Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:55 pm
Time: 10:55 pm
Results for cognitive-behavioral treatment
4 results foundAuthor: Usher, Amelia Title: The Effectiveness of Correctional Programs with Diverse Offenders: A Meta-Analytic Study Summary: Correctional populations in most countries today are composed of a heterogeneous group representing offenders from varying ethnic and racial backgrounds. Correctional constituencies therefore have an interest in determining if interventions are effective in reducing criminal recidivism for a diverse group of individuals. Canada's federal offender population increasingly represents a broad range of ethnic and cultural groups. The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) is responsible for providing effective correctional programming for all offenders requiring it. Traditionally, most research on correctional interventions has not disaggregated outcomes for the various ethnic groups participating in these programs. Some critics have suggested that the current correctional model may not be appropriate for all ethnic groups. There is evidence to suggest from individual studies, however, that cognitive-behavioural approaches, which form the basis of CSC's correctional programming, are appropriate for individuals from a wide range of ethnic and cultural backgrounds. The present study seeks to examine the effectiveness of CSC's correctional model for offenders of diverse ethnic backgrounds by using meta-analysis. The study will also estimate the base rates of reoffending for the various groups attending programming and their comparison groups. To investigate this issue, a search was undertaken of all previous outcome research on CSC correctional programs. Studies were selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis if they investigated cognitive-behavioural correctional interventions, included federal offenders from a wide range of ethnic groups, used readmission to custody as an outcome measure, and employed a control group methodological design. Participants were grouped according to four different ethnic backgrounds: Aboriginal, Black, Caucasian, and Other. Overall mean effect sizes were calculated for each group using the odds ratio. Overall, it was found that all ethnic groups showed decreased likelihood of readmission after participating in correctional programming. Odds ratios ranged from 1.36 to 1.76. For example, Aboriginal offenders who participated in correctional programming had odds of success that were 1.45 times greater than Aboriginal offenders who did not participate in programming. Base rates of readmissions to custody were also calculated. The highest rates of readmission were found for Aboriginal offenders, followed by Caucasian, Black and Other offenders. Results of this study indicate that CSC's correctional programs are effective across a broad range of ethnic groups. Offenders who participate in programming are less likely to return to custody than offenders who do not participate in programs, regardless of ethnic background. While the cognitive-behavioural treatment model appears to be effective in addressing criminal recidivism for offenders with diverse cultural backgrounds, the results do not preclude attending to responsivity issues related to culture within the treatment model. Offender ethnicity and culture remain important responsivity factors in effective correctional programming. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2011. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: 2011 No. R-246: Accessed March 31, 2014 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/cn21448-eng.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Canada URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/cn21448-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 132033 Keywords: AboriginalsCognitive-Behavioral TreatmentEthnic GroupsInmatesOffender TreatmentRecidivism |
Author: Helmond, Petra Title: Inside Out: Program Integrity and Effectiveness of the Cognitive-Behavioral Program EQUIP for Incarcerated Youth Summary: This dissertation focuses on the program integrity and effectiveness of the cognitive-behavioral program EQUIP for incarcerated youth. The title 'Inside Out' refers to opening the 'black box' of the implementation of EQUIP. We will uncover the actual implementation of the EQUIP program by bringing out what happens inside group meetings of the EQUIP program. In another sense, we will turn the implementation of EQUIP inside out by assessing the program integrity of EQUIP and the impact of program integrity on the effectiveness of EQUIP in a detailed way. Last but not least, we hope to contribute to the 'what works' literature in correctional treatment with the knowledge on program integrity obtained in our research. In this way, the present dissertation hopes to contribute to keeping youths inside out, from inside correctional facilities to outside, out into society. Effective intervention outcomes can be established on the condition that interventions contain effective ingredients and that interventions are implemented with high levels of program integrity (see Table 1). Although program