Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 25, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:08 pm
Time: 9:08 pm
Results for re-offending
41 results foundAuthor: Lulham, Rohan Title: The Magistrates Early Referral Into Treatment Program: Impact of Program Participation on Re-Offending by Defendants with a Drug Use Problem Summary: This bulletin reports on the evaluation of re-offending outcomes for the Magistrates Early Referral Into Treatment (MERIT) drug diversion program in New South Wales, Australia. MERIT provides defendants in NSW Local Courts with the option of undertaking formal drug treatment while on bail. Re-offending outcomes for a cohort of 2,396 defendants who participated in the MERIT program were compared with a comparison group of defendants who did not participate in the MERIT program but who broadly met the eligibility criteria. To estimate the impact of the program we used a treatment effects model with correction for selection bias. Acceptance into the MERIT program, regardless of completion, was found to significantly reduce the number of defendants committing any theft re-offence by an estimated four percentage points. Acceptance and completion of the MERIT program significantly reduced the number of defendants committing any type of offence by an estimated 12 percentage points, and any theft re-offence by four percentage points. This evaluation provides strong support that participation in the MERIT program reduces defendants’ propensity to commit theft offences and, for those who complete the program, substantially reduces their propensity to commit any type of re-offence. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2009. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: Crime and Justice Bulletin, No. 131: Accessed October 9, 2010 at: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/cjb131.pdf/$file/cjb131.pdf Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/cjb131.pdf/$file/cjb131.pdf Shelf Number: 119897 Keywords: DiversionDrug Abuse and CrimeDrug Abuse TreatmentDrug OffendersRe-OffendingRecidivismTheft |
Author: Cockram, Judith Title: Equal Justice? The Experiences and Needs of Repeat Offenders with Intellectual Disability in Western Australia Summary: This study aimed at enhancing the understanding of factors that contribute to re-offending by people with intellectual disability in Western Australia. The aims of the study were to: (1) examine both the individual experiences of repeat offenders with intellectual disabilitiy in Western Australia and the systemic context in which the experiences are located; (2) investigate the characteristics and factors that might influence re-offending; (3) identify the key issues that will need to be addressed to overcome the high rate of recidivism, including the gaps and barriers to the provision of more effective support; and (4) identify strategies or approahces that could be considered for developing effective responses to identified needs and issues. Details: Wembley, Western Australia: Acriv Foundation, 2005. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 23, 2012 at: http://www.correctiveservices.wa.gov.au/_files/about-us/statistics-publications/students-researchers/equal-justice.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Australia URL: http://www.correctiveservices.wa.gov.au/_files/about-us/statistics-publications/students-researchers/equal-justice.pdf Shelf Number: 123740 Keywords: Intellectual Disabilities (Australia)Mental RetardationRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Ringland, Clare Title: Improving the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Risk/Needs Assessment Process for Community-Based Offenders Summary: The objectives of this study were (1) to explore the effects of applying a screening tool to determine who is administered the Level of Service Inventory – Revised (LSI-R); and (2) to examine the predictive utility of including LSI-R subscale scores along with standard risk factors in a model of recidivism. Method: Aim (1) was addressed by developing a screening tool using routinely collected data. Predicted probabilities of re-offending were obtained from this tool. Alternative thresholds of predicted probabilities required for an LSI-R assessment were then applied. The effect of screening was examined in terms of whether those who went on to re-offend were predicted to do so, having met the applied screening tool and LSI-R risk category criteria. Aim (2) was addressed by constructing and comparing logistic regression models with and without LSI-R subscale scores to assess whether models which included LSI-R subscale scores in addition to routinely collected data were better at discriminating those who re-offended within 12 months from those who did not. Analyses were conducted separately for males and females. Results: Aim (1): By administering the LSI-R to those with a predicted probability of re-offending of at least .15, 80 per cent of male and 71 per cent of female recidivists would have been identified as being likely to re-offend, using LSI-R risk level criteria of at least low-medium. Aim (2): For males and females, after controlling for standard risk factors, the LSI-R subscales education/employment and attitudes/orientation were associated with re-offending. Further, criminal history, alcohol/drugs and accommodation subscales were associated with re-offending in males, and the companions subscale was associated with re-offending in females. Conclusion: More efficient identification of those at higher risk of re-offending could be achieved by using a screening tool based on routinely collected data to determine who the LSI-R is administered to. Further, the inclusion of LSI-R subscale scores in models of recidivism could improve the predictive accuracy of models developed for evaluation purposes. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2011. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 154: Accessed February 13, 2012 at: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/Lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/CJB154.pdf/$file/CJB154.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/Lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/CJB154.pdf/$file/CJB154.pdf Shelf Number: 124112 Keywords: OffendersRe-OffendingRecidivismRisk Assessment (Australia) |
Author: Speir, John C. Title: Analysis of Georgia's 90-Day Short-Term Program for Juvenile Offenders Summary: The Children and Youth Coordinating Council (CYCC) commissioned Applied Research Services (ARS) to conduct a preliminary investigation into the re-offending patterns of juveniles ordered to spend time in Georgia’s 90-day Short-Term Program (STP). The central question is whether youths placed in STP exhibit improved re-offense rates compared to similarly situated youths placed on probation. The research focused on two main questions: 1. Is there an observable difference between Georgia youths placed in STP compared to those placed on probation (demographics, referral type, offense type, prior history)? 2. Is there a measurable reduction in re-offending among youths placed in STP compared to similarly situated probationers at the end of a two-year follow-up period? In Georgia, juvenile case management and local probationary services are organized into independent and non-independent court systems. The independent courts, such as Fulton and Cobb Counties, depend on the Juvenile Case Activity Tracking (JCAT) System as the primary case management system. Information on youth referrals, charges, and dispositions in the independent juvenile courts was retrieved from JCAT. The remaining courts, also referred to as DJJ served courts, rely on the Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) Juvenile Tracking System (JTS). This state operated case management system contains referrals, charges, disposition, and facility admissions for all youths committed to the custody of DJJ (including the independent courts), as well as youths placed on probation in the DJJ served juvenile court systems. Information for the DJJ served court system cases was retrieved from JTS. The study examines a variety of outcome measures associated with juvenile reoffending. Unfortunately, there is no single, accepted measure of re-offending used nationwide or recommended by the Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency and Prevention (OJJDP) to evaluate juvenile justice programs, such as the Short-Term Program. Each measure has inherent advantages and disadvantages which must be taken into consideration, and each is impacted by the way researchers select the study cohort and define their follow-up period. These reasons usually explain why agencies often produce disparate re-offending rates over time. Recognizing these problems, this study investigates over a dozen distinct measures of re-offending. This study also includes a comparison group in order to assess the effectiveness of STP in comparison to another DJJ program – probation. For example, if the reoffense rate for STP was 50%, one might incorrectly conclude that STP is ineffective. However, if the similarly situated youths placed on probation exhibited a 75% re-offense rate, the STP findings now take on an entirely new interpretation. While policy-makers may conclude that both re-offense rates are unacceptable and inconsistent with the agency mission, the lower, hypothetical STP rate suggests that the program is resulting in improved outcomes over probation. To provide such a benchmark, this study includes juvenile probationers as an appropriate comparison group. Details: Atlanta, GA: Applied Research Services, Inc., 2004. 11p. Source: Submitted to Pete Colbenson, Executive Director Children and Youth Coordinating Council: Internet Resource: Accessed February 19, 2012 at http://ars-corp.com/_view/PDF_Files/AnalysisofGeorgias90DayShortTermProgramforJuvenileOffenders2004.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://ars-corp.com/_view/PDF_Files/AnalysisofGeorgias90DayShortTermProgramforJuvenileOffenders2004.pdf Shelf Number: 124197 Keywords: Evaluative StudiesJuvenile Offenders (Georgia)ProbationRe-Offending |
Author: Nortern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspection Title: An announced inspection of Woodlands Juvenile Justice Centre Summary: The last Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJI) report on Woodlands Juvenile Justice Centre (the JJC) was published in May 2008. It made 38 recommendations of which the Youth Justice Agency (YJA) fully accepted 33, partially accepted five, and published an action plan to implement accordingly. The JJC had only recently opened when CJI last inspected and in the intervening period it has consolidated its practice. This inspection found that the JJC has continued to provide high levels of care and control to children sent into its custody. It was delivering a good service in close consultation with children and their adult carers. Appropriate governance arrangements had been maintained and management practices were strengthened. There had been no escapes since the last inspection and considerable effort was being invested in addressing children’s offending behaviour. There had been some positive developments in the child custody system since 2008 and Inspectors found: the JJC had become the default location for all girls aged under 18-years-old; the age profile of its population had changed. Some 25% of the children admitted were 17-years-old at the time of our inspection; and collaboration with Social Services had also improved and this appears to have reduced inappropriate admissions. However, a better response is required from some Social Services Trusts to support the work of the JJC. There were several examples of progress within internal JJC management and practice. These included: a significant reduction in the use of force; continued investment in staff training and development, and high numbers of staff had qualified in relevant disciplines; the appointment of a Deputy Director of SocialWork and part-time Forensic Psychiatrist; improved performance management - overtime and sick leave were reduced and there was closer managerial control over annual leave and night staff deployment; better management information systems; new JJC rules had been published and were more fit-for-purpose; children’s file recording had improved; and monthly monitoring visits by the Office of Social Services and bi-annual unannounced CJI inspections had been initiated. Standards of healthcare and education were high though Inspectors were concerned about professional isolation of healthcare and education personnel. Feedback from partner agencies and community providers about the JJC was positive and it was recognised as a model of good practice. Senior personnel were invited to advise on the design of new Secure Children’s Homes (SCH) in England and the Republic of Ireland, and were also represented on the England and Wales Restraint Management Board. The JJC buildings were well-maintained and security had been enhanced by the extension of closed-circuit television (CCTV) to all communal areas. Inspectors were therefore satisfied the JJC was fulfilling its legislative remit to ‘Protect the public by accommodating children ordered to be detained therein in a safe, secure and caring environment; and work to reintegrate children into the community ….’ Despite this the inspection also raises major issues. These are outwith the JJC and the YJA, and are not to do with its operational management or care and control of children held there. Rather they are systemic matters around the high numbers of children being sent to the JJC for very short periods on foot of Police and Criminal Evidence (PACE) proceedings, the impact of delay and the location of 17-year-old boys who require custody. These issues are not new. They are already being addressed to varying degrees, but there is scope for further progress and we make recommendations only accordingly. Things are better in some respects than the child custody arrangements in England and Wales, but it should be possible to further improve the position in the small Northern Ireland jurisdiction. The JJC service comes at a very high financial cost, but it is impossible to accurately relate costs to re-offending levels since there have been so few sentenced children and re-offending data is limited. For the majority of children who are sent there yet never receive a sentence, we can only conclude that the JJC represents a very expensive way to detain them, usually for short periods from which they are unlikely to gain much benefit. It is also anomalous that while there is surplus bed space in the JJC, many 17-year-old boys are held in HydebankWood Young Offenders Centre (the YOC) which is ill-equipped to deal with them. This situation begs early implementation of the obvious remedy-transfer of 17-year-old boys from the YOC to the JJC - on grounds of both good practice and value for money. There will be challenges in the future including budget pressures and changes in the population profile. Measurement of outcomes for children, including their reconviction rates needs to be improved. However, the main challenge is for the wider criminal justice and child care systems to build on the positive collaboration that has begun and ensure the JJC is only used for children who really need to be held in custody. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2011. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 19, 2012 at http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/c1/c1f1690b-190f-4788-90b8-5d1b48578f57.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Europe URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/c1/c1f1690b-190f-4788-90b8-5d1b48578f57.pdf Shelf Number: 124199 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeJuvenile DetentionJuvenile Justice (Northern Ireland)Re-Offending |
