Maximising effect sizes Changing Organisational Systems and Individual work

PRINCIPLE #1: RISK PRINCIPLE Assess Risk/Need AND Match Level (intensity & dosage) of Services to Offender Risk

PRINCIPLE #2: NEED PRINCIPLE Target criminogenic needs, that is those empirically related to criminal behaviour

PRINCIPLE #3: RESPONSIVITY PRINCIPLE Match intervention style (General & Specific) to the offender’s style of learning

RISK WHO TO TREAT (and how much) NEED WHAT TO TREAT RESPONSIVITY HOW TO TREAT

Adherence to RNR Principles =  Recidivism

R-N-R Principles Have changed our organisations since 2001 ASSESSMENTS – VISAT, ROR, ORNI-R, LSI-R, LS-CMI, LS-RNR, YLSI, CVTRQ PROGRAMS – Groupwork, evidence based, accredited and focused on “needs” CASE MANAGEMENT AND INDIVIDUAL WORK?

Snapshot of what Probation Officers Do Behind Closed Doors The Manitoba “Black Box” Study Bonta et. al. 2008

Manitoba Black Box Study (Bonta et al., 2004, 2008) 211 audiotapes of client interviews a)Do offenders’ plans contain criminogenic needs? b)Does supervision target identified criminogenic needs? c)Are probation officers using the techniques associated with reduced recidivism (i.e., cognitive-behavioural strategies, problem-solving)? d)Any differences?

The “Big Four” & “Central Eight” Criminogenic Needs

Assessment → Plans Only 39% of identified needs (using the PRA) had a matching intervention strategy

Adherence to the Need Principle? Need Area % Discussed When Need Present Family/Marital90 Substance Abuse78 Employment/Academic57 Peer Problems21 Attitudes9

Probation Conditions & Recidivism  Compliance with the probation conditions is a fact of community supervision  But too much emphasis can backfire TimeRecidivism 10 minutes18.9% 15 minutes or more42.3% Rates adjusted for risk level

Targeting Criminogenic Needs: Effecting Recidivism  Discussing criminogenic needs were related to reduced recidivism  More focus on criminogenic needs, lower the recidivism Length of DiscussionRecidivism (n) Low (0-15 minutes)59.8% (49) Medium (20-30 minutes)47.6% (26) High (40+ minutes)33.3% (3)

2009 NSW Replication Study Joanne Kennedy replicated Black Box study in 2009 Total sample – 1,666 Looked at the relationship between Assessment (LSI-R), case plan factors, case plan strategies and discussion case notes Similar patterns were found

Assessment → Plan (NSW) “CONSIDERABLE NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT” – LSI-R FactorStrategy Education/Employment84%54% Finances31%13% Family/Marital68%56% Accommodation70%34% Leisure/Recreation23%22% Companions/Associates21%32% Alcohol/drug problems94%93% Emotional/personal82%81% Attitude/orientation34%17%

Discussion of Needs (NSW) Criminogenic Needs (LSI-R) Number of interviews where Factor was relevant Number of interviews where factor was discussed Education/Employment69%48% Finances32%22% Family/Marital66%48% Accommodation45%40% Leisure/Recreation21%11% Companions/Associates21%20% Alcohol/drug problems83%69% Emotional/personal62%54% Attitude/orientation30%17%

STICS : (Strategic Training Initiative in Community Supervision) Training in the RNR model of Community Supervision Bonta, Bourgon, Rugge, Scott, Yessine, Gutierrez & Li (Nov 2011)

STICS format  3 Day Training  Teach skills to facilitate change in RNR framework  Teach the “how to” with clients  Provide structure  On-Going Clinical Support  Monthly STICS Meetings  Refresher Course  Feedback on audiotapes

Effects on Probation Officers STICS Officers v Untrained “Control” Officers

Relevant & Irrelevant Discussions?  Is time spent on… Criminogenic needs Focus on procriminal attitudes  Or… Non-criminogenic needs Probation conditions

Addressing what matters most… Percent

Overall Officer Interview Skills

So Evidence says…  STICS changes PO behaviour  Enhances the officers’ RNR practices  More focus on criminogenic needs, especially antisocial attitudes  Less spent on non-criminogenic needs & the conditions of probation  Better relationship, structuring & cognitive- behavioural skills for interpersonal influence

Effects on Clients

Did STICS reduce recidivism? Are client outcomes different? “Personal” caseload recidivism rates at 1 & 2 Years PO Effectiveness? Before vs. After STICS

Recidivism before STICS  Note: No Differences: STICS PO higher recidivism prior to training

Recidivism after STICS  Note: 13% Difference  Even greater reductions in recidivism was achieved for those who continued with the monthly meetings, feedback and refresher courses (15% )

1 Year Recidivism Differences GroupPrePostChange Control34%33%↓ 1% STICS with some clinical support 33%24%↓ 9% STICS with high clinical Support 41%15%↓ 26%

Intensive Training and Support in What Works Works! Intensive RNR training improves PO skills & Interventions Intensive RNR training reduces reoffending On-going clinical support very important Cognitive Behavioural skills hardest to learn Requires time & clinical support SO HOW DO WE GET HOLD OF IT? Or do we attempt it ourselves??

Is it worth it? YES It works. Working with clients this way reduces recidivism. Adhering to RNR principles has to be organisational, functional, be supported in policy and in practice. NO Costly to put all staff through thorough training and have ongoing STICS type support Only one study so far Some staff are already over “What Works”

STICS Report More information on STICS: Or contact Manager, Offender Assessments Corrective Services NSW