integrity is widely recognized as an important factor influencing the effectiveness of interventions, many studies still fail to include measures of program integrity (Durlak & DuPre, 2008; Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005; Roen, Arai, Roberts, & Popay, 2006). Although correctional treatment researchers have written extensively about the importance of program integrity for the success of rehabilitation programs (Andrews & Dowden, 2005; Gendreau, Goggin, & Smith, 1999; Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005; Lipsey, 2009), studies on the effectiveness of correctional treatment that include measures of integrity are almost nonexistent (Andrews & Dowden, 2005; Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005; Lipsey, 2009). Yet, it is crucially important to know whether interventions have been implemented with high levels of program integrity for two reasons. First, without any information on program integrity we do not know whether the experimental manipulation (i.e., the intervention) has succeeded and whether positive, negative or absent outcomes can and should be attributed to the intervention program (Dane & Schneider, 1998; Durlak & DuPre, 2008; Mowbray, Holter, Teague, & Bybee, 2003). Second, in general, studies have shown that higher levels of program integrity are related to higher levels of program effectiveness (Caroll et al., 2007; Durlak & DuPre, 2008). For instance, the intervention Multisystemic Therapy (MST) showed that higher levels of program integrity predicted higher effectiveness of MST, in terms of rates of youth criminal charges after the intervention (Schoenwald, Chapman, Sheidow, & Carter, 2009). In a correctional setting, Family Functional Therapy (FFT) and Aggression Replacement Training (ART) produced greater reductions in recidivism when implemented competently (Barnoski, 2004). A major shortcoming of this latter study was that the measurement of "competence" was based on post-hoc recollections of involved supervising staff rather than on real time measurement (Barnoski, 2004). In this dissertation, we have examined the program integrity and effectiveness of EQUIP, a cognitive-behavioral program aimed at reducing antisocial behavior of incarcerated offenders. Previous studies on the effectiveness of EQUIP showed diverse results (Brugman & Bink, 2011; Devlin & Gibbs, 2010; Leeman, Gibbs, & Fuller, 1993; Liau et al., 2004; Nas, Brugman, & Koops, 2005). However, none of these previous studies included measures of program integrity. Thus, for these previous studies on EQUIP it is unclear whether the program was actually implemented as intended and whether the diverse findings should be attributed to poor program implementation or to a lack of effectiveness of the EQUIP program itself. Therefore, the aim of this dissertation was to assess the program integrity of EQUIP, and to examine whether higher levels of program integrity would stimulate the effectiveness of EQUIP on program outcomes (i.e., cognitive distortions, social skills, and moral development) and behavioral outcomes (i.e., recidivism). Details: Utrecht: Universiteit Utrecht, 2013. 213p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed May 26, 2015 at: http://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/272325/helmond.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2013 Country: Netherlands URL: http://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/272325/helmond.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 129791 Keywords: Cognitive-Behavioral TreatmentCognitive-Treatment ProgramsCorrectional ProgramsJuvenile OffendersJuvenile Treatment Programs |
Author: Rotter, Merrill Title: Reducing Criminal Recidivism for Justice-Involved Persons with Mental Illness: Risk/Needs/Responsivity and Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions Summary: Decreased criminal recidivism, particularly resulting from new crimes with new victims, is the measure most consistently desired by programs, policymakers, and funding agencies for justice-involved individuals with mental illness. This one measure captures both improved client stability and public safety, while providing support for the promised decreased jail-day cost savings required to sustain continued financial resources (Almquist, 2009; Milkman, 2007). Evidence-based practices (EBP) with track records of effectiveness in treating serious mental illness, co-occurring substance abuse, trauma, and motivational challenges have been utilized with some success in forensic populations (CMHS National GAINS Center, n.d.). However, recent reviews of offender-focused and jail diversion programs found that many EBPs, such as Assertive Community Treatment, may achieve symptom reduction but not decrease criminal recidivism (Morrissey, 2007; Case, 2009; Skeem, 2009). In fact, studies indicate that offenders with mental illness share diagnoses and treatment needs similar to those of individuals with mental illness who do not commit crimes. However, with reference to recurrent criminal behavior, offenders with mental illness share the same risk factors for offending as their non-mentally ill counterparts (Epperson, 2011). In