Author: Nobles, Matt R. Title: Understanding How Some Victims Become Perpetrators: Self-Control as Moderator Summary: Although much of the criminology literature conceptualizes the overlap in victims and offenders as originating with perpetration behaviors that result in increased risk of victimization, some evidence suggests that the reverse order also may be predictive. Socio-psychological literature, for example, offers alternative explanations demonstrating that perpetration in adolescence and adulthood may be driven by a lifetime history of traumatic victimization (e.g. child abuse or neglect, peer conflicts). Research on individual-level personality and experiential factors, including a history of certain types of victimization, is significantly associated with different forms of future perpetration, including adolescent weapon carrying, intimate partner physical abuse, child molestation, and adult sexual abuse. Smith and Ecob’s review of theoretical explanations of the victimization-perpetration link, highlight the roles environmental contextual factors and individual beliefs may play post-victimization. Sub-cultural explanations also may be valuable to address the phenomenon. For example, both personal value systems in gangs and learned aggression via victimization may offer clear pathways to future perpetration. In this case, there would be the intersection of the effects of individual traits, such as personality and self-control, and structural effects. Further, the interaction of individual and structural characteristics may provide additional predictive value to this relationship. Gottfredson and Hirschi posit in their general theory of crime that low levels of self-control are associated with criminal behavior throughout the life course, an idea that has generated wide empirical support. The theory also has been extended to account for different forms of victimization. Research from different areas of the psychology literature suggests that a history of certain types of victimization predicts later perpetration through various mechanisms. To date no research has explicitly tested low self-control as a moderating influence in the relationship between various forms of victimization and perpetration. The present study hypothesizes that low self-control affects the direction and strength of this relationship and that the relative influence of the moderation varies across crime types. Details: Huntsville, TX: Crime Victims' Institute, Criminal Justice Center, Sam Houston State University, 2012. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 9, 2012 at http://www.crimevictimsinstitute.org/documents/8793%20Self%20Control%20Report.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.crimevictimsinstitute.org/documents/8793%20Self%20Control%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 124401 Keywords: OffendersRe-OffendingSelf-ControlVictimization |
Author: Villettaz, Patrice Title: The Effects of Custodial vs. Non-Custodial Sentences on Re-Offending: A Systematic Review of the State of Knowledge Summary: As part of a broad initiative of systematic reviews of experimental or quasiexperimental evaluations of interventions in the field of crime prevention and the treatment of offenders, our work consisted in searching through all available databases for evidence concerning the effects of custodial and non-custodial sanctions on reoffending. For this purpose, we examined more than 3,000 abstracts, and finally 23 studies that met the minimal conditions of the Campbell Review, with only 5 studies based on a controlled or a natural experimental design. These studies allowed, all in all, 27 comparisons. Relatively few studies compare recidivism rates for offenders sentenced to jail or prison with those of offenders given some alternative to incarceration (typically probation). According to the findings, the rate of re-offending after a non-custodial sanction is lower than after a custodial sanction in 11 out of 13 significant comparisons. However, in 14 out of 27 comparisons, no significant difference on re-offending between both sanctions is noted. Two out of 27 comparisons are in favour of custodial sanctions. Finally, experimental evaluations and natural experiments yield results that are less favourable to non-custodial sanctions, than are quasi-experimental studies using softer designs. This is confirmed by the meta-analysis including four controlled and one natural experiment. According to the results, non-custodial sanctions are not beneficial in terms of lower rates of re-offending beyond random effects. Contradictory results reported in the literature are likely due to insufficient control of pre-intervention differences between prisoners and those serving “alternative” sanctions. Details: Oslo: The Campbell Collaboration, 2006. 73p. Source: Campbell Systematic Reviews 2006:13: Internet Resource: Accessed March 10, 2012 at Year: 2006 Country: International URL: Shelf Number: 124420 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCrime PreventionCustodial SentencesRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Khan, Sadiq Title: Punishment & Reform: How Our Justice System Can Help Cut Crime Summary: ‘Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime’ was more than a clever soundbite; it was a successful approach to criminal justice policy that left crime 43 per cent lower when Labour departed office than when it entered. The challenge now is to build on this legacy and further reduce crime, but within the tough spending constraints imposed by straitened times. To inform the conclusions of the Labour Party policy review, Sadiq Khan MP brings together a group of experts from across the criminal justice field to investigate reform. Their essays do not represent Labour Party policy, but are suggestions and inspiration from some of the most respected figures in the area. The authors think creatively about how to get the balance right between deterrent, punishment and rehabilitation and how to create a criminal justice system that lowers crime and protects communities whilst breaking the cycle of re-offending. One aspect that is often overlooked is the experience of the victim. Victims should be at the heart of our criminal justice system, not only because they deserve to be treated with respect and dignity, but also because their co-operation and trust is vital for it to function effectively and bring offenders to justice. But victims are often treated as mere bystanders as their cases proceed through the courts. This needs to change. In Punishment and Reform: How our justice system can help cut crime, Lord Victor Adebowale, Baroness Jean Corston, Shauneen Lambe, Paul McDowell, Kevin McGrath, Barry Mizen, Dame Helen Reeves, Professor Robert Reiner, Professor Julian V Roberts, Matthew Ryder QC, Lord Norman Warner and Phil Wheatley CB consider what changes could be made to support victims and ensure justice is served more effectively in our country. Details: London: The Fabian Society, 2011. 122p. Source: Fabian Ideas 630: Internet Resource: Accessed March 10, 2012 at http://www.fabians.org.uk/images/Punishment_and_Reform_WEB.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.fabians.org.uk/images/Punishment_and_Reform_WEB.pdf Shelf Number: 124421 Keywords: Criminal Justice PolicyRe-OffendingVictims of CrimeVictims Services |
Author: Khan, Sabena Title: Initial Analysis of the Impact of the Intensive Alternatives to Custody Pilots on Re-offending Rates Summary: The Intensive Alternatives to Custody (IAC) pilot programme ran from April 2008 to March 2011 to test the use of intensive community orders in diverting offenders from short-term custodial sentences. The Ministry of Justice have undertaken initial analysis to compare re-offending rates for offenders receiving IAC with a well-matched control group receiving short custodial sentences and a well-matched control group receiving court orders. This paper summarises the key findings. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 10p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Summary 5/12: Accessed July 17, 2012 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/iac-impact-evaluation-research-summary.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/iac-impact-evaluation-research-summary.pdf Shelf Number: 125658 Keywords: Alternative to Incarceration (U.K.)Community SupervisionIntensive Community OrdersRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Booth, Lucy Title: North Liverpool Community Justice Centre: Analysis of Re-offending Rates and Efficiency of Court Processes Summary: Based on Community Justice principles, the North Liverpool Community Justice Centre (NLCJC) brings together a range of criminal justice agencies as a one-stop-shop for tackling offending in the local area. Adding to the findings from previous evaluations of the NLCJC, this evaluation assessed the impact the court had on re-offending and the efficiency of court processes. Though the NLCJC had no impact on re-offending rates, breach rates among offenders receiving court orders there were higher than elsewhere. The efficiency findings were mixed, providing evidence of both positive and negative performance at the court. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Research Series 10/12: Accessed july 25, 2012 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/liverpool-community-centre.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/liverpool-community-centre.pdf Shelf Number: 125781 Keywords: Community Justice Centers (U.K.)CourtsNeighborhood Justice CentersRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Justice Title: Proven Re-Offending Statistics: Definitions and Measurement Summary: The Ministry of Justice launched a statistical consultation on improvements to the transparency and accessibility of our information in 2010 and a response to the consultation was published in March 2011. One aspect of the consultation was the measurement of proven re-offending. Responses have supported the proposals to move to a single framework for measuring re-offending where adult and youth data can be provided at the national and local level on a consistent basis. The response to the consultation is available here: www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/consultations/improvements-moj-statistics-consultation-response.pdf Prior to this consultation there were six different measures of proven re-offending: national adult proven re-offending; local adult proven re-offending; national youth proven re-offending; local youth proven re-offending; Prolific and other Priority Offending (PPO); and drug-misusing proven offending. The current framework for measuring proven re-offending integrates these approaches into a single framework. This allows users to: form a clear picture of proven re-offending at national and local levels; compare adult and youth results, and enable other work on transition between the youth and adult system; understand how results for different offender groups (such as those managed by the prison and probation services, those under the PPO schemes, drug-misusing offenders, first time entrants, etc) fit in to the overall picture on proven re-offending; and continue to be able to analyse proven re-offending behaviour of particular types of offender. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 30, 2012 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/statistics/reoffending/proven-reoffending-definitions-measurement.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/statistics/reoffending/proven-reoffending-definitions-measurement.pdf Shelf Number: 125810 Keywords: Crime Statistics (U.K.)Re-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Ipsos MORI Title: Evaluation of the London Youth Reducing Re-offending Programme (Daedalus). Interim report – process evaluation Summary: There has been a long history of studies within the UK highlighting the impact of custodial regimes on the resettlement needs of young people. For example, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons and the Youth Justice Board’s (YJB) joint report, ‘Children and Young People in Custody 2008-2009’ (2010), examined young people’s views on what would help them once released from custody. The report found that there were a number of issues surrounding the extent to which young people felt prepared for release. Only 37% of young people felt they had done anything while in custody that would make them less likely to offend in the future, compared with 42% in the previous reporting period. In terms of being prepared for their release, only 45% believed they had done something useful during their time in custody that would help them get a job, while even fewer said they had spoken to someone about going back into education or had received help in finding accommodation (37% and 23% respectively). The report highlighted the need for more resettlement work around finding employment for young people once leaving custody: 73% felt that getting a job would be the experience most likely to prevent them from re-offending in the future, yet only a quarter (23%) had a job to go to on release. However, studies have also shown that when additional focus is placed on care, treatment and through-care, the outcomes for young offenders can be notably improved. For example, in 1992, Ditchfield and Catan compared the regimes of Young Offender Institutions (YOIs) and Local Authority Secure Units (LASUs) and found that young people in LASUs had lower rates of reconviction. They attributed this directly to the focus of LASUs on care and treatment, compared with the security or control ethos in YOIs. In 1991 and 1996, Professor Gwyneth Boswell also conducted research which compared the experiences of Section 53 offenders in two high-quality Youth Treatment Centres (which have subsequently closed) with those in YOIs, and reached similar conclusions to Ditchfield and Catan. In 2003, she also carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of the regimes for Section 90/91 young people at Feltham YOI and at the enhanced Carlford Unit at Warren YOI. The Carlford Unit was found to address the criminogenic needs of the young offenders, due primarily to the injection of extra resources which were used in part to develop a wide range of activities and educational opportunities for those in custody. However, much of the resettlement research to date lacks sufficient information on statistical effectiveness. Additionally, studies have tended to examine the experiences of those aged 18 years or older, and not the youth justice population. Where information is available about young people, it is limited and relates to very small numbers. In light of the impact that focused resettlement work has been shown to have on young offenders, there are several projects currently being under-taken in London. The London Criminal Justice Partnership (CJP) is carrying out a Criminal Justice System (CJS) youth review with support from the Mayor’s office and the YJB. This is a review of the Criminal Justice System relating to young people across London. The review looks at the end-to-end ‘journey’ for young people within the criminal justice system, identifying key points of interaction within the system and the process improvements that are most likely to contribute to public safety, reducing re-offending, and helping young people realise a positive future. The review commenced in June 2010 and a final report was produced in February 2011, with the aim of making practical recommendations on how to shape and inform the future direction of CJS youth strategies in London and how to deliver better co-ordination of activity. Details: London: Ipsos MORI, Social Research Institute, 2011. