Examining Improvements in Criminogenic Needs: The Risk Reduction Potential of a Structured Re‐entry Program

Abstract

The risk–need–responsivity (RNR) model describes the importance of targeting criminogenic needs through planned interventions in order to reduce the risk of future offending behavior. Although risk/needs instruments capture these dynamic risk factors and previous research has demonstrated their sensitivity to change in these domains, correctional programs may not be leveraging the full case management potential of these instruments. This study explored the potential for improvements in criminogenic needs through participation in a brief, structured re‐entry program consistent with the principles of RNR. Four criminogenic needs were identified as having the potential to change during the course of this program: education/employment, family/marital, procriminal attitudes/orientation, and antisocial pattern. The results indicated that overall risk level significantly decreased during the course of the treatment program, as did risk level for each of these criminogenic needs. For three of these domains, the participants in the highest risk category experienced significant improvements, consistent with the risk principle of RNR. Implications for the interface between assessment and treatment planning are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Risk Assessment Trajectories of Youth During Juvenile Justice Residential Placement

“…Findings from adult samples indicate changes in LSI-R composite (overall risk) scores predict subsequent offending in hypothesized directions (Raynor, 2007; Vose et al, 2009). In addition, changes in overall scores as well as domain-level subscores have been demonstrated in other work, though subsequent outcomes were not examined in those studies (Schlager & Pacheco, 2011; see also Brooks Holliday, Heilburn, & Fretz, 2012). Wooditch, Tang, and Taxman (2014) showed adult drug-involved probationers who evidenced decreases in risk in familial criminal networks as well as alcohol use, and who reported improved income had reduced self-reported offending, though a standardized formal “risk/need assessment” was not used to capture the measures.…”

The Validity of the PICTS-SV and Its Effectiveness with Positive Impression Management: An Investigation in a Court-Mandated Substance Use Treatment Facility

“…Clinically, targeting criminal cognitions as a dynamic risk and criminogenic needs factor aligns well with the Risk–Needs–Responsivity (RNR; Andrews & Bonta, 2010) model widely implemented in forensic settings (Brooks Holliday, Heilbrun, & Fretz, 2012). Cognitive behavioral interventions can be targeted toward those with high levels of criminal thinking to modify maladaptive cognitions and increase reasoning skills, presumably resulting in a decreased risk of reoffending.…”

Criminal Typology of Veterans Entering Substance Abuse Treatment

“…Screening patients with substance use or mental health disorders for severity of criminal history may inform treatment planning, such as monitoring 12-step engagement to improve involvement (Timko et al, 2006), addressing treatment readiness (Joe, Simpson, & Broome, 1998), providing longer-term residential treatment (Bleiberg, Devlin, Croan, & Briscoe, 1994), or providing supportive housing (Cheng, Lin, Kasprow, & Rosenheck, 2007). Comprehensive treatment plans that address crimonogenic risk factors (e.g., substance abuse, treatment motivation) decrease recidivism risk and high costs associated with incarceration (McCollister, French, Prendergast, Hall, & Sacks, 2004), as well as improve patients’ clinical functioning (Holliday, Heilbrun, & Fretz, 2012). Finally, these data have important policy implications; programs that specifically focus on community reentry may need to be expanded to address the growing needs of those involved with the criminal justice system.…”