Studies of implementation of evidence-based supervision policies and procedures often report minimal to moderate adherence to evidence-based models. The few studies that exist examine the degree to which characteristics of probation officers, individuals on supervision, and supervision processes have an impact on rearrest (outcomes). Using administrative data on 7,326 probationers and surveys from 161 probation officers employed by five agencies, hierarchical linear models were used to identify the features of supervision processes that are most important to reduce recidivism. The findings clarify that no one evidence-based supervision feature (i.e., a validated risk and need assessment tool, case planning, treatment, compliance management, etc.) can achieve recidivism reductions. The best results can be achieved by using all features, although a risk-based case management approach that prioritizes employment and/or reducing the criminogenic needs creates similar outcomes. This article discusses the implications of prioritizing which supervision processes are used to impact positive supervision outcomes.

Findings suggest that motivation for treatment may be a gender-neutral construct, and that there is a need to better understand sociodemographic predictors of motivation.

Despite the prevalence of substance dependence in incarcerated populations and the correlation between substance use and crime, only 11% receive substance abuse treatment, even as treatment participation may help reduce institutional misbehavior and postrelease recidivism. The current research examined the influence of individual and program factors on substance abuse treatment participation and prison misconducts in a state prison system. Based on analyses of administrative data from 2012 to 2015 and program data, the findings support previous research documenting participant characteristics as predictors of misconducts. In addition, program training requirements significantly predicted misconducts. Implications and research recommendations are discussed.

Although the number of juvenile drug treatment courts (JDTC) in operation has increased since the first JDTCs were implemented in the 1990s, research continues to lag regarding the effectiveness of the treatment interventions that are provided. The purpose of the present study was to explore how the risk-need-responsivity models' general responsivity principle could be used to inform the effectiveness of the interventions provided to 1,176 participants in nine JDTCs in the United States. Responsivity adherence was measured using the number of general responsivity-adherent techniques included in each intervention. The results indicated that an increase in general responsivity adherence was associated with an increase in substanceuse severity score, which suggests that the effect of the JDTC model on treatment outcomes could vary by the type of interventions provided to participants. In addition, the findings suggest the need to further specify adherence to the general responsivity principle, particularly among substance-involved juvenile offenders.

No abstract