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed August 10, 2012 at: http://www.londoncjp.gov.uk/publications/ipsos_MORI_Interim_Report_Final_Version_20_04_2011_internal_use_only.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.londoncjp.gov.uk/publications/ipsos_MORI_Interim_Report_Final_Version_20_04_2011_internal_use_only.pdf Shelf Number: 125949 Keywords: Juvenile Justice SystemJuvenile Offenders, Reentry (U.K.)Re-OffendingRecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: The Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: States Report Reductions in Recidivism Summary: The Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center's National Reentry Resource Center (NRRC) released this policy brief on September 25, 2012 highlighting a number of states reporting significant reductions in recidivism. The states profiled in the report show significant declines in their three-year recidivism rates based on data tracking individuals released from prison in 2005-2007. Texas and Ohio reported reductions of 11 percent, while the Kansas rate fell by 15 percent and Michigan's rate dropped by 18 percent. Incorporating data through 2010 (and in some cases, through 2011), the report provides the most recent multi-state information available on recidivism. Details: New York: The Council of State Governments, Justice Center, 2012. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 30, 2012 at http://www.nationalreentryresourcecenter.org/documents/0000/1569/9.24.12_Recidivism_Reductions_9-24_lo_res.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.nationalreentryresourcecenter.org/documents/0000/1569/9.24.12_Recidivism_Reductions_9-24_lo_res.pdf Shelf Number: 126522 Keywords: Crime Reduction, RecidivismRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Klima, Tali Title: Risk Assessment Instruments to Predict Recidivism of Sex Offenders: Practices in Washington State Summary: This paper reviews policies and practices regarding assessment of sex offenders for risk of reoffense among public agencies and private treatment providers in Washington State. Specifically, we reviewed the use of risk assessment instruments, which gauge the likelihood that individual sex offenders will reoffend. We found that a diverse set of instruments are employed by public and private entities in making decisions about sex offenders. These decisions include sentencing, facility assignment, treatment, release, public notification, and community supervision. As expected, there was greater variability in risk assessment practices among private treatment providers than public agencies. Three policies related to risk assessment were identified as topics of concern. One is the lack of appropriate instruments for juvenile sex offenders. The second is the validity of the primary instrument used to determine risk levels for registration purposes, the WSSORLCT (soon to be replaced). Third, some informants discussed the static nature of risk level assignment and suggested provisions to reassess offenders’ levels during extended registration periods. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2008. 12p. Source: Document No. 08-06-1101: Internet Resource: Accessed October 1, 2012 at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/08-06-1101.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/08-06-1101.pdf Shelf Number: 126541 Keywords: Re-OffendingRecidivismRecidivism, Sex Offenders (Washington)Risk AssessmentSex Offenders |
Author: Revolving Doors Agency Title: Ending the Revolving Door: How the First Generation of Police and Crime Commissioners Can Cut Crime by Working in Partnership to Address Multiple Needs Summary: With nearly half a million crimes committed by former offenders in the year ending June 2010, repeat offending and anti-social behaviour is causing serious damage to communities, taking up valuable police resources, and placing a major burden on the public purse. A significant proportion of this crime is committed by people with multiple needs, who are falling through gaps in services and failing to get the help they need to stop offending. This briefing highlights to police and crime commissioner candidates the importance of dealing effectively with this group of ‘revolving door’ offenders in order to reduce crime and maintain an efficient police force, and offers solutions for them to consider locally. Details: London: Revolving Doors Agency, 2012. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 8, 2012 at http://www.revolving-doors.org.uk/documents/ending-the-revolving-door/ Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.revolving-doors.org.uk/documents/ending-the-revolving-door/ Shelf Number: 126640 Keywords: Anti-Social BehaviorCosts of CrimeCriminal Justice PolicyRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Newman, Mark Title: A Systematic Review of Selected Interventions to Reduce Juvenile Re-offending Summary: What do we want to know? This is a report of the methods and results of a systematic review of primary research on the effectiveness of selected interventions to reduce juvenile re-offending. The review provides answers to the question of the relative effectiveness of a small number of selected interventions in reducing juvenile re-offending. What did we find out about interventions? Consistent evidence of reducing re-offending • Pre-sentencing Diversion – personal skill straining + for first time offenders. The intervention included: o personal skills training/ counselling which is about anger management, personal responsibility and decision making. o some form of reparation to the community/ victim of crime. o family involvement. compared to standard diversion (caution & monitoring). • Community based family residential placement for female juvenile offenders. The intervention included: o Residential placement for six months to a year in small group supportive ‘family type’ environment. o personal skills training/ counselling which is about anger management, personal responsibility and decision making. o Monitoring and use of appropriate incentives and sanctions. compared to standard residential placement. Promising effects (positive or negative) limited or inconsistent evidence • ‘Teen Courts’ compared to other diversion – Positive • Community based family residential placements compared to standard residential placements for male juvenile offenders – Positive Insufficient evidence • Secure incarceration compared to community sentence • Psycho-dynamic counselling compared to ‘normal Court interventions • Pre-sentence diversions compared to court community sentence • Multi component diversion for persistent offenders (comparison not clear) • Multi-component diversion for mixed groups of offence severity (comparison not clear) • Supported transition from secure incarceration to community compared to no or limited support • Probation plus sports counselling compared to probation only • Violence re-education programme compared to court imposed community service. Details: London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, 2012. 120p. Source: Internet Resource: EPPI-Centre report no. 2008T: Accessed March 12, 2013 at: http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=3YwaW7wpQnU%3D&tabid=3360 Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=3YwaW7wpQnU%3D&tabid=3360 Shelf Number: 127914 Keywords: Delinquency PreventionJuvenile Offenders (U.K.)Re-OffendingRecidivismRehabilitation Programs |
Author: Mews, Aidan Title: Updated Analysis of the Impact of the Intensive Alternatives to Custody Pilots on Re-offending Rates Summary: The Intensive Alternatives to Custody (IAC) pilot programme ran from April 2008 to March 2011 to test the use of intensive community orders in diverting offenders from short-term custodial sentences. The Ministry of Justice have undertaken updated analysis to compare re-offending rates for offenders receiving IAC orders in 2009 and 2010, with matched offenders receiving short custodial sentences and court orders. The analysis assesses the effectiveness of Intensive Alternatives to Custody (IAC) orders in reducing re-offending compared with a) short-term custodial sentences and b) court orders. Offenders starting an Intensive Alternative to Custody (IAC) order in 2009 or 2010 were matched to similar offenders receiving these disposals and their re-offending was compared. This report updates previous analysis published in July 2012 by including a larger sample (due to 2010 re-offending rates becoming available), using Propensity Score Matching (PSM) methodology as opposed to variable by variable matching, and by including additional offender information from Offender Assessment System (OASys), Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) data sources. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Analytical Summary: Accessed March 20, 2014 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/289369/updated-analysis-impact-of-intensive-alternatives-to-custody-pilots-on-re-offending-rates.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/289369/updated-analysis-impact-of-intensive-alternatives-to-custody-pilots-on-re-offending-rates.pdf Shelf Number: 131989 Keywords: Alternative to IncarcerationIntensive SupervisionOffender SupervisionRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Ireland. Probation Service Title: Probation Service Recidivism Study 2008-2013 Summary: The Probation Service and Central Statistics Office (CSO) have established a partnership to conduct research on recidivism and related issues among offenders on supervision in the community. This second study report is based on anonymised offender and offence information on a 2008 cohort of offenders from the Probation Service supervision database. The study reports on recidivism within three years among that cohort using five years follow up of recorded crime and Court Service data held by the CSO. The study also examines variations in recidivism relating to type of original order, gender and age of the offender, category of original offence and of the subsequent offence. This recidivism study provides a clear overview of community sanctions and their outcomes; informing the Service in the development and support of effective interventions in working to make our communities safer. Key Findings - Almost 60% of offenders on Probation Service supervision had no conviction for a further offence committed within three years of the imposition of a Probation or Community Service order. - The overall recidivism rate of offenders in the study was 41% over a three year period. - There is a higher level of re-offending in the first year after the making of the supervision order in comparison with subsequent years within the 2008 cohort. The reduction between first and second year was more significant in the 2007 cohort. - The recidivism rate decreased as the offender age increased. - Male offenders represented 87% of the total population and had a higher recidivism rate than female offenders. - Public Order was the most common original offence. - The three most common offences for which offenders were reconvicted were the same as with the 2007 cohort: Public Order, Theft and Controlled Drugs Offences. Details: Dublin: The Probation Service, 2013. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Probation Service Research Report 4: Accessed August 14, 2014 at: http://www.probation.ie/website/probationservice/websitepublishingdec09.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/Probation+Service+Recidivism+Study+2008-2013/$FILE/Probation+Service+Recidivism+Study+2008-2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Ireland URL: http://www.probation.ie/website/probationservice/websitepublishingdec09.