Over the recent past there have been several meta-analyses and primary studies that support the importance of the risk principle. Oftentimes these studies, particularly the metaanalyses, are limited in their ability to assess how the actual implementation of the risk principle by correctional agencies affects effectiveness in reducing recidivism. Furthermore, primary studies are typically limited to the assessment of one or two programs, which again limits the types of analyses conducted. This study, using data from two independent studies of 97 correctional programs, investigates how adherence to the risk principle by targeting offenders who are higher risk and varying length of stay and services by level of risk affects program effectiveness in reducing recidivism. Overall, this research indicates that for residential and nonresidential programs, adhering to the risk principle has a strong relationship with a program's ability to reduce recidivism.

No abstract

Over the last several decades, the use of risk/need assessments has had a great impact on correctional classification and treatment decisions. One instrument that is now being used by many correctional agencies in the United States is the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R). Criticisms of the LSI-R include failure to consider physical and sexual abuse as risk factors and failure to modify the instrument for the assessment of female offenders. Using a sample of 442 offenders (317 male and 125 female), this research investigates (a) the validity of the LSI-R for both females and males and (b) the relationship between childhood abuse, the LSI-R, and recidivism rates. Analyses indicated that the LSI-R is a valid (predictive) instrument for this sample of female offenders and that a history of prior abuse fails to add to the prediction of reincarceration, once risk is controlled for using the LSI-R. Implications for further research are discussed.

The impetus of the drug court movement can be traced to a number of factors, such as the social and organizational costs of imprisonment and the literature surrounding the effectiveness of community-based treatment. Regardless of its origins, however, drug courts have altered the way in which court systems process drug cases and respond to drug-dependent offenders. Evaluations of U.S. drug courts are beginning to emerge, and although the outcome results are encouraging, not all courts are showing a reduction in rearrest rates. Despite the rapid expansion of drug courts, their growing prevalence, and popularity, little is known about the drug court model's ability to achieve its objectives in a variety of circumstances. This research adds to the literature on drug courts by examining the effect of drug court programming on multiple indicators of recidivism. Results of the study are mixed; however, the drug court treatment group did perform better when examining arrest for a drug-related offense.