this document, we review the leading offender recidivism - targeted intervention paradigm: Risk/Needs/Responsivity (RNR). RNR proposes that to address the community behavior of offenders: the intensity of treatment and supervision should match the "Risk" level for re-offense; the treatment provided should match the individual "Needs" most clearly associated with criminality; and the intervention modalities should match those to which the individual is most "Responsive" (Andrews, 2010). In particular, we focus on criminal thinking, one of the identified "needs," and structured cognitive-behavioral interventions from the worlds of criminal justice and mental health that were created or adapted to specifically target the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors associated with criminal recidivism. Details: Rockville, MD: SAMHSA's GAINS Center for Behavioral Health and Justice Transformation, 2013. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed June 3, 2015 at: http://gainscenter.samhsa.gov/cms-assets/documents/141805-776469.cbt-fact-sheet---merrill-rotter.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://gainscenter.samhsa.gov/cms-assets/documents/141805-776469.cbt-fact-sheet---merrill-rotter.pdf Shelf Number: 135866 Keywords: Cognitive-Behavioral TreatmentEvidence-Based PracticesMentally Ill OffendersMentally Ill PersonsRecidivism |
Author: Mews, Aidan Title: Impact evaluation of the prison-based Core Sex Offender Treatment Programme Summary: The aim of the research was to extend the evidence base on the effectiveness of treatment for sexual offenders. This study measures the impact of the prison-based Core Sex Offender Treatment Programme (SOTP) on the re-offending outcomes of sex offenders in England and Wales, whilst controlling for the different observable characteristics, needs, and risk factors of offenders. Core1 SOTP is a cognitive-behavioural psychological intervention designed by the HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) for imprisoned men who have committed sexual offences. The Programme is intended to reduce sexual reoffending amongst participants by identifying and addressing known criminogenic needs. It was accredited for use in prisons in 1992 by the then HM Prison and Probation Service Prison and Probation Services Joint Accreditation Panel, which later became the Correctional Services Accreditation and Advice Panel (CSAAP). The CSAAP help the MOJ and HMPPS to develop and implement high quality offending behaviour programmes and promote excellence in programmes designed to reduce reoffending. Programmes are assessed against a set of criteria derived from the "what works" evidence base. These include having a clear model of change, effective risk management, targeting offending behaviour, employing effective methods, ensuring relevance to individual learning styles, and maintaining the quality and integrity of delivery. Changes have been made to the targets, the content, and the methods used in Core SOTP since its introduction in response to emerging research. As a result, during the course of this study (and in the period thereafter) the Programme has changed. However, it remains a cognitive behavioural group based treatment approach. It was, and remains, available in approximately one-sixth of male prison establishments in England and Wales and is intended for individuals sentenced to 12 months or more, who had either a current or previous (sentence) sex offence, were willing to engage in treatment, and were not in denial of their offending. There were 2,562 convicted sex offenders who started treatment under the prison-based Core Sex Offender Treatment Programme between 2000 and 2012 in England and Wales. These were matched to 13,219 co Police National Computer (PNC) records, SOTP treatment records, and the Offender Assessment System (OASys) database (where available). Standardised mean differences between the matched treated and comparison groups for the matching factors showed that the matching quality achieved was excellent. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match sexual offenders who participated in Core SOTP (treated sex offenders) to similar sexual offenders who did not. PSM is a statistical matching technique which uses factors theoretically and empirically associated with both receiving the treatment and the outcome variable (i.e. reoffending) to predict a 'propensity score', which represents the likelihood of entering treatment. This propensity score is then used to match treated individuals to comparison offenders who are similar to them. The matched treatment and comparison groups were then compared on an extensive range of proven reoffending outcomes (sexual and non-sexual). These outcome measures were calculated over a period of up to 13.9 years (average of 8.2 years) starting from each offender's release from prison between 2002 and 2012, with the follow-up period finishing in October 2015. For all individuals in this study (the treatment group plus the unmatched comparison group), the binary reoffending rate for all offences was 38.3% and the sexual reoffending rate excluding breaches,4 was 7.5%. These are low when compared