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/Probation+Service+Recidivism+Study+2008-2013/$FILE/Probation+Service+Recidivism+Study+2008-2013.pdf Shelf Number: 133059 Keywords: Offender SupervisionProbationers (Ireland)Re-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Hudson, Kirsty Title: Evaluation of the 'Going Straight Contract' Pilot Project. Final Report Summary: The Going Straight Contract was first mentioned in the Social Exclusion Unit's report - Reducing Re Offending by Ex-Prisoners (2002:7). In line with recent developments in the management of offenders (NOMS 2005), the report stipulated that prisoners who engaged with the Going Straight Project should be given the opportunity to obtain direct access to services to address their needs both in and out of custody, as well as being offered continued contact with project staff after release. In response to the Social Exclusion Unit's recommendations, the Home Office produced the 'Reducing Re-Offending National Action Plan' (July 2004) setting out a clear plan for delivery, including action points for implementation of a 'Going Straight' Pilot Project. A sub-regional GSC Pilot Project was thus developed by South West Integration (SWing), in partnership with the Home Office and Her Majesties Prison and Young Offender Institution Guys Marsh (HMP & YOI Guys Marsh), in an attempt to utilise and test this 'end to end' resettlement strategy. This report presents an evaluation of the Going Straight Contract, in which a total of 168 prisoners took part. Structure of the report The report is structured as follows. The remainder of this chapter provides a descriptive overview of the organisational structure of the GSC and the arrangements that surrounded its implementation within HMP & YOI Guys Marsh. It also sets out the methodology used to evaluate the pilot project. Chapter 2 presents findings that relate to how successfully the GSC was integrated within the prison as a whole. First, attention is paid to attempts to integrate the ideals surrounding the Going Straight Contract across the prison as a whole, through changes in the induction process and the use of motivational training, and then ways in which the Pilot Project itself was integrated into the prison, for example, through the incorporation of the personal Officer Scheme. Chapter 3 then presents a profile of the type of prisoners who engaged with the GSC Pilot Project. Details presented include their age and ethnicity, offending behaviour, initial CRIME-PICS II assessment scores, and their problems and needs, as measured by the South West - Offender Management Record (SWOMR - these research tools will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter). Chapter 4 looks at the role of offender management as tasked by the project's Intensive Support Worker (ISW). This chapter also explores how successful the ISW was at linking up with other agencies working in the area of resettlement both in custody and in the community. In doing so it provides further evidence of how well the Project was integrated within the rest of the prison and within the local community. Unlike in chapter two, particular attention will be on the different agencies working relations with the pilot and their perceived advantages of the pilot for offenders. Chapter 5, by an analysis of interviews with prisoners , then focuses on the offenders' views of the pilot as a whole. Chapter 6 presents findings relating to the impact and outcomes of the pilot. This includes levels of continuity of service (as already discussed in chapter 4), as well as changes in crime related attitudes and self assessed problems as measured by the CRIME-PICS II instrument, and changes in employment and accommodation status following intervention by the GSC Pilot Project, as measured by the SW-OMR. Finally, chapter 7 draws together the main research findings from the study and offers some broad conclusions. It also provides recommendations in relation to the future delivery of the national offender management model (NOMM) that could eventually be absorbed (without major upheaval) into the NOMS system. Details: Cardiff: Cardiff University, 2007. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 17, 2014 at: http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/socsi/resources/GSC.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/socsi/resources/GSC.pdf Shelf Number: 133736 Keywords: Offender Management (U.K.)Offender TreatmentPrisoner ReentryProbation SupervisionProbationersRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Hopkins, Kathryn Title: Prisoners' experience of prison and outcomes on release: Waves 2 and 3 of SPCR Summary: This report presents the findings from Wave 2 (in-custody, pre-release) and Wave 3 (post-custody) of Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR), a longitudinal cohort study of male and female adult prisoners sentenced to between one month and four years in England and Wales between 2005 and 2007. Prisoners were interviewed in prison and in the community between 2005 and 2010 and re-offending was followed-up using police records for two years after release. The report describes prison routine, prisoners' expectations of life after custody and actual outcomes on release, including employment, accommodation, drugs and alcohol, and finance, benefits and debt. It is not an exhaustive account of SPCR Wave 2 and 3 data, but rather aims to summarise the key results from these waves. Results from Wave 1 of the survey (administered on reception to custody) have already been published. This report is based on self-reported survey questions from a representative sample (SPCR Sample 1) of 1,435 prisoners, most of whom (76%) were sentenced to less than 12 months. Some missing data (due to survey attrition) has been recovered, and some supplementary material from longer-sentenced (18 months to four years) prisoners (SPCR Sample 2) is also reported. Comparisons with earlier prisoner surveys are also made. Prisoners were asked about their time in custody during the Wave 2 interviews, which were conducted shortly before release, and about their outcomes on release during the Wave 3 interviews, which were conducted shortly after release. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed November 3, 2014 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/368164/prisoners-experience-of-prison-and-outcomes-on-release-waves-2-and-3-spcr.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/368164/prisoners-experience-of-prison-and-outcomes-on-release-waves-2-and-3-spcr.pdf Shelf Number: 133937 Keywords: Longitudinal Cohort Study (U.K.)Prisoner ReentryPrisoner ReintegrationPrisonersRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Justice. Justice Data Lab Title: Re-offending Analysis: Warwickshire Youth Justice Service Summary: This analysis assessed the impact on re-offending of an intervention targeted at young offenders who had committed a violent offence, provided by Warwickshire Youth Justice Service (WYJS). The one year proven re-offending rate for 82 offenders who received the service was 38%, compared with 51% for a matched control group of similar offenders. Statistical significance testing has shown that this difference in the re-offending rates is statistically significant; meaning that we can be confident that there is a real difference in the re-offending rate for the group who received the intervention. The offenders included in this analysis all had index offences of violence against the person, and were all between 14 and 18 years of age at the time of this offence. The individuals in this analysis were receiving a statutory programme of provision, which is statutory for all young offenders who commit and are subsequently convicted of violent offences. This analysis therefore presents a comparison of the provision from WYJS against the statutory provision outside the Warwickshire area. What you can say: This analysis shows that participating in an intervention provided by Warwickshire Youth Justice Service led to a reduction in re-offending of between 2 and 24 percentage points. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 25, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/279366/warwickshire-youth-justice-service-report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/279366/warwickshire-youth-justice-service-report.pdf Shelf Number: 135011 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity Based CorrectionsRe-offendingRecidivismViolent Juvenile Offenders (U.K.) |
Author: Villettaz, Patrice Title: The Effects on Re-offending of Custodial vs. Non-custodial Sanctions: An Updated Systematic Review of the State of Knowledge Summary: As part of a broad initiative of systematic reviews of experimental or quasi-experimental evaluations of interventions in the field of crime prevention and the treatment of offenders, our work consisted in searching through all available databases for evidence concerning the effects of custodial and non-custodial sanctions on re-offending. For this purpose, we examined, in 2006, more than 3,000 abstracts, and identified more than 300 possibly eligible studies. For the update, nearly 100 additional potentially eligible studies published or completed between 2003 and 2013 have been identified. For the update, 10 matched-pair design studies and one RCT have been abstracted. One study (Bergman 1976) that, in 2006, had been classified as an RCT turned out, after closer examination, to have been quasi-experimental with respect to the comparison of the custodial and the non-custodial groups. As a result, it has been "downgraded" and included among the quasi-experimental studies in this update. The findings of the update confirm one of the major results of the first report, namely that the rate of re-offending after a non-custodial sanction is lower than after a custodial sanction in most comparisons. However, this is true mostly for quasi-experimental studies using weaker designs, whereas experimental evaluations and natural experiments yield results that are less favourable to non-custodial sanctions. It can be concluded that results in favour of non-custodial sanctions in the majority of quasi-experimental studies may reflect insufficient control of pre-intervention differences between prisoners and those serving "alternative" sanctions. Details: Oslo: Campbell Collaboration, 2015. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2015:1: Accessed April 1, 2015 at: http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/lib/?go=monograph&year=2015 Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/lib/?go=monograph&year=2015 Shelf Number: 135108 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCrime PreventionCustodial SentencesRe-OffendingRecidivism |
Author: Northern Ireland Criminal Justice Inspection Title: An announced inspection of Woodlands Juvenile Justice Centre Summary: Woodlands Juvenile Justice Centre has been praised by Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJI) for its role in improving the child custody system in Northern Ireland. "Woodlands Juvenile Justice Centre (the JJC) accommodates some of the most difficult and disturbed children in our society, and in doing so, prevents them from causing mayhem in their communities and in the residential care system," said Brendan McGuigan, Chief Inspector of Criminal Justice in Northern Ireland. "Since autumn 2012 all children under 18 who are sent to custody are held at the JJC. This means that no child is held in adult custody in this jurisdiction. "This is a significant achievement but the impact of older children being held within the JJC is testing the resilience of staff. It is also inappropriately used as a short term care facility for children who breach children's home rules, when parents/guardians refuse to accept them back home or on foot of Police and Criminal Evidence (PACE) proceedings," said Mr McGuigan. In order to successfully address these challenges, Inspectors have recommended the existing regime at the JJC should be redesigned to take account of the needs of older children including 17-year-olds, while maintaining its existing child-centred ethos. And they have called for the Youth Justice Agency which operates the JJC to work with its statutory partners to reduce inappropriate use of the 9.3m a year facility. "Inspectors accept that the JJC has and can provide stability in times of crisis, but committing a child to custody should be an action of last resort. Placements should not be based on expediency or - as in the case of PACE - more on proximity to the JJC rather than any other criterion," said Mr McGuigan. The Chief Inspector said Inspectors had also recommended steps should be taken to improve current arrangements for children who do not have suitable bail addresses and those who refuse to perfect their personal bail by opting to remain in custody until accommodation of their choice becomes available. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2015. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 3, 2015 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/fb/fb2b3c05-0ec8-47cc-9d63-35443b8e1d97.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/fb/fb2b3c05-0ec8-47cc-9d63-35443b8e1d97.pdf Shelf Number: 135868 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeJuvenile DetentionJuvenile Justice (Northern Ireland)Re-Offending |
Author: Agnew-Pauley, Winifred Title: Re-offending in NSW Summary: Aim: To provide an overview of adult and juvenile re-offending over the last 10 years in New South Wales (NSW). Method: Descriptive analysis of data from the NSW Re-offending Database (ROD). Results and conclusion: Most offenders convicted in the NSW criminal courts were reconvicted of a further offence within 10 years of their initial offence, and this was especially so for juveniles and Indigenous offenders. Those reconvicted tended to be reconvicted for a variety of offences. Keywords: Re-offending, recidivism, NSW, juveniles, adults Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2015. 5p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue paper no. 108: Accessed October 20, 2015 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/bb108.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/bb108.pdf Shelf Number: 137025 Keywords: Adult Offenders Juvenile Offenders Re-offendingRecidivism |
Author: Ringland, Clare Title: Can child protection data improve the prediction of re-offending in young persons? Summary: Aim: To determine whether the inclusion of child protection data improves the ability to predict re-offending in young persons with few prior formal contacts with the criminal justice system. Method: A cohort of young persons who had their first, second or third formal contact with the criminal justice system (i.e., police caution, youth justice conference, or court appearance) in 2011 or 2012 were identified in the Re-offending Database maintained by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. For these young persons, NSW Department of Family and Community Services provided data relating to risk of significant harm (ROSH) reports and out-of-home-care (OOHC). Models predicting re-offending using demographic and criminal history variables were developed and compared with models that also included child protection information. Separate models were developed for males and females, as well as for the subgroup of young persons having their first contact with the criminal justice system. Results: While some variables relating to ROSH reports and OOHC data were significant predictors of re-offending, the inclusion of child protection data did little to improve the ability to predict re-offending within 12 months in young persons with few prior formal contacts. Models with and without child protection data were similarly poor at predicting those who would go on to re-offend. Conclusion: Early identification of young persons at risk of re-offending using administrative data sources remains a challenge Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2015. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, no. 188: Accessed January 27, 2016 at: http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/bocsar_canchildprotectiondataimprovethepredictionofreoffendinginyoungpersons_jan_2016.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/bocsar_canchildprotectiondataimprovethepredictionofreoffendinginyoungpersons_jan_2016.pdf Shelf Number: 137662 Keywords: Juvenile OffendersRe-offendingRecidivism |
