Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The effective use of the core treatment principles from the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model has the potential to reduce criminal recidivism significantly. A pilot trial of the RNR-based model Krimstics in the Swedish probation service showed increased RNR adherence but no effects on recidivism. The subsequent implementation of Krimstics involved the training and clinical support of more than 700 probation officers working with community supervision. In parallel, an implementation evaluation examining RNR adherence was undertaken, collecting and coding audio-recorded supervision sessions and case file data. Findings showed that Krimstics-trained probation officers (N = 96) used cognitive behavioral therapy-based techniques in supervision sessions while demonstrating moderate-to-high levels of relationship building skills. However, adherence to the risk principle was lacking and key cognitive behavioral techniques showed poor quality. Although Krimstics has increased RNR adherence in a Swedish context, challenges with implementing theory into practice may obscure the assessment of the service’s effectiveness.

Keywords

Risk-Need-Responsivity RNR Sweden community supervision probation evaluation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aebi

M. F.

Hashimoto

Y. Z.

Tiago

M. M.

(2019). Probation and prisons in Europe 2018: Key findings of the SPACE reports. Council of Europe.

Andrews

D. A.

Bonta

(1995). The Level of Service Inventory—Revised. MultiHealth Systems.

Andrews

D. A.

Bonta

Hoge

R. D.

(1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17(1), 19–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854890017001004

Andrews

D. A.

Dowden

(2006). Risk principle of case classification in correctional treatment: A meta-analytic investigation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50(1), 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X05282556

Barnett

G. D.

Howard

F. F.

(2018). A review of reviews of ineffective interventions for adults convicted of crimes. European Psychologist, 23(2), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000323

Bonta

Andrews

D. A.

(2007). Risk-need-responsivity model for offender assessment and rehabilitation (Corrections User Report 2007-06). Public Safety Canada.

Bonta

Andrews

D. A.

(2017). The psychology of criminal conduct (6th ed.). Routledge.

Bonta

Bourgon

Rugge

Scott

T. L.

Yessine

A. K.

Gutierrez

(2011). An experimental demonstration of training probation officers in evidence-based community supervision. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(11), 1127–1148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854811420678

Bonta

Rugge

Bourgon

Wanamaker

K. A.

(2019). A conceptual replication of the Strategic Training Initiative in Community Supervision (STICS). Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15, 397–419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09371-4

10.

Bonta

Rugge

Scott

T. L.

Bourgon

Yessine

A. K.

(2008). Exploring the black box of community supervision. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 47(3), 248–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509670802134085

11.

Bourgon

Bonta

Rugge

Scott

T. L.

Yessine

A. K.

(2010). The role of program design, implementation, and evaluation in evidence-based “real world” community supervision. Federal Probation, 74(1), 2–15.

12.

Damschroder

L. J.

Aron

D. C.

Keith

R. E.

Kirsh

S. R.

Alexander

J. A.

Lowery

J. C.

(2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4, Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50

13.

Day

Hardcastle

Birgden

(2012). Case management in community corrections: Current status and future directions. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 51(7), 484–495. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2012.706245

14.

Fixsen

D. L.

Blase

K. A.

Naoom

S. F.

Wallace

(2009). Core implementation components. Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 531–540. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731509335549

15.

Hanley

(2006). Appropriate services: Examining the case classification principle. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 42, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1300/J076v42n04_01

16.

Koehler

J. A.

Lösel

Akoensi

T. D.

Humphreys

D. K.

(2013). A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of young offender treatment programs in Europe. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 9, 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-012-9159-7

17.

Koo

T. K.

M. Y.

(2016). A guideline for selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012

18.

Landenberger

N. A.

Lipsey

M. W.

(2005). The positive effects of cognitive behavioral programs for offenders: A meta-analysis of factors associated with effective treatment. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 451–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-005-3541-7

19.

Latessa

E. J.

Smith

Schweitzer

Labrecque

R. M.

(2013). Evaluation of the Effective Practices in Community Supervision model (EPICS) in Ohio. University of Cincinnati.

20.

Lipsey

M. W.

Cullen

F. T.

(2007). The effectiveness of correctional rehabilitation: A review of systematic reviews. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3, 297–320. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112833

21.

Lovins

B. L.

Lowenkamp

C. T.

Latessa

E. J.

(2009). Applying the risk principle to sex offenders: Can treatment make some sex offenders worse? The Prison Journal, 89, 344–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885509339509

22.

Lovins

B. L.

Lowenkamp

C. T.

Latessa

E. J.

Smith

(2007). Application of the risk principle to female offenders. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23, 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986207309437

23.

Makarios

Sperber

K. G.

Latessa

E. J.

(2014). Treatment dosage and the risk principle: A refinement and extension. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 53(5), 334–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2014.922157

24.

Robinson

C. R.

Vanbenschoten

Alexander

Lowenkamp

C. T.

(2011). A random (almost) study of staff training aimed at reducing re-arrests (STARR): Reducing recidivism through intentional design. Federal Probation, 75(2), 57–63.

25.

Smith

Schweitzer

Labrecque

R. M.

Latessa

E. J.

(2012). Improving probation officers’ supervision skills: An evaluation of the EPICS model. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35(2), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2012.674826

26.

Sperber

K. G.

Lowenkamp

C. T.

(2017). Dosage is more than just counting program hours: The importance of role-playing in treatment outcomes. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 56(7), 433–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2017.1359222

27.

The Swedish Prison and Probation Service. (2018). Utvärdering av Krimstics försöksverksamhet 2011–2013 [

Evaluation of a pilot trial of Krimstics 2011–2013

] (Report No. 7289).

28.

Taft

C. T.

Murphy

C. M.

(2007). The working alliance in intervention for partner violence perpetrators: Recent research and theory. Journal of Family Violence, 22, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-006-9053-z

29.

Taft

C. T.

Murphy

C. M.

King

D. W.

Musser

P. H.

DeDeyn

J. M.

(2003). Process and treatment adherence factors in group cognitive behavioral therapy for partner violent men. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 812–820. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.71.4.812

30.

Viglione

(2019). The risk-need-responsivity model: How do probation officers implement the principles of effective intervention? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(5), 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818807505

31.

Viglione

Blasko

B. L.

(2018). The differential impacts of probation staff attitudes on use of evidence-based practices. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24(4), 449–458. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000180

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.17 MB

Evaluation of the Implementation of a Risk-Need-Responsivity Service in Community Supervision in Sweden

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material