Jacqueline van Wormer

The Nexus Between Drug and Alcohol Treatment Program Integrity and Drug Court Effectiveness: Policy Recommendations for Pursuing Success

The literature supporting the efficacy of drug courts continues to grow. Much attention and research has focused on recidivism rates for participants, and generally address the question of, do drug courts work? The current state of drug court practice is a process that relies heavily on the drug and alcohol treatment services that are offered to clients. Many treatment programs, and the treatment philosophy that underlies their approach to solving substance abuse, offer vague and eclectic approaches that oftentimes do not meet the diverse needs of their clients related to gender, culture, and specific cognitive impacts on the brain caused by drug use. We argue that a move toward the use of evidence-based practice, coupled with quality assurance measures for treatment providers, will promote best practice and will ensure program integrity that leads to effective and long-lasting drug court programs.

Impact of Swift and Certain Sanctions

Research Summary In the wake of the mass incarceration movement, many states must now manage the rebound of decarceration. Thermodynamic forces of the justice system, however, have pushed former fiscal pressures of institutions onto that of community corrections. Encouraged by the positive findings of recently piloted innovations, several jurisdictions have taken great interest in the implementation of deterrence-based sanctioning models when dealing with supervision violations. Among the first to implement a statewide turn to this style of sanctioning, Washington States swift-and-certain (SAC) policy was implemented in June 2012. The intent of SAC was to expand the model found in Hawaiis Opportunity Probation and Enforcement (HOPE) to a wider criminal justice population, while emphasizing the reduction of confinement costs. This study focused on the impact of SAC with regard to supervision outcomes for participants. By using a quasi-experimental design, we examined confinement, recidivism, treatment, violation, and costs outcomes of SAC participants. Findings reveal that SAC participants were found to incur fewer sanctioned incarceration days after a violation, reduced odds of recidivism, possessed greater treatment program utilization, reduced their propensity of committing violations over time, and as a result, imposed lower correctional and associated costs. The SAC model provides noteworthy positive effects and no appreciable negative impacts on public safety. Policy Implications We further discuss the impact of SAC in the context of deterrence-based sanctioning. Specifically, we explain how practices such as SAC may impact the future of sanctioning community supervision conditions. Although many policies that emphasize deterrence demonstrate inconsistent findings, immediate advantages of SAC take the form of fiscal savings, indicating that these novel methods provide a form of justice reinvestment. Additionally, connecting deterrence-based supervision methods to reductions in most recidivism measures suggests that proportionality and quality assurance may increase the effectiveness of these policies. We recommend ways that such nuanced implementation may be fruitful, as well as suggest ways of conceptualizing the theory of deterrence. Policy makers can appropriately work its components into supervision practice without depreciating the importance of treatment and addressing criminogenic needs.

Designed to Fit: The Development and Validation of the STRONG-R Recidivism Risk Assessment

Recidivism risk assessment tools have been utilized for decades. Although their implementation and use have the potential to touch nearly every aspect of the correctional system, the creation and examination of optimal development methods have been restricted to a small group of instrument developers. Furthermore, the methodological variation among common instruments used nationally is substantial. The current study examines this variation by reviewing methodologies used to develop several existing assessments and then tests a variety of design variations in an attempt to isolate and select those which provide improved content and predictive performance using a large sample (N = 44,010) of reentering offenders in Washington State. Study efforts were completed in an attempt to isolate and identify potential incremental performance achievements. Findings identify a methodology for improved prediction model performance and, in turn, describe the development and introduction of the Washington State Department of Correction’s recidivism prediction instrument—the Static Risk Offender Need Guide for Recidivism (STRONG-R).

Digging Deeper: Exploring the Value of Prison-Based Dog Handler Programs:

As U.S. correctional systems continue to rollout evidence-based programs, the utility of “complimentary” programs that do not address recidivism reduction remains in question. Many U.S. prisons have a variety of prison-based animal programs, yet the outcomes are largely unexplored. This research addresses a literature gap by evaluating the intermediate outcomes associated with a statewide prison-based dog handler program. Using propensity score matching, we compared 1,001 inmates in a pretest, postentry design, aimed at measuring change across four outcomes. Results indicate that dog handler program inmates experienced significant improvement in three of four areas. Implications and further research needs are explored.

Assessing the current state of juvenile probation practice: A statutory analysis

ABSTRACT The 2002 Desktop Guide to Good Juvenile Probation Practice indicated that a states juvenile justice system should reflect a “balanced and restorative justice” (BARJ) model. Over a decade has passed since this publication, yet little is known about whether juvenile probation followed the BARJ. This study employed a statutory analysis to examine the differences between the legally prescribed roles of juvenile probation officers and the BARJ model across 50 states and the District of Columbia. Results indicated that even with significant reforms and statutory changes overtime, juvenile probation practices still fall short of meeting the basic tenets of restorative justice.

A More Consistent Application of the RNR Model: The Strong-R Needs Assessment

The development of risk–needs assessments has substantially expanded assessment content, which is reflected in the now regular use of both static and dynamic items. However, while the risk–need–responsivity model differentiates between risks and needs theoretically, the scoring of risks and needs does not make for a clear demarcation. We argue that an assessment of an offender’s needs should be scored separately and solely on items that are changeable and predict recidivism. This article describes the conceptualization and development of Washington State’s offender needs assessment. Designed to complement an offender’s assessment of risk, we make use of key design elements to avoid many theoretical and methodological caveats. Using preexisting item selection, weighting, and validation methods, we present domain-based needs models that maximize item content and provide substantial performance in the prediction of recidivism.