Author: Brunton-Smith, Ian Title: The impact of experience in prison on the employment status of longer-sentenced prisoners after release. Results from the Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR) longitudinal cohort study of prisoners Summary: According to survey data, around two-thirds of prisoners are unemployed both before and after custody. The importance of employment in supporting reducing re-offending has long been recognised. There is less understanding of why some prisoners are able to secure work, whilst others do not. Improving our understanding is a key priority for those involved in the management and rehabilitation of offenders. Between 2005 and 2010 a longitudinal cohort study (Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction - SPCR) was conducted, involving face to face interviews with prisoners during and after custody, as well as matching individuals to administrative data such as criminal records. During the SPCR interviews, prisoners were asked about events and circumstances in childhood and early life and before coming into custody as well as their experiences in prison and after release. Previous reports from the SPCR study have focused on the background characteristics of 1,435 prisoners sentenced to between one month and four years in prison (SPCR Sample 1), including childhood experiences, education, employment, drug and alcohol use, health and mental health, needs and attitudes, accommodation before custody, and criminal history (MoJ, 2010a; Boorman & Hopkins, 2012; Hopkins, 2012; Williams, Poyser & Hopkins, 2012; Williams, Papadopoulou & Booth, 2012; Light, Grant & Hopkins, 2013) These reports were based on bivariate analysis and explored prevalence of these pre-custody factors and whether they were associated with higher rates of re-offending on release. In addition, a longitudinal report (Brunton-Smith & Hopkins, 2013) demonstrated which factors identified in the bivariate analyses remained independently associated with re-offending after release from prison, once all other factors were taken into account. SPCR respondents were asked about their employment status during the Wave 3 interviews, conducted a few months2 post-release from prison. The current report presents findings about the factors that are associated with employment after release, for 2,171 prisoners serving sentences of between 18 months and four years (SPCR Sample 2). These sentence lengths are not typical, as on average, most prisoners are sentenced to less than one year in prison.3 However, longer-sentenced prisoners are more likely to access programmes and interventions in prison, and this focus on longer-sentenced prisoners may allow analysis of the effects of these programmes on outcomes such as employment after release. The research first uses bivariate analysis to describe a range of factors before, during custody and after release, exploring how post-custody employment rates vary according to these factors. The analysis then focuses more specifically on identifying the factors that were most strongly associated with higher likelihood of reporting employment after release. To do so the analysis used logistic regression, developing a multivariate model to allow several factors to be tested for their association with post-custody employment at the same time. This allows us to demonstrate which factors were independently associated with employment, when all factors were considered together. Logistic regression analysis does not establish causal links between events, circumstances and re-offending. Nevertheless, the approach allows us to identify a range of factors directly associated with employment after release from prison, and to consider the relative importance of different factors to support policy makers and practitioners working with prisoners and ex-prisoners. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed March 9, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296320/impact-of-experience-in-prison-on-employment-status-of-longer-sentenced-prisoners.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296320/impact-of-experience-in-prison-on-employment-status-of-longer-sentenced-prisoners.pdf Shelf Number: 138146 Keywords: EmploymentEx-Offender EmploymentPrisoner RehabilitationRe-offendingRecidivism |
Author: Hunt, Kim Steven Title: Recidivism Among Federal Offenders: A Comprehensive Overview Summary: This report provides a broad overview of key findings from the United States Sentencing Commission's study of recidivism of federal offenders. The Commission studied offenders who were either released from federal prison after serving a sentence of imprisonment or placed on a term of probation in 2005. Nearly half (49.3%) of such offenders were rearrested within eight years for either a new crime or for some other violation of the condition of their probation or release conditions. This report discusses the Commission's recidivism research project and provides many additional findings from that project. In the future, the Commission will release additional publications discussing specific topics concerning recidivism of federal offenders. (March 2016) The offenders studied in this project are 25,431 federal offenders who: are citizens; re-entered the community during 2005 after discharging their sentence of incarceration or by commencing a term of probation in 2005; have valid FBI numbers which could be located in criminal history repositories (in at least one state, the District of Columbia, or federal records); are not reported dead, escaped, or detained, and have a pre-sentence investigation report that was submitted to the Commission with a federal sentence that was not vacated. The key findings of the Commission's study are: - Over an eight year follow-up period, almost one-half of federal offenders released in 2005 (49.3%) were rearrested for a new crime or rearrested for a violation of supervision conditions. - Almost one-third (31.7%) of the offenders were also reconvicted, and one-quarter (24.6%) of the offenders were reincarcerated over the same study period. - Offenders released from incarceration in 2005 had a rearrest rate of 52.5 percent, while offenders released directly to a probationary sentence had a rearrest rate of 35.1 percent. - Of those offenders who recidivated, most did so within the first two years of the eight year follow-up period. The median time to rearrest was 21 months. - About one-fourth of those rearrested had an assault rearrest as their most serious charge over the study period. Other common most serious offenses were drug trafficking, larceny, and public order offenses. - A federal offender's criminal history was closely correlated with recidivism rates. Rearrest rates range from 30.2 percent for offenders with zero total criminal history points to 80.1 percent of offenders in the highest Criminal History Category, VI. Each additional criminal history point was generally associated with a greater likelihood of recidivism. - A federal offender's age at time of release into the community was also closely associated with differences in recidivism rates. Offenders released prior to age 21 had the highest rearrest rate, 67.6 percent, while offenders over sixty years old at the time of release had a recidivism rate of 16.0 percent - Other factors, including offense type and educational level, were associated with differing rates of recidivism but less so than age and criminal history. Details: Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission, 2016. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 10, 2016 at: http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2016/recidivism_overview.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2016/recidivism_overview.pdf Shelf Number: 138162 Keywords: Federal OffendersOffendersRe-offendingRecidivismRepeat Offenders |
Author: Great Britain. House of Commons. Justice Committee Title: Crime reduction policies: a co-ordinated approach? Summary: During this inquiry we wished to examine the nature and effectiveness of crime reduction policies over the four years since our predecessor Committee reported on the merits of justice reinvestment as a means of cutting crime. Since 2010, crime has been falling, but we found that the extent to which this can, in practice, be attributed to the success of national or local crime reduction policies is unclear. Re-offending rates which had been falling have stabilised over this period but remain relatively high, and it concerns us that last year there has been a fall in the proportion of local areas achieving a decrease in reoffending. We call on the Government to seek to recognise more explicitly where reoffending has fallen and seek to understand why. The prison population has remained high but its once inexorable growth seems to have calmed. All parts of the criminal justice system have had to cope with significant spending cuts, yet it appears to us that the Government has shied away from using the need to make significant cuts to re-evaluate how and where money is spent. This is in contrast to the approach that we saw in Texas (and over half of US states) where they concluded that any real effort to contain spending on corrections must have as its centrepiece a plan to limit the growth of, and ultimately reduce, the prison population. The Government's method of reform remains focused largely on the activity of the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice, which can over-emphasise the significance in attempting to reduce crime of measures taken entirely within the criminal justice system. Some cross-Government initiatives have been developed, such as the Troubled Families programme, to deal with sources of crime. We welcome these yet note that the resources attached to very early intervention schemes, like Family Nurse Partnerships, are tiny in relation to the prison budget and the staggeringly high costs of crime to society. For example, we were told that it is estimated that annually violent crime, 44% of which is alcohol related, costs almost $30 billion, crime perpetrated by people who had conduct problems in childhood costs about $60 billion, and drug-related crime costs almost $14 billion. There have been significant changes to the local partnership landscape for crime reduction since 2010, including the introduction of police and crime commissioners and the transfer of public health responsibilities to local authorities, reflecting the ongoing broader shift of power in this field from Whitehall to local communities. While this has resulted in an assortment of local accountability structures, our evidence highlights the clear benefits of collective ownership, pooled funding and joint priorities that have been facilitated by this approach, although there remains a considerable way to go before health can be considered a fully integral part of the crime reduction picture. In particular, we consider that addressing the funding of mental health services, the inadequacy of which costs the police, courts, probation, and prisons and victims of crime greatly, should be an urgent priority. Alcohol treatment similarly remains a Cinderella service. In our view, two major elements are missing from local partnership approaches to crime reduction: courts and prisons. We believe that a prison system which effectively rehabilitates a smaller number of offenders, while other offenders are rehabilitated through robust community sentences, has the potential to bring about a bigger reduction in crime. Additionally, seeing courts as purely instrumental institutions involved solely in processing and resolving cases, misses an opportunity for encouraging greater innovation, for example through the adoption of problem-solving approaches, which we saw in operation in Texas and in Stockport, and we believe has the potential to make broader systemic savings. The radical and controversial changes that have been made to the probation system with the intention of providing for supervision of short-sentenced prisoners will be commissioned centrally and must be carefully managed to ensure that local crime reduction activity continues to build in strength as the resources for all concerned are further diminished. What remains lacking also is still, as our predecessor observed, a rigorous assessment of where taxpayers' money can most effectively be spent in cutting crime, and a government-wide approach which recognises more explicitly that the criminal justice system is only one limited part of the system through which taxpayers' money is spent to keep people safe from crime. We do not have the right structures in place to provide a collective memory of research evidence, its relative weight, and its implications for policy-making, including the capacity to make decisions about the best direction of resources, and we call on the Government to create an independent and authoritative body to facilitate this. In addition, the Treasury should seriously question whether taxpayers' money is used in ways most likely to reduce future crime and victimisation, and develop a longer-term strategy for the use of resources in this manner. Details: London: The Stationery Office Limited, 2014. 211p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 30, 2016 at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmjust/307/307.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmjust/307/307.pdf Shelf Number: 138482 Keywords: Crime PreventionCrime ReductionCriminal Justice PoliciesCriminal Justice ReformRe-Offending |
