Evidence-Based Sentencing

Learning Objectives

• Describe the three principles of evidence-based practice and the key elements of evidence-based sentencing;

• Define the potential impact and benefit of these principles and supporting practices on risk reduction among the general offender and the sex offender population; and

• Apply these principles to the adult sex offender population.

REFORM INTERESTS AND APPLICATION TO SEX

OFFENDERS

Concerns Among Felony Court Judges and State Chief Justices

• Concerns of felony court judges

– High rates of recidivism among felony offenders

– Ineffectiveness of traditional probation and other sanctions in reducing recidivism

– Lack of effective community alternatives to incarceration

(Peters & Warren, 2006)

• State chief justices’ top reform interests for the state court

– Public safety through recidivism reduction efforts

Implementation of evidence-based practices and services

Use of empirically-based risk and needs assessment tools

• Direct application to adult sex offenders

Concerns Among Felony Court Judges and State Chief Justices (cont.)

(Peters & Warren, 2006)

The Rationale for Applying Evidence-Based Practices to Offender

Management and Sentencing

• Offenders, in general, are failing at alarming rates

• 67% rearrested within three years following release from prison

• 30% probationers are reconvicted of a new crime

• Research over the past two decades demonstrates that – through the use of evidence-based practices – recidivism can be reduced by as much as 30%

(Hughes & Wilson, 2003; Andrews & Bonta, 1997)

KEY TERMS AND PRINCIPLES IN EVIDENCE-BASED

SENTENCING

Defining Key Terms

• Evidence-Based Knowledge

– Conclusions drawn from studies that have been replicated numerous times with defined, measurable outcomes about the effectiveness of an intervention or process

• Evidence-Based Practice

– The application of empirical research to professional practice

Defining Key Terms (cont.)

• Evidence-Based Principles

– The three “principles” of evidence-based practice that have been derived from the research on risk reduction

• Evidence-Based Sentencing

– The application of the principles of evidence-based practice to sentencing

The Three Key Principles of Evidence-Based Practice

(Andrews & Bonta, 2007)

The Risk The Risk PrinciplePrinciple

WHOWHO to target for

intervention

The Needs The Needs PrinciplePrinciple

WHATWHAT to target for

intervention

The The Responsivity Responsivity

PrinciplePrinciple

HOWHOW to target for

intervention

The First Key Principle: Risk

• Aligning level of intervention with level of risk to produce reduced recidivism

• Empirically based, actuarial instruments assess the level of risk an individual offender is likely to pose

• More intensive services for higher risk and higher need offenders produce the most significant reductions in recidivism

The Risk Principle: Which is True?

A) Delivering moderate or high intensity interventions to offenders who are at low risk for recidivism can result in an increase in the likelihood to re-offend.

B) Delivering moderate or high intensity interventions to offenders who are at low risk for recidivism can result in a decrease in the likelihood to re-offend.

The Second Key Principle: Needs

• Criminogenic needs (dynamic risk factors) = changeable conditions in an offender’s life that can lead to re-offense behavior

• Actuarial instruments have been developed to assess these "criminogenic needs”

• Targeting interventions to the unique criminogenic needs of an individual offender has significant risk reduction potential

Criminogenic Need Areas:The “Big Four”

• Anti-social cognitions

• Anti-social companions

• Anti-social personality (temperament)

• Family and/or marital difficulties

Criminogenic Need Areas:The “Lesser Four”

• Substance abuse concerns

• Lack of education

• Lack of employment

• Lack of pro-social leisure activities

More Criminogenic than Non-Criminogenic Needs

More Non-Criminogenic than Criminogenic

Needs

Increased recidivism

Decreased recidivism

Recidivism Reductions as a Function of Targeting Multiple Criminogenic vs. Non-Criminogenic Needs

(Hanson et al., 2009)

Sex Offender-Specific DynamicRisk Factors

Sexual preoccupationsSexual preoccupations

Access to victimsAccess to victims

Intimacy deficits, Intimacy deficits, conflicts in relationshipsconflicts in relationships

Pro-offending attitudes Pro-offending attitudes

HostilityHostility

Non-compliance with Non-compliance with supervision, treatmentsupervision, treatment

Lifestyle instabilityLifestyle instability

The Third Key Principle: Responsivity

• Treatment and supervision are most effective when tailored to responsivity factors

• Primary responsivity factors– Cognitive/intellectual functioning– Culture– Gender– Learning style– Level of motivation– Mental health condition

The Three Components of Responsivity

Motivational Interviewing as a Key Behavioral Change Tool

• Motivational interviewing engages the offender in his/her plan for change

• Motivational interviewing is skill-based

– The application of specific techniques is critical to its success

Motivational Interviewing as a Key Behavioral Change Tool (cont.)

• All professionals should be skilled in motivational interviewing

– Judges are increasingly using motivational interviewing

Increased recidivism

Decreased recidivism

Impact of Adhering to the Core Principles of Effective Correctional Intervention: Risk, Needs and Responsivity

(Andrews et al., 1999)

Other Research Findings Identifying Interventions and Strategies that “Work” with Offenders

• Cognitive-behavioral interventions

• Positive reinforcement

• Balanced approach to supervision

(Andrews & Bonta, 2007; Aos et al., 2006)

RELEVANCE OF RESEARCH TO SEX OFFENDERS

Research Findings Identifying Treatment and Supervision Strategies that Generally Don’t

“Work” with Offenders

• Surveillance models of supervision

• Longer sentences over shorter sentences

• Punishment-oriented sanctions

(Aos et al., 2006)

Relevance of These Findings to Sex Offenders

• Sex offenders are not “just” sex offenders

• Risk/needs/responsivity studies replicated with sex offenders

Reducing Risk Among the Adult Sex Offender Population

Evidence-Evidence-Based Based

PracticesPractices

Sex Offender-Sex Offender-Specific Specific

InterventionsInterventions

Risk Risk ReductionReduction

Reminder: Definition of Evidence-Based Sentencing

Evidence-based sentencing is the application of the principles of evidence-based practice to sentencing.

FIVE TENETS OF EVIDENCE-BASED SENTENCING

Five Tenets of Evidence-Based Sentencing

#1: Expect professionals to provide thorough, complete, and

accurate information about offenders so that informed decision-making is possible.

Five Tenets of Evidence-Based Sentencing (cont.)

#2: On an individual case basis, obtain and apply comprehensive offender assessment data

– Level of risk to re-offend sexually

– Level of risk to re-offend non-sexually

– Sex offender-specific dynamic risk factors

– Criminogenic needs

Five Tenets of Evidence-Based Sentencing (cont.)

#3: When crafting sentences for the purpose of risk reduction, match interventions to empirically assessed, changeable risk factors

–Sex offender-specific dynamic risk factors, as well as

–Criminogenic needs

Five Tenets of Evidence-Based Sentencing (cont.)

#4: Use motivational interviewing as a tool to encourage behavioral change

among offenders.

#5: Encourage and support the use of evidence-based policies and practices by all justice practitioners and service providers.