Goal 3: To foster program effectiveness by encouraging jurisdictions to develop evaluation metrics of services offered to DWI offenders
The literature on criminal conduct points to the need for evidence-based practices. A few fundamental principles need to be in place to evaluate the effectiveness of jurisdictional practices in Texas.
Evidence-Based Sentencing Considerations
Measuring an offender’s level of risk and needs is an excellent step in the right direction, but it is insufficient to engender significantly reduced recidivism rates. Many factors influence a person’s ability to comply with interventions: socio-economic disparities, disabilities, mental health issues, history of trauma, cultural sensitivity programming, among others. Andrews & Bonta named this concept the principle of responsivity. To not address a person’s responsivity factors can decrease that person’s levels of engagement, thus diminishing outcomes throughout their involvement with the criminal justice system. Therefore, interventions must address a person’s readiness and motivation levels to engage in treatment services.
Researchers find that using goal-setting strategies combined with motivational interviewing techniques can lead to greater predictability of a person’s compliance and higher completion rates of intervention programs. However, self-motivation is not the only factor involved in the successful participation of an individual’s treatment program; a person’s perception of sanctions and incentives also influences intervention outcomes (Lurigio, 2011).
Ultimately, to reduce recidivism, the DWI offender needs to gain insight into the addiction, co-occurring diagnosis, maladaptive behaviors, and other psychosocial problems that can hinder his ability to function. Benefits addressing these issues include upholding simple goals of maintaining stable housing, complete treatment, sustain employment, having long-lasting relationships, among other factors. A healthy mix of legal sanctions, monitoring practices, and treatment interventions can lead to a person’s wanting to address the ambivalence of certain behaviors and attempt to make lifestyle changes, leading to reduced future criminal behavior.
Intervention Practices that Work
Dr. James Bonta and Dr. Donald Andrews recommend a set of core principles for effective correctional counseling that targets offenders’ criminogenic factors. DWI offender’s immediate needs for acute care due to substance use disorders or mental health episodes are essential aspects that need to be addressed by treatment interventions. Only fulfilling these targets are usually insufficient to produce a significant reduction in recidivism rates. Research has shown, to have the most significant impact on recidivism rates, the system needs to target the highest possible number of an offender’s criminogenic needs. Addressing an individual’s pro-criminal attitude and associates, and their antisocial personality patterns of thinking are also crucial elements that need to be targeted by a comprehensive intervention plan.
Andrew & Bonta agree that to reduce recidivism and create an effective correctional supervision and treatment program, stakeholders need to increase an offender’s pro-social expressions, attitudes, thoughts, behaviors, and decrease pro-criminal expressions.
Applying the following dimensions to the correctional counseling settings will help enhance your programs:
- Building a relationship with the client in a way to promote pro-social thinking and behaviors.
- Structuring by modeling desired behaviors, reinforcing pro-social behaviors, and disapproving pro-criminal ones.
- Cognitive restructuring by connecting the impact of thoughts on behavioral outcomes.
- Skill-building by teaching offenders self-management and problem-solving skills through social learning role-playing with correcting feedback. (Bonta & Andrews, 2016)
It is important to note that addressing non-criminogenic factors, including anxiety, depression, major mental health disorders, and physical health-related barriers may increase a DWI offender’s responsivity levels. In turn, this may reduce barriers to successful treatment. However, research shows that treatment plans focusing solely on these factors are not effective in reducing the risk of re-offending (Andrews & Bonta, 2016).
There is a vast number of evidence-based treatment approaches and practices being utilized in criminal justice settings that target criminogenic risk factors. The most common methods are the assertive community treatment (ACT), the therapeutic communities (TCs), the strategic training initiative in community supervision (STICS) project that trains professionals in adhering to the risk/needs/responsivity (RNR) model, but there are many others (Andrews & Bonta, 2016, Chandler et al., 2004).
Although they differ in application, these treatment modalities share common key elements that make up for its effectiveness. The blend of theory and practice involve:
- Including cognitive-behavioral interventions
- Teaching relapse prevention techniques
- Matching treatment intensity and duration to client’s RNR needs
- Offering peer- and family-support practices
- Incorporating psychoeducational skills
- Addressing pro-criminal thoughts and behaviors relating to mental health and substance abuse issues (Chandler et al., 2004).
Evaluation Metrics to be Considered
Documenting the types of treatment intervention services offered in the state can aid criminal justice stakeholders to determine sentencing options that incorporate effective treatment interventions.
Some examples of evaluation metrics that can be used to measure the effectiveness of services offered to DWI offenders involve:
- Number of treatment programs that offer motivational interviewing services
- Number of places that offer cognitive-behavioral therapy
- Number of treatment programs that target the Central Eight Risk/Need Factors criminogenic factors
- The average number of Central Eight Risk/Need Factors addressed per DWI population clientele
- Number of targeted criminogenic factors addressed
- Number of professionals/facilities that offer specific population services- gender-specific, culturally sensitive, trauma-informed case
These evaluation metrics are examples referenced in the criminology literature. Jurisdictions might use various other metrics in the field pertinent to their area and cases.
Do you want to know what types of services DWI offenders receive in the state? Please click the button below.