Author: Western Australia, Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services Title: Recidivism rates and the impact of treatment programs Summary: Crime costs Australia approximately $36 billion dollars per year. Government spending on the criminal justice system accounts for approximately one quarter of these costs, distributed between the police, the courts, and corrective services. National trends show an increasing expenditure on the criminal justice system and Western Australia reflects this. Over the past five years, the yearly cost of Corrective Services has increased by nearly $200 million (34%), with an additional $655 million used on capital expenditure. This review has found that the Department is missing opportunities in reducing reoffending among those most likely to return to prison. Many factors that increase the likelihood of returning to prison are beyond the Department's control but some can be addressed by treatment in prison, education, or by support and assistance on release. It was found that prisoners released from prisons where there were identified deficiencies in service provision were more likely to reoffend. One area that has seen significant investment with the explicit aim of reducing re-offending is the provision of psychologically-based 'offender treatment programs'. These programs are also an influential factor in Prisoners Review Board decisions. Despite their importance there are inequities in their provision and individual programs are rarely subject to long term evaluation. In order to improve outcomes and reduce the rate at which people return to prison, the Department needs to adopt a holistic but carefully targeted approach. This will require clear goals, well-funded strategies for improvement, and continuous measuring of effectiveness so that alterations can be made where needed. Cost increases in the Western Australian correctives services system coincide with an unprecedented increase in prisoner population. The number of prisoners in adult prisons has increased from approximately 3000 in 2004 to over 5000 in 2014. Not only has the population risen but the cost per prisoner is also rising. In Western Australia, five years ago the cost per prisoner each day was $303.62. Now it is $341.64. For 5000 prisoners that is a rise of over $190,000 per day. These cost and population pressures underline the importance of an effective corrective services system. In an effective system, imprisonment will positively influence a prisoner's life by making them less likely to reoffend in the future. Every 10 less prisoners in the system represents an annual saving of one million dollars. Research has shown that a prison sentence increases the likelihood of reoffending; however, reoffending is less likely if a person undertakes a relevant treatment program (e.g. drug treatment, sexual offender treatment). Other effectively proven rehabilitative measures for reducing reoffending include: - Prison-based educational and vocational training programs; - Prison-based employment programs; - Post-release services that aid community re-integration; - Drug courts; and - Mental health diversionary programs. Recently, the Commissioner for Corrective Services announced an intention to reduce reoffending by five to six per cent per year Details: Perth: Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, 2014. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2016 at: http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/publications/tabledpapers.nsf/displaypaper/3912295a35b28230ed9c541e48257d730008d551/$file/2295.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/publications/tabledpapers.nsf/displaypaper/3912295a35b28230ed9c541e48257d730008d551/$file/2295.pdf Shelf Number: 138937 Keywords: Correctional ProgramsCosts of CorrectionsPrisoner RehabilitationRe-offendingRecidivism |
Author: Stubbs, Claire Title: Resilience to Re-offending: mechanisms supporting young men to oversome adversity Summary: This study investigated the mechanisms supporting young men's resilience to reoffending. Resilience was defined as "the outcome from negotiations between individuals and their environments for the resources to define themselves as healthy amidst conditions collectively viewed as adverse" (Ungar, 2004a, p.32). The philosophical approach was critical realist (Bhaskar, 1978) and the methodology used was narrative enquiry, employing content analysis (Lieblich et al., 1998) to elicit mechanisms from the data. Eight young men with previous involvement in the criminal justice system were recruited from organisations in Hastings, East Sussex. They participated in a narrative interview which explored their life stories and the mechanisms utilised to change their offending trajectory. The study used Hart and Blincow's Resilient Therapy (RT) Framework (2007), to categorise the data. Mechanisms within the framework, located within categories such as Basics, Belonging, Learning, Core Self and Coping, were applied to the young men's experience, to understand the application of RT in promoting resilience to reoffending. All categories of RT were pertinent in nurturing their pathways to resilience. Further analysis of the data elicited additional resilient mechanisms absent within RT. Proposed additions included Clothes within the Basics compartment, and Humour, an important mechanism facilitating coping and affiliation, included within the Belonging and Coping compartments. Social capital was instrumental to the young men's resilience, providing them with essential coping resources; a further recommendation was to rename the Belonging compartment "social capital". This research challenges common discourses of risk. The young men demonstrated how the experiences and environments where they encountered risk were important in cultivating their resilience to reoffending. Within counselling psychology, this reinforces the notion of focusing on the subjective experience of the individual, embracing uncertainty, bracketing assumptions and extending traditional boundaries when promoting resilience with vulnerable young men. This study corroborated existing research demonstrating resilience as the outcome of both individual and social processes (Luthar and Cicchetti, 2000; Prilleltensky, 2005; Hart and Blincow, 2007). With respect to counselling psychology practice it presents a challenge to individualised therapeutic interventions, encouraging counselling psychologists to become active participants in changing the social systems that impact on an individual's resilience, reconciling their roles as healers with their role as change agents. RT (Hart and Blincow, 2007) provides a systemic application of mechanisms targeting both micro- and macro-level processes, offering an extension to counselling psychology practice necessary to promote resilience to reoffending. Details: Middlesex, UK: Middlesex University and Metanoia Institute, 2014. 234p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed July 29, 2016 at: http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/13802/1/CStubbs_thesis.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/13802/1/CStubbs_thesis.pdf Shelf Number: 139896 Keywords: Behavioral CounselingMale OffendersRe-offendingRecidivismSocial Capital |
Author: Halstead, Imogen Title: Does the Custody-based Intensive Treatment (CUBIT) program for sex offenders reduce re-offending? Summary: Aim: To investigate whether completing the Custody-based Intensive Treatment (CUBIT) program for moderate to high risk/needs sex offenders reduces re-offending. Method: The study sample includes 386 male offenders identified by custodial staff as suitable for participation in CUBIT who were released from NSW custody during the period 2000 to 2010. An Instrumental Variables (IV) approach is adopted to control for potential unobservable selection bias in treatment outcomes (a key concern in the treatment effects literature), with the CUBIT completion rate amongst commencements around the time of an offender's own potential participation in CUBIT employed as the preferred IV. This method is statistically inefficient, and has limited power to assess the impact of treatment on sex re-offending (which is relatively rare) specifically. As such, three separate two-stage least squares models (including a range of control variables) are used to estimate the impact of completing CUBIT on whether or not an offender will re-offend with a sex, violent, or general offence, respectively, within five years of free time following their release from custody. Results: Within five years free time following release from custody 12 per cent of offenders who completed CUBIT committed a proven sex offence, 27 per cent re-offended with a new violent offence and 41 per cent committed a proven offence of any type. Multivariate models controlling for a range of important observable risk factors found that CUBIT completers had, on average, a 5-year general recidivism risk that was 13 percentage points lower than a similar cohort of offenders suitable for CUBIT but who did not participate. No significant differences between the treated and untreated groups were found for violent or sex re-offending. Conclusion: There is some evidence to suggest that completing CUBIT results in a considerable reduction in general recidivism risk. No evidence is found to suggest that CUBIT completion reduces sexual or violent re-offending. However, it is difficult to draw any conclusion from the null results, since the power of the statistical methods employed to detect a treatment impact in this study is limited given the relatively small sample size. Details: Sydney, NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. 24p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 193: Accessed August 30, 2016 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Custody-based-Intensive-Treatment-%28CUBIT%29-program-cjb193.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Custody-based-Intensive-Treatment-%28CUBIT%29-program-cjb193.pdf Shelf Number: 140087 Keywords: Offender TreatmentRe-offendingRecidivismSex Offenders |
Author: Stavrou, Efty Title: Parole release authority and re-offending Summary: Aim: To determine whether recidivism was associated with parole release authority; and to determine whether re-offending was also related to being under supervision or not. Method: Time to first proven re-offence was examined for 1,644 matched offenders who served between 18 and 36 months in custody using Cox proportional hazard regression. Being on-parole was included as a time-varying covariate in the overall model. Estimates of those who re-offended overall and on-parole or off-parole were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates as separate outcomes. Results: One in four offenders re-offended whilst on-parole and 20 per cent re-offended after their parole period had expired. Parolees released by the court were significantly more likely to re-offend overall and when offenders were off-parole (when separately examined). Although the overall model showed that offenders were less likely to re-offend when on-parole, this was not statistically significant. No difference was seen in the type of re-offences committed between court-released and SPA parolees. Conclusion: SPA released parolees appear to be less likely to re-offend, particularly once the parole order has expired. This may be due to the selective processes of the SPA in choosing who should be granted parole or because SPA parolees are more motivated to participate in rehabilitation programs whilst in custody. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 194: Accessed September 3, 2016 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Parole-release-authority-and-reoffending-cjb194.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Parole-release-authority-and-reoffending-cjb194.pdf Shelf Number: 140163 Keywords: Parole Parolees Re-offendingRecidivism |
Author: Wan, Wai Yin Title: Violent Criminal Careers: A retrospective longitudinal study Summary: Aims: To determine: (1) the long-term risk that someone charged with a violent offence will commit another violent offence (2) what factors influence the likelihood of desistance and the length of time to the next violent offence for those who do re-offend. Method: All 26,472 offenders who were born between 1986 and 1990 (inclusive) and who had at least one violent offence proved against them in New South Wales (NSW) before December 31st, 2014 were followed up to December 31st, 2015. An offence was counted as proved if at the index contact it resulted in a caution, a youth justice conference or proven court appearance. The mean follow-up time for offenders in the study was 6.35 years (range = 21.3 years; interquartile range = 4.7 years). Bivariate correlates of time to re-offend were identified using log-rank tests. Multivariate analysis of survival time was undertaken using a cure fraction model with a loglogistic distribution of survival time. Results: In the median case, after 20 years, an estimated 23 per cent of violent offenders committed a further violent offence. However the risk of violent re-offending varies greatly across different offender groups, being much higher for Indigenous offenders, those who were aged 17 and under at the time of their index contact and those whose first contact with the criminal justice system occurred when they were 12 years of age or younger. There is little evidence of specialisation among violent offenders in the sample. Most have committed a wide variety of different offences prior to their conviction for a violent offence and those who do re-offend commit a wide variety of offences. Conclusion: Authorities charged with responsibility for making bail, sentencing and parole decisions in relation to violent offenders need to pay close attention to the characteristics of the violent offenders they are dealing with. Evaluations of violent offender programs should include both short-term and long-term follow up. Prison is not a very effective instrument through which to reduce violent offending. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, no. 198: Accessed October 19, 2016 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Violent-Criminal-Careers-A-retrospective-longitudinal-study-cjb198.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-Violent-Criminal-Careers-A-retrospective-longitudinal-study-cjb198.pdf Shelf Number: 145381 Keywords: Career CriminalsRe-offendingRecidivismViolenceViolent CrimeViolent Offenders |
