Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:15 am
Time: 3:15 am
Results for correctional rehabilitation programs (new zealand)
2 results foundAuthor: New Zealand. Department of Corrections, Strategy, Policy and Planning Title: What Works Now? A review and update of research evidence relevant to offender rehabilitation practices within the Department of Corrections Summary: A substantial body of research evidence, known as the “What Works” literature, was influential in the design of the Department’s current sentence management framework. This literature revolved around a number of key principles of correctional rehabilitation which, if adhered to in the design and delivery of services, would reliably lead to reduced rates of re-offending. The principles of effective correctional rehabilitation can be divided into three major domains, namely risk, targets and “responsivity”. It is now more than ten years since the main features of the existing sentence management framework were adopted. The current review examines new research published over the last decade that relates to these three domains. In doing so, the approach taken was not limited to publications directly aligned with the “what works” paradigm; the goal was to consider all new evidence which related to effective correctional rehabilitation. The main findings of the review are presented below under the headings relating to each of the three main domain areas. In relation to risk assessment, the current review concludes that knowledge of an offender’s relative likelihood of recidivism remains valuable in supporting effective correctional treatment. Evidence confirming the accuracy and utility of a variety of risk assessment tools has continued to accumulate. Structured risk prediction tools have been adopted in countries around the world, and are in use in a range of ways to assist efficient offender management. The utility of risk data has been demonstrated in serving both incapacitative and rehabilitative goals. With respect to the latter, the principle that treatment should be targeted at medium- and high-risk offenders, rather than low-risk offenders, has continued to receive empirical support. Risk prediction tools have proliferated, and principles for their optimal use have become clearer. For the general offender population, research suggests that risk tools should be clearly structured to assess static (stable, enduring) risk factors or both static and dynamic (more changeable) factors. Accurate estimations of risk can also be produced by tools that guide clinical judgement. Assessing acute (highly changeable) factors can also provide guidance about whether offending may be imminent. More recently, innovations have included risk assessment tools that are specific to certain types of offending, especially violent and sexual recidivism, and these specialised risk assessment tools have been proven to be more accurate than generic risk tools. Similarly, more accurate estimations of risk can be produced when specific tools are used for youth offenders and to assess psychopathic offenders. Finally, there is now some evidence suggesting that assessment of positive characteristics in an offender’s life (skills, strengths and social resources) are relevant to risk of re-offending, and should be included in an overall risk assessment. The current review adopts the term “target” to refer to those aspects of the offender’s personality, lifestyle or circumstances which, if effectively remedied in some way, lead to positive (reduced re-offending) outcomes. The term replaces the previous “criminogenic need” concept, which is no longer as widely accepted. From an examination of published outcome studies, the following personal characteristics continue to show value as a focus for correctional intervention: • anti-social attitudes and beliefs • anti-social peer associations • deviant sexual interests • substance abuse and dependency • poor self-management and problem-solving skills • familial conflict and dysfunction • psychiatric disorders • education and employment related deficits. Details: Wellington, NZ: New Zealand Department of Corrections, 2009. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 15, 2013 at: http://www.corrections.govt.nz/research.html Year: 2009 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.corrections.govt.nz/research.html Shelf Number: 119149 Keywords: Correctional ProgramsCorrectional Rehabilitation Programs (New Zealand)Correctional TreatmentPrisoners |
Author: Kilgour, Glen Title: Breaking the Cycle of Crime: Special Treatment Unit Evaluation Report Summary: This summary report outlines a multi-layered evaluation of the performance and effectiveness of the four High Risk Special Treatment Units (HRSTUs) run by the Department of Corrections, New Zealand. Projects covered the description of programme participants, completers’ perceptions of the programme, programme integrity, pre- and post-programme results on psychometric measures, misconduct rates following treatment and recidivism outcomes. The evaluation found that: • The HRSTUs are generally targeting the offenders for which they were designed; Maori participants are represented in proportion to their presence within the high risk prisoner population. • The programmes are well received by programme completers; the units are typically regarded as ‘safe’ places that effectively challenge antisocial thinking and behaviour. • Programme integrity is generally satisfactory but changes in some areas could improve the ‘therapeutic community’ aspect of the environment and other indicators of integrity (e.g. supervision, staff selection, adherence to manuals). • Initial indications show changes in the right direction on several measures of programme outcome including psychometric testing results, prison incidents, and recidivism. The recommendations are divided into five sections: changes to programme eligibility criteria; HRSTU programme improvements; post-programme support and reintegration; general management of the units, and ongoing research and evaluation. The recommendations include: • reviewing the use of key programme assessment measures • refining aspects of the selection and retention of programme participants • ensuring regular and robust supervision of programme staff • improving post-treatment support, release planning, and reintegration initiatives for programme attendees • changing structural aspects of the programme and improving staff selection procedures and training to strengthen the therapeutic community • maintaining an ongoing evaluative component of the programme following an internal review of appropriate psychometric measures and the model of data capture. Details: Wellington, NZ: Psychological Services Department of Corrections, 2012. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 15, 2013 at: http://www.corrections.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/641217/COR_Breaking_the_Cycle_of_Crime_WEB.pdf Year: 2012 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.corrections.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/641217/COR_Breaking_the_Cycle_of_Crime_WEB.pdf Shelf Number: 127966 Keywords: Correctional ProgramsCorrectional Rehabilitation Programs (New Zealand)Mental Health ServicesPsychological ServicesRecidivism |