to international studies but are within the range of other UK-based studies on reconviction rates for sex offenders (Craig et al., 2008). PSM can provide a robust quasi-experimental approach, although offenders can only be matched on observable variables. While extensive efforts were undertaken in identifying relevant factors, it is possible that unobserved factors could influence the findings that emerge from this research. Such factors include deviant sexual interest, general self-regulation problems and the degree of violence associated with the current sexual offence. Key findings The main findings of the analysis were as follows: - Some statistically significant differences were detected over an average 8.2 year follow up period. They were small in magnitude although they widened over the follow-up period. In particular: - More treated sex offenders committed at least one sexual reoffence (excluding breach) during the follow-up period when compared with the matched comparison offenders (10.0% compared with 8.0%). - More treated sex offenders committed at least one child image reoffence during the follow-up period when compared with the matched comparison offenders (4.4% compared with 2.9 %). Otherwise, the matched treated and comparison groups had similar reoffending rates across a variety of outcome measures. - A variety of sensitivity analyses were performed, which mostly focused on the sexual reoffending measure. The sexual reoffending treatment effect was found to be reasonably stable across these. As previously noted, it is possible that these results could be materially influenced by unobserved factors. However, such factors would need to increase both the odds of treatment and the odds of reoffending after controlling for the observable factors that were included within the matching process. In fact to conclude that the sexual re-offending treatment impact is not statistically significantly different from a reduction of 2 percentage points, the odds of treatment and re-offending would both need to increase by 122%. This increases to 219% for a 5 percentage point reduction. While the sensitivity analysis, involving both treatment and comparison groups, shows reoffending rates to be higher for individuals who have higher risk profiles, the matching process includes a range of factors that are used to determine risk. Conclusions The results suggest that while Core SOTP in prisons is generally associated with little or no changes in sexual and non-sexual reoffending, there were some statistically significant differences. The small changes in the sexual reoffending rate suggest that either Core SOTP does not reduce sexual reoffending as it intends to do, or that the true impact of the Programme was not detected. This study draws on large treatment and comparison groups, long follow-ups, and many matching factors, thus addressing the most common shortcomings in the research field on sex offenders' reoffending behaviour. However it still has a number of limitations that could either bias the findings or the interpretation of them. In particular: - It is impossible to conclusively rule out the absence of variables relating to deviant sexual interest, general self-regulation problems and the degree of violence associated with the current sexual offence that could possibly influence the results. Moreover, it is possible that the available data do not fully account for issues such as motivation to address offending behaviour. However, these absences are at least partly accounted for by matching factors included in this study (e.g. sexual deviancy by matching factors covering previous offending). Furthermore as shown above, what remains unaccounted for would need to have strong relationships both with participation onto treatment and reoffending to conclude that Core SOTP is associated with a reduction in sexual reoffending. - The estimated impact of Core SOTP was found to be similar when removing from the comparison group those who were identified as having done community SOTP. However, it will include some differences between the matched treatment and comparison groups that reflect changes occurring after the prison sentence has commenced and which are not associated with the provision of Core SOTP. Such factors include participation on other treatment programmes in prison and in the community, differences in offender management and in supervision, and regional demographics e.g. in employment rates. - Availability of good quality data on all factors which determine an offenders' participation on core SOTP, was also a particular issue. It is possible that paucity of data on some key offender characteristics including denial of offending, and a degree of self-selection, could bias the results. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2017. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed June 30, 2017 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/623876/sotp-report-web-.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/623876/sotp-report-web-.pdf Shelf Number: 146479 Keywords: Cognitive-Behavioral TreatmentCorrectional ProgramsRecidivismReoffendingSex Offender TreatmentSex Offenders |