Author: Bateman, Tim Title: The State of Youth Custody, 2016 Summary: The National Association for Youth Justice (NAYJ) has consistently argued for a minimum use of custody for children who break the law: imprisonment should only be used as a last resort and for the shortest necessary period in those rare situations where a child's offending is such as to pose a demonstrable risk of serious harm to others and where, after thorough consideration, no other alternative is sufficient to mitigate that risk. Where deprivation of liberty is necessary, children should only be detained in child care establishments that promote their well-being and longer term development. This longstanding opposition to the use of custody is informed by a well-established, international evidence base which clearly shows that incarceration is extremely damaging to children in the short term and impedes their healthy development over the longer term. Nor is imprisonment an effective mechanism for preventing youth crime. In spite of some reduction in recent years, re-ofending rates for children following a custodial episode remain extremely high (67.1% within 12 months for those released in 2014). Analysis confrms that, controlling for range of relevant factors, children who receive custodial sentences of between six and 12 months are significantly (4% points) more likely to re-ofend than a comparison group sentenced to a high level community penalty.5 Deprivation of liberty accordingly exacerbates rather than reduces the likelihood of offending, suggesting that far from acting as a deterrent, incarceration has a criminogenic effect. This conclusion is unsurprising given the nature of youth crime. Children who break the law have rarely given careful consideration to the consequences of their actions. Neither the prospect of incarceration, nor the subsequent experience of being locked up, is likely to deter them or others from further criminal activity. International standards acknowledge the counterproductive and damaging nature of custody. Article 37 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, whose tenets the UK is obliged to uphold as a signatory to the Convention, proscribes the use of child imprisonment other than as a measure of last resort. During the 1990s and much of the following decade, England and Wales was in clear breach of such obligations with child imprisonment characterised by a rapid and sustained escalation. More recently, the number of children in custody has declined sharply. In May 2008, the under-18 population of the secure estate for children was 3,006; by May 2016, it had fallen to 870, a reduction of more than 70%.8 While the precise reasons for this contraction are open to debate, it is clear that much of it can be explained as a consequence of a less punitive climate towards children in conflict with the law, permitting the development of a range of informal responses to youth crime that have, in turn, led to a substantial reduction in the number of children entering the formal parameters of the youth justice system. Such advances should, of course, be recognised, but the NAYJ considers that levels of child incarceration remain too high and continue to be out of step with more progressive youth justice practices and international standards. Moreover, as will be argued in due course, effecting further reductions in child imprisonment may be an important consideration in ensuring a humane treatment of those children who continue to be deprived of their liberty. Details: s.l.: National Association for Youth Justice, 2016. 12p. Source: NAYJ Briefing: Accessed October 24, 2016 at: http://thenayj.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/NAYJ-Briefing-State-of-Youth-Custody-2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://thenayj.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/NAYJ-Briefing-State-of-Youth-Custody-2016.pdf Shelf Number: 134828 Keywords: Juvenile DetentionJuvenile OffendersRe-offendingRecidivismYouth Custody |
Author: New York State. Department of Corrections and Community Supervision Title: 2010 Inmates Releases: Three Year Post Release Follow-up Summary: Return-to-custody data are presented for inmates released from the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) in 2010. This includes inmates who were released from parole program facilities as well as those released from correctional facilities. Return rates are based on a three-year follow-up period and are analyzed relative to several demographic and legal history characteristics. Return rates among the 2010 release cohort are compared to those found for an aggregated release cohort covering 1985 to 2010. Trends in rates of return among the annual release cohorts since 1985 are also presented. Details: Albany, NY: The Department, 2014. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 26, 2016 at: http://www.doccs.ny.gov/Research/Reports/2014/2010_releases_3yr_out.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.doccs.ny.gov/Research/Reports/2014/2010_releases_3yr_out.pdf Shelf Number: 146022 Keywords: Offender RehabilitationRe-offendingRecidivism |
Author: Foster, Rowan Title: Evaluation of the Employment and Reoffending Pilot: Lessons learnt from the planning and early implementation phase Summary: The evaluation of the Employment and Reoffending Pilot aims to draw out lessons learned from its design, development, implementation and delivery, including any reasons for the results it achieves, providing valuable learning to inform the implementation of Transforming Rehabilitation. This report contains findings from the first phase of the evaluation, covering the set-up and first six months of operation of the pilot. Annex D - Topic Guides used in the Employment and Reoffending Pilot Evaluation is published as a separated document alongside this report. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2013. 54p., annex. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 15, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/265287/employment-reoffending-pilot.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/265287/employment-reoffending-pilot.pdf Shelf Number: 146640 Keywords: Ex-offender EmploymentOffender RehabilitationRe-offendingRecidivismRehabilitation Programs |
Author: Spier, Philip Title: Offending by Children in New Zealand Summary: Children who offend are a group who are under-researched in New Zealand. This research report aims to fill some key information gaps around the profile of child offenders in New Zealand and their patterns of offending and reoffending. The findings from this research will inform future work under the cross-agency Youth Crime Action Plan in response to Government commitments made in September 2012 following the Social Services Select Committee's Inquiry into the identification, rehabilitation, and care and protection of child offenders. Offending trajectories were examined for the 1995 to 1999 birth cohorts to the end of 2013, and child offenders aged 10 to 13 years in the period 2009 to 2013 were examined in some depth. Children who offend are a group who are under-researched in New Zealand. This research report aims to fill some key information gaps around the profile of child offenders in New Zealand and their patterns of offending and reoffending. The findings from this research will inform future work under the cross-agency Youth Crime Action Plan in response to Government commitments made in September 2012 following the Social Services Select Committee’s Inquiry into the identification, rehabilitation, and care and protection of child offenders. Offending trajectories were examined for the 1995 to 1999 birth cohorts to the end of 2013, and child offenders aged 10 to 13 years in the period 2009 to 2013 were examined in some depth. Key findings An estimated one in twenty New Zealand children offend before age 14 The number of child offenders has dropped considerably Despite offending less, Māori children remain significantly over-represented Large drop in shoplifting, and violent offending down Fewer children are becoming offenders Early identification of persistent offenders is critical to reduce crime Police responses reflect changing patterns of offending A little over half of all child offenders reoffend within two years Conclusions Offending by children has dropped in the last five years for both genders, across all ethnic groups and ages, across almost all offence types, and in all regions. A falling youth crime rate is not unique to New Zealand, and the reasons for the fall are unclear and therefore subject to debate. It is likely due to the confluence of a number of factors such as: changes in police practice; better public and private security measures; more effective youth justice interventions; goods often subject to theft or burglary historically continuing to become affordable to more people; and a proliferation of smart phones and video gaming devices among youth which may prevent some opportunistic crimes through boredom. The factors behind the fall in crime may also differ for different types of crime. Much of the drop in offending by children in New Zealand has been because of a drop in first-time child offenders. This is a very positive finding. It is encouraging that there was at least a third fewer child offenders from all ethnic groups apprehended in 2013 than in 2009. However, the decrease for Māori was smaller than that seen for European and Pacific children, with the consequence that the over-representation in the offender statistics of Māori children is exacerbated. This over-representation at the front-end of the youth justice system flows through to other parts of the system (i.e. Child, Youth and Family and the Youth Court). It is important to understand and address the complex interplay of risk factors that lead to Māori children, both boys and girls, being apprehended at a greater rate than children from other ethnic groups. Broadly, attention needs to focus on two areas. Firstly, the rate of Māori children offending and entering the youth justice system in the first instance needs to be reduced. Secondly, for those children who do come in contact with the system, there needs to be effective interventions to increase the likelihood that they do not reoffend. Although a minority (20%) of child offenders committed the majority (57%) of offences by children over the five-year period 2009 to 2013, this was not a small group (around 3,600 children). Within these figures there were 820 children who committed around 11,000 offences, including 170 children who committed nearly 4,200 offences. These figures support the view that early identification and application of effective interventions with high-risk child offenders presents an opportunity to steer the children onto a more positive path, thereby preventing a large number of future crimes and a large number of people from becoming victims. Children who offend are a group who are under-researched in New Zealand. There would be benefit to further research in the following areas: The dynamics of offending by Māori children, and what effective interventions for this group would look like. Who are the high-risk child offenders, how can they be identified early, and what would effective interventions for this group look like? Details: Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Social Development, 2016. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 16, 2016 at: http://apo.org.au/resource/offending-children-new-zealand Year: 2016 Country: New Zealand URL: http://apo.org.au/resource/offending-children-new-zealand Shelf Number: 144843 Keywords: Juvenile Justice SystemJuvenile OffendersRe-offendingRecidivismRehabilitation ProgramsTrajectories |
Author: Millsteed, Melanie Title: Predictors of recidivism amongst police recorded family violence perpetrators Summary: Prior research has identified that a number of factors are associated with an increased risk of recidivism amongst perpetrators of domestic violence and that the risk assessment tools currently available have limited statistical capacity to accurately predict recidivism. In Victoria, police complete a risk assessment form (the L17 form) for each family incident reported to them. This study sought to analyse the relationship between repeat family incidents, and factors that may predict such incidents including alleged perpetrator characteristics and L17 risk factors recorded by police. Logistic regression modelling identified statistical relationships between some, but not all, of the alleged perpetrator characteristics and risk factors recorded, and the perpetration of further family incidents. Opportunities for further research are identified, including piloting and evaluation of any new or revised risk assessment tools developed in Victoria. Details: Melbourne, AUS: Victoria Crime Statistics Agency, 2016. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: In Brief, no. 4: Accessed November 21, 2016 at: https://www.crimestatistics.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/embridge_cache/emshare/original/public/2016/06/96/97f49b66e/20160530_final_in_brief4.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.crimestatistics.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/embridge_cache/emshare/original/public/2016/06/96/97f49b66e/20160530_final_in_brief4.pdf Shelf Number: 147852 Keywords: Family ViolenceIntimate Partner ViolenceRe-offendingRecidivismRisk Assessment |
Author: Clifton, Jonathan Title: Prisons and Prevention: Giving Local Areas the Power to Reduce Offending Summary: Devolving responsibility and funding for the management of low-level offenders could empower local services and agencies to work more effectively to prevent crime and develop alternatives to prison that do more to rehabilitate offenders. This briefing describes how this can be achieved. England and Wales’s prison system could do better at reducing crime and rehabilitating offenders: it is currently a hugely expensive and highly inefficient arm of the public sector. As the number of prisoners continues to rise, and as the Ministry of Justice budget is faces further cuts, this is clearly unsustainable. This paper argues that reform is needed to address the inherent flaw in our criminal justice system: that the bodies that could take action to reduce offending have neither the financial power nor the incentive to do so. This is because many of the services and agencies that could act to reduce offending are organised and controlled at the local level, whereas the budget for prison places is held by central government. The challenge, therefore, is to ‘unfreeze’ the resources that are locked up in the prison system, and ensure that local services and agencies are enabled and incentivised to use those resources to both prevent crime and develop alternatives to custody. At the moment, incentives work in precisely the wrong direction: if a local authority invests in high-quality services that keep people out of prison, the financial benefits accrue to the Ministry of Justice (as it spends less on prisons as a result) rather than the local authority, which ends up meeting the costs of ever more people using their community services The recent drive to devolve power and resources to groups of local authorities and city mayors could hold the answer to this problem. The government has already successfully experimented with devolving elements of the youth justice system to local authorities, as well as granting greater powers over transport, skills and health services to some of England’s major cities and counties. In this report We propose that this approach be extended to the management of low-level adult offenders, who make up the bulk of ‘churn’ within the prison system. This would involve giving city mayors or combined authorities a budget to cover the costs of these offenders, but charging them for each night that an offender from their area is held in prison. This would give local authorities resources to invest in preventative services and alternatives to custody, and give them a strong financial incentive to ensure that these investments deliver results, while also ensuring that money and responsibility for the reduction of reoffending is located where it can best be exercised. This report presents case studies of a number of youth justice programmes in the US and England that have proven effective at reducing pressure on prisons and reoffending, drawing from them eight principles that should underpin the reform and devolution of the adult offenders budget. Bearing these principles in mind, it sets out detailed recommendations for the timings and mechanisms by which the government should pursue these reforms – which bodies should be allowed to bid for control of the custody budget, how targets should be set and oversight and accountability ensured, how funding and savings should be managed and how, in time, funding for probation services for low-level offenders should also be devolved. Details: London: Institute for Public Policy Research, 2016. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Briefing: Accessed December 15, 2016 at: http://www.ippr.org/files/publications/pdf/prisons-and-prevention_Jan2016.pdf?noredirect=1 Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.ippr.org/files/publications/pdf/prisons-and-prevention_Jan2016.pdf?noredirect=1 Shelf Number: 146165 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCosts of CorrectionsCriminal Justice ReformRe-offendingRecidivism |
