A Review of the Creative Group Work Training Program for Facilitators

O’Sullivan, Kevin; Blatch, Chris; Toh, Melissa

doi:10.1080/01933922.2014.891682

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The program is facilitated by a male and one female facilitator, who complete specialist training in group work facilitation, working with DV offenders, motivational interviewing principles and cognitive behavior therapy, and two-day training in the use of the DAP program and materials (see Corrective Services NSW, 2012). Many also complete the CSNSW Creative Group Work training program (O’Sullivan et al , 2014).…”

Section: The Nsw Dapmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-benefits of a domestic abuse program for Australian offenders

Blatch

Webber

O’Sullivan

et al. 2017

JCRPP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to determine recidivism costs and benefits for 1,030 community-based male offenders enrolled in a domestic abuse program (DAP) compared to an untreated control group (n=1,030) matched on risk factors. Design/methodology/approach The study time frame was October 1, 2007-June 30, 2010 with reconvictions measured to December 31, 2010. Follow up averaged 19 months. Controls received standard community supervision, but no domestic violence group interventions. Follow up measures included court costs for violent and non-violent reconvictions; re-incarcerations and community-based orders costs measured in days. Findings Adjusting for time at risk, DAP enrollees had 29 percent fewer reconvictions, 46 percent fewer violent reconvictions, 34 percent fewer custodial days, but 23 percent more days on community orders. Costs: DAP enrollment avoided $2.52 M in custodial costs, but higher community correction costs (+$773 K) and court costs (+$5.8 K), reducing the DAP’s criminal justice system cost savings to $1.754 M ($8.92 M for the DAP group compared to $10.67M for controls). Cost benefits: when the 64 DAP program costs were deducted ($602 K), the net benefit to the New South Wales criminal justice system was $1,141 M, or $1,108 per enrollee, providing a net benefit/cost ratio of 2.89. If the DAP was completed, the net benefit was $1,820 per offender. These results compares favorably to economic evaluations of other community-based interventions. Practical implications Group interventions for domestically violent (DV) offenders can provide good investment returns to tax payers and government by reducing demand on scarce criminal justice system resources. The study provides insights into justice costs for DV offenders; a methodological template to determine cost benefits for offender programs and a contribution to cost-effective evidence-based crime reduction interventions. Originality/value Using a rigorous methodology, official court, custodial and community correction services costing data, this is the first Australian cost benefit analysis of a domestic violence group intervention, and the first to justify program expenditure by demonstrating substantial savings to the criminal justice system.

show abstract

Section: The Nsw Dapmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-benefits of a domestic abuse program for Australian offenders

Blatch

Webber

O’Sullivan

et al. 2017

JCRPP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of the Risk, Needs, Responsivity (RNR) model (Andrews and Bonta, 2006) in guiding program provision in NSW has been previously described (O'Sullivan et al, 2014). Briefly, the model indicates that programs should target those at higher actuarial risk of reoffending (the risk principle); treatment target dynamic risk factors, also called criminogenic needs (Andrews and Bonta, 2010), associated with offending behaviors (the need principle), and be delivered in ways which maximize the likelihood that participants can respond (the responsivity principle).…”

Section: Offender Programs In Nswmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blatch¹,

O’Sullivan

Delaney³

et al. 2016

Journal of Forensic Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to determine reconviction outcomes for 2,882 male and female offenders with significant alcohol and other drug (AOD) criminogenic needs, serving custodial sentences in New South Wales, between 2007 and 2011, who participated in the Getting SMART and/or the SMART Recovery® programs. Design/methodology/approach – A quasi-experimental research design utilized data from 2,343 offenders attending Getting SMART; 233 attending SMART Recovery© and 306 attending both programs, compared to a propensity score-matched control group of 2,882 offenders. Cox and Poisson regression techniques determined survival times to first reconviction and rates of reconvictions, adjusting for time at risk. Findings – Getting SMART participation was significantly associated with improved odds of time to first reconviction by 8 percent and to first violent reconviction by 13 percent, compared to controls. Participants attending both programs (Getting SMART and SMART Recovery©), had significantly lower reconviction rate ratios for both general (21 percent) and violent (42 percent) crime, relative to controls. Getting SMART attendance was associated with significant reductions in reconviction rates of 19 percent, and the reduction for SMART Recovery© attendance (alone) was 15 percent, the latter figure being non-significant. In all, 20 hours in either SMART program (ten sessions) was required to detect a significant therapeutic effect. Practical implications – Criminal justice jurisdictions could implement this two SMART program intervention model, knowing a therapeutic effect is more likely if Getting SMART (12 sessions of cognitive-restructuring and motivation) is followed by SMART Recovery© for ongoing AOD therapeutic maintenance and behavioral change consolidation. SMART Recovery©, a not-for-profit proprietary program, is widely available internationally. Originality/value – Getting SMART and SMART Recovery© have not previously been rigorously evaluated. This innovative two-program model contributes to best practice for treating higher risk offenders with AOD needs, suggesting achievable reductions in both violent and general reoffending.

show abstract

Research and Scholarship in Group Work: Scope and Emergent Themes Over 20 Years

Vereen

Bohecker

2017

The Journal for Specialists in Group Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Review of the Creative Group Work Training Program for Facilitators

Cited by 5 publications

References 41 publications

Cost-benefits of a domestic abuse program for Australian offenders

Cost-benefits of a domestic abuse program for Australian offenders

Getting SMART, SMART Recovery© programs and reoffending

Research and Scholarship in Group Work: Scope and Emergent Themes Over 20 Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About