2009
DOI: 10.1080/15564880802612615
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Crime and Criminal Justice Costs: Implications in Washington State

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
226
0
6

Year Published

2010
2010
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 236 publications
(235 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
1
226
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…EBPs in the criminal justice context are interventions that have provided "strong evidence" of an impact on an individual's risk for re-offending, generally measured through repeated experiments or summarized through a meta-analysis process (Drake, Aos, & Miller, 2009;Lipsey & Wilson, 1998). Some scholars have questioned the narrow definition of 'evidence' in EBPs and policymakers' neglect of sociological perspectives and knowledge produced by methods other than quantitative or experimental designs (Goldson & Hughes, 2010;Rex, 2002;Sampson, 2010).…”
Section: Approaches To Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…EBPs in the criminal justice context are interventions that have provided "strong evidence" of an impact on an individual's risk for re-offending, generally measured through repeated experiments or summarized through a meta-analysis process (Drake, Aos, & Miller, 2009;Lipsey & Wilson, 1998). Some scholars have questioned the narrow definition of 'evidence' in EBPs and policymakers' neglect of sociological perspectives and knowledge produced by methods other than quantitative or experimental designs (Goldson & Hughes, 2010;Rex, 2002;Sampson, 2010).…”
Section: Approaches To Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2. Drake, Aos, and Miller (2009) developed a five-point scale with higher values indicating a stronger methodological design. A score of five was assigned to randomized-control studies.…”
Section: Notesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For many jurisdictions, investment into the development and delivery of rehabilitation programs has occurred in the context of relatively modest correctional budgets and the increasing demands that are placed on service providers from a growing prison population (Australian Government Productivity Commission 2009). However, public policy in this area is underpinned by the belief that rehabilitation programs can not only bring about socially significant reductions in crime, but also reduce the direct and indirect costs to the community that are associated with victimisation and incarceration (Drake et al 2009). This belief is supported by what is now a robust body of international research attesting to the positive impact of many rehabilitation programs on re-offending rates (Andrews & Bonta 2010) and, despite the lack of controlled outcome studies that have been reported involving Australian offenders (Heseltine et al 2011), is indicative of the growing government commitment to the notion of evidence-based correctional policy and practice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%