Do Intervention Plans Meet Criteria for Effective Practice to Reduce Recidivism? How Probation Officers Forget about Social Capital and Basic Needs

Bosker, Jacqueline; Witteman, Cilia; Hermanns, J.M.A.

doi:10.1177/206622031300500105

Cited by 24 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To find such an inconsistent follow through from the identification of risk and need is concerning. However, these findings are consistent with other international studies such as: Bonta and Wormith (2007), Bosker et al (2013), Harris et al (2004), and Bonta et al (2004). We are presently unable to draw general conclusions from these findings, as further exploration of the perspectives from practitioners and managers is of course required.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…The findings might therefore be unique to this trust. However, findings from other studies, outside of England and Wales (Bonta & Wormith, 2007;Bosker et al, 2013;Harris et al, 2004), suggest these may not be so unique.…”

Section: Strengths Limitations and Suggestions For Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Insufficient awareness of sexual risk factors, poor or lack of training, inadequate supervision, or poor policy and guidance, might offer some explanation for both the overestimations of risk and the inconsistent application of strategies to manage all known risk factors (Bonta & Wormith, 2007). Indeed, a number of previous studies, show practitioners failing to use evidence based knowledge when developing intervention plans (Bosker et al, 2013); support sex offender policy without scientific justification (Levenson, Fortney, & Baker, 2010); demonstrate harsh and negative views of those convicted of sexual offences (Higgins & Ireland, 2009); and influence the outcome of parole eligibility depending on the personal views of the assessor (Freeman, Palk, & Davey, 2010). These studies help show that where the personal views of practitioners and assessors are negative towards those convicted of sexual offending; outcomes tend to be adverse for the client.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, findings from the few studies available show that practitioners tend to either exclude identified risks altogether or fail to address them fully in subsequent plans (Bonta & Wormith, 2007). Bosker, Witteman and Hermanns (2013), found in their examination of 300 general offender Dutch probation cases, that where criminogenic needs were first identified, a goal to deal with them was not consistently found in subsequent intervention plans. They also found probation officers failed to use evidence based approaches when developing plans.…”

Section: Oasysmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effective risk management planning for those convicted of sexual offending

Kewley

Beech

Harkins³

et al. 2015

Jnl Aggress Conflict Peace Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the extent to which risk is addressed in the risk management planning process of those convicted of sexual offending. Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from a risk assessment and management system called the Offender Assessment System (OASys), used by the National Offender Management Service, in England and Wales. The records of 216 clients were accessed and each risk management plan analysed. The study aimed to understand if first, general and sexual risk factors identified by assessors were recorded and detailed in subsequent plans; second, if specialist sexual offending risk assessment tools were used to inform risk management strategies; and third, if both a balance of control and support mechanisms were in place to tackle identified risk and needs of clients. Findings – Inconsistencies were found in relation to practitioners transposing risks identified, into the subsequent risk management plans. Strategies were therefore deemed, inadequate as there was a significant omission of the use of specialist sexual risk assessment tools to inform and ensure risk assessment to be robust. In addition risk management plans were often overbearing in nature, as assessors tended to utilise control strategies to assist the reintegration process, in contrast to a combination of both control and support. Research limitations/implications – This sample was taken from only one probation trust in England and Wales. The findings might therefore be unique to this organisation rather than be representative of national practice. This study should therefore, be replicated in a number of other probation areas. In addition, it is important to note that this study only reviewed one electronic tool used by practitioners. Therefore, while it might appear for example that the RM2000 tool was not routinely completed; this cannot be assumed as practitioners might have adopted local custom and practice, recording RM2000 scores elsewhere. Practical implications – These findings highlight the need for some understanding as to why there is a lack of consistency throughout the risk management planning process. Practitioners should receive ongoing risk management training, development and supportive supervision. In particular, practitioners require supervision that supports and develops their skills when applying RM2000 classifications to their clients’ risk management plans. Likewise initiatives which develop practitioner’s awareness and application of strengths based approaches such as the Good Lives Model should be encouraged. These will help practitioners develop plans that address both the risks while supporting their development of the strengths a client presents. Originality/value – To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study of its kind, which examines the risk management plans of those convicted of sexual offending, completed by practitioners in England and Wales using the OASys tool.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Strengths Limitations and Suggestions For Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Oasysmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effective risk management planning for those convicted of sexual offending

Kewley

Beech

Harkins³

et al. 2015

Jnl Aggress Conflict Peace Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This helps probation officers not to overlook criminogenic needs present in a specific case. In an earlier study, we found that some probation officers seem to be focused on what they consider as the main problem related to the offence and to ignore criminogenic needs that may be very relevant to support desistance from crime (Bosker et al, 2013b). Structured decision making may prevent this.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Agreement About Intervention Plans in Probation by Decision Support

Bosker

Witteman

Hermanns

et al. 2014

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliability in decision making about intervention plans is a necessary condition for evidence-based probation work and equal treatment of offenders. Structuring decision making can improve agreement between clinical decision makers. In a former study however, we found that in Dutch probation practice structured risk and needs assessment did not result in acceptable agreement about intervention plans. The Dutch probation services subsequently introduced a tool for support in decision making on intervention plans. This article addresses the question whether the use of this tool results in better agreement between probation officers. A significant and meaningful improvement in agreement was found on all domains of the intervention plan. Implications for probation practice are discussed.

show abstract