Author: Vigurs, Carol Title: A Systematic Review of Motivational Approaches as a Pre-Treatment Intervention for Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programmes Summary: What is the focus of the intervention? Motivational Interviewing (MI) or Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET) is a non-judgemental, empathic and optimistic counselling style that has been used with offenders who have been ordered by a court to attend a standard domestic violence perpetrator programme. MI/MET is designed to overcome resistance, hostility or denial by the offender at the time of referral to these programmes, and can be used when the offender is in custody or the community, while on bail or on probation. MI/MET is undertaken by the offender prior to another standard perpetrator intervention such as cognitive behavioural therapy. Underpinning the MI/MET approach is a belief that the journey to permanent change in behaviour goes through several stages: early stages of pre-contemplation and contemplation; preparation for change; readiness to take action; and, finally, a maintenance stage. MI/MET is designed to help domestic abuse offenders develop their own personal desire for change through use of a therapeutic style that is non-judgemental, empathic and optimistic. This narrative is based on a systematic review of 7 studies using victim reported and official measures of reoffending, such as rearrests, as the outcome. EFFECT How effective is it? Overall, the evidence suggests that Motivational Interviewing/Motivational Enhancement Therapy has reduced rates of victim-reported reoffending. The effect size within the review, from 3 studies, showed that lower levels of reoffending were reported by victims of offenders who received MI/MET and attended a standard domestic violence perpetrator programme than by victims where the offender did not receive MI/MET. The authors stated that while the effect size was small, it did show a significant reduction in victim reported reoffending. The two studies that reported official measures of reoffending, such as rearrests and breaches of conditions, showed that MI/MET had no significant effect on these measures. However, the control groups may not have been comparable as they measured different kinds of official reports, including those not related specifically to domestic violence. Details: London: College of Policing, 2015. 101p. Source: Internet Resource: WHAT WORKS: CRIME REDUCTION SYSTEMATIC REVIEW SERIES, no. 4: http://whatworks.college.police.uk/Research/Systematic_Review_Series/Documents/Motivational_intervewing.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://whatworks.college.police.uk/Research/Systematic_Review_Series/Documents/Motivational_intervewing.pdf Shelf Number: 145759 Keywords: Abusive Men Domestic Violence Evidence-Based Programs Motivational Interviewing Re-offendingRecidivism Violence Against Women |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: An Inspection of Through the Gate Resettlement Services for Prisoners Serving 12 Months or More Summary: Until 2014, probation services in England and Wales were delivered by local Probation Trusts. Reoffending rates for released prisoners were high. It was recognised that issues including homelessness, unemployment, mental health and substance misuse contributed to reoffending. The government's Transforming Rehabilitation strategy aimed to reduce reoffending rates by opening up the probation market to new providers, encouraging innovation and creativity. A new National Probation Service and 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies were set up on 01 June 2014. Cases allocated to the NPS included high risk of serious harm offenders and those subject to Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements. CRCs were to manage most other medium and low risk of serious harm offenders, and were to be given: 'flexibility to do what works and freedom from bureaucracy' (Ministry of Justice, 2013). The Transforming Rehabilitation programme introduced Through the Gate resettlement services into prisons in England and Wales. Through the Gate services were intended to be delivered by the local CRC to help prisoners maintain or find accommodation; provide assistance with finance, benefits and debt; and to support them to enter education, training and employment. Additional support was to be provided for those prisoners who had been sex workers or had experienced domestic abuse. These services had existed in prisons previously, but in a more fragmented way. The aim of Through the Gate was to provide a seamless transition between prison and the community. Through the Gate arrangements The prison estate was reorganised in November 2014, with 89 of the 120 prisons in England and Wales designated as resettlement prisons. All female prisons were so designated. The aim is for 80% of prisoners to be moved to a resettlement prison local to their home area at least three months before release. Prison staff screen all new prisoners to discover what needs they have, and CRCs are expected to plan to meet any immediate resettlement needs at the start of sentence, and then to review the plan 12 weeks before release putting in place assistance required at that point. CRCs have Through the Gate resettlement teams located within all designated resettlement prisons, consisting either of direct CRC employees or staff working for organisations in a contractual arrangement with the CRC. CRCs receive a 'fee for service' for providing core Through the Gate services, which should include assistance to maintain or find accommodation; assistance with finance, benefits and debt; education, training and employment; release coordination; and support for those who have been sex workers or have experienced domestic abuse. When CRCs bid for the contracts, they set out their broad intentions about how they would deliver Through the Gate services, but the detailed content is not specified. Through the Gate services are available to all prisoners, irrespective of whether their cases are to be managed upon release by a CRC or the NPS. The CRC contracts are managed by HMPPS, and the only performance target for CRCs relating to Through the Gate is to complete resettlement plans in the prescribed timescale. There is no contractual obligation to address the needs that have been identified. We visited nine prisons, where Through the Gate services were being delivered by eight different CRCs with seven different corporate owners. We looked at the cases of 98 prisoners, before and after release. What prisoners need to help them resettle We found, as anticipated, that many prisoners needed substantial help before they were released. Finding somewhere to live was a common problem, along with finding work or making a benefits claim, and getting assistance with substance misuse or mental health problems. We found that many of these needs were not recognised when prisoners first went into custody. Problems that should have been obvious to prison staff were not identified. Where problems were picked up, they were not well-recorded, so that Through the Gate staff did not have enough information to make a good plan about what help was needed. If urgent issues were identified at the start of a sentence, the speed with which prisoners were transferred to other prisons meant that they were unlikely to receive early help, for example to sort out debts or maintain accommodation. There was then a time delay until they could access Through the Gate services, 12 weeks before release. Most prisoners did have plans drawn up for them before release, though not always in the required timescale. The quality of the plans was variable. Necessary actions were not always identified. Moreover, many of the actions in plans consisted of no more than referring the prisoner on to other services, with little or no follow-up. The delays in completing plans sometimes meant there was not enough time left to deal with issues that arose. Outcomes for prisoners receiving Through the Gate services Too many prisoners (more than one in seven) were released not knowing where they would sleep that night. Only two prisoners were found accommodation via Through the Gate arrangements. Three more were placed in short-term accommodation provided by HMPPS for home detention curfew. Work that could and should have been done by Through the Gate services in prison was left for responsible officers to pick up after release. Five prisoners only found accommodation on their day of release. This increased the anxiety of those prisoners and placed a heavy burden on staff in the community trying to make arrangements for housing on the day of release. The rate of homelessness varied from prison to prison, but ten of the cases we looked at started off their licence period with no fixed address. The impact of Through the Gate services on education, training and employment was minimal. No prisoners were helped by Through the Gate services to enter education, training or employment after release. All except one of the prisons we visited were able to set bank accounts up for prisoners, but even where this service was available, some prisoners were still released without bank accounts. Other work on finance, benefits and debt was not being delivered to any great extent. When Through the Gate was introduced there was much talk about the use of mentors to provide intensive support to prisoners around the time of release. The use of mentors had not been developed as anticipated, and only one prisoner had received support through a mentor scheme introduced under Through the Gate. After release, all of the prisoners in our sample would be supervised for at least 12 months. We thought it was important that their responsible officers in the community received full information at the point of release, about the prisoner's behaviour and experience in prison. Ideally this would include details of all handover arrangements, including appointments made at Jobcentre Plus, and with drug treatment and mental health services. This could be done either by prison staff or Through the Gate workers, but in many prisons communication and information sharing was poor. Public protection Public protection is the business of everyone working with the prisoner. Most of the Through the Gate staff we met were ill-informed about public protection issues in the cases they were working with. We observed shortcomings in the work of prison staff, and of responsible officers in the CRCs and in the NPS. Too many prisoners had inadequate assessment of their potential to cause harm, and too little was done to mitigate these risks. Poor communication was often a factor, and there was not enough evidence of a 'whole system' approach to managing risk of harm. Design and evaluation of Through the Gate services Prison places are not evenly distributed across the country, so layering Through the Gate onto the prison footprint was never going to be straightforward. Other pressures in the prison system mean that the catchment areas for some resettlement prisons are very wide. We only saw a few prisons where there was a clear benefit from having the 'local' CRC delivering Through the Gate services. No clear guidance has been given on how Through the Gate services should align with sentence planning arrangements. For many prisoners, no sentence planning takes place at all because of operational difficulties within prisons, while others only receive a risk assessment due to the current Offender Assessment System prioritisation policy. The Through the Gate resettlement plan may be the only record of work that needs to be done with them, and it is not sufficient for that purpose. The complexity and incompatibility of the IT systems used by staff in preparing prisoners for release were major obstacles to effective working. Either staff waste time entering the same information in multiple places, or they just record in one or two places, with the consequence that others are not able to find out about relevant work. While many CRCs have contracted well-respected voluntary organisations to deliver Through the Gate services, the focus has been on completion of resettlement plans and so the potential for these more diverse providers to improve the overall quality of resettlement work is not being realised. The few examples of innovation we saw were on a very small scale, so are likely to have no more than a negligible impact on reducing reoffending. The CRC contracts incentivise the completion of resettlement plans, not the improvement of prisoners' situations. CRCs are generally struggling financially and it is not surprising, then, that most have invested little in services beyond the minimum contractual expectation. Those that are doing more - Durham Tees Valley CRC for example - told us that they are doing so at a loss. It is hard to see any impact of the prospect of future payment by results for reducing reoffending rates. The consequence is that Through the Gate services as delivered now are not likely to reduce rates of reoffending. For technical and legal reasons it is impossible for CRCs to track any difference Through the Gate has made for the prisoners they have worked with, such as finding accommodation or work. This makes it hard for them to evaluate the impact of their work. The staff we met in prisons working for Through the Gate were keen and committed, and were clearly very busy writing resettlement plans to meet contractual targets. Many of them, and some of their managers, were unaware that the work they were doing was having little or no impact on the eventual resettlement of prisoners. Details: Manchester: Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation, 2017. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 23, 2017 at: http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/06/Through-the-Gate-phase-2-report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/06/Through-the-Gate-phase-2-report.pdf Shelf Number: 146349 Keywords: Prisoner ReentryProbationProbationersRe-offendingRecidivismResettlement |