Finding the right focus: Improving the link between risk/needs assessment and case management in probation.

Abstract

In this article we report a study into the Dutch probation service about the question whether structured decision making about case management plans does or does not improve the quality of these plans, and subsequently improves the effectiveness of offender supervision. Two samples of nearly 300 case management plans each were compared. In the first sample a tool for risk/needs assessment was used to assess the risks and needs but decision making about the subsequent case management plan was not structured (RISc2-sample). In the second sample professionals used the same tool for risk and needs assessment but now it also contained a section for structured decision making about the case management plan (RISc3-sample). Results showed that in the RISc3-sample the quality of the plans was significantly better than in the RISc2-sample: a better match between criminogenic needs and goals, a better match between goals of the offender and goals in the plan, 1 Author Note: We thank the probation services in The Netherlands for supporting this research. We thank Jan Bogaard for supplying the databases for the samples, and Barbara Keuning, Karien Rijnen, and Ada Andreas for their help in clustering and coding the goals and interventions. We also thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on an earlier version of this article.

Improving Case Plans and Interventions for Adolescents on Probation: The Implementation of the SAVRY and a Structured Case Planning Form

“…Instead, we believe that increased needs match may be due, in large part, to the structured plan. A couple of studies indicate that structuring case plans yield better agreement about the criminogenic needs to target in plans (Bosker & Witteman, 2016; Bosker et al, 2015). Furthermore, in this study, the structured form directly instructed YPOs to consider youths’ needs, thus providing a plausible mechanism between structured plans and the needs principle, and sending a clear and consistent reminder to YPOs on the importance of targeting needs.…”

“…Plans that were developed with a case planning form showed better agreement about the intensity of supervision and criminogenic needs to target than those developed with the risk assessment tool alone. In a subsequent field study, Bosker and Witteman (2016) found that the case planning form was associated with improved match to the risk principle in real-world case management plans. In addition, it led to improvements on other quality indicators, such as the extent to which plans addressed probationers' own goals.…”

“…Although these findings suggest that structured case planning approaches hold promise, knowledge is scarce. Furthermore, whereas the structured form used by Bosker and colleagues was comprehensive and included suggestions about interventions to use (Bosker & Witteman, 2016), it is unclear whether simpler forms, similar to those used in the LSI tools, could also improve case plans. For instance, do forms that simply instruct evaluators to consider needs, without suggesting specific interventions, produce positive effects?…”

Bridging Risk Assessments to Case Planning: Development and Evaluation of an Intervention-Planning Tool for Adolescents on Probation

“…Decision support systems have been found to improve decision making in a variety of health care settings (Hunt, Haynes, Hanna, & Smith, 1998; Moja et al, 2014). In addition, several studies have found that such protocols improve probation officers’ case plans (Bosker & Witteman, 2016; Bosker, Witteman, Hermanns, & Heij, 2015; Viljoen et al, 2019). For instance, Bosker and Witteman (2016) compared the quality of plans that were developed with a risk assessment tool alone versus a tool plus a decision support system.…”

“…In addition, several studies have found that such protocols improve probation officers’ case plans (Bosker & Witteman, 2016; Bosker, Witteman, Hermanns, & Heij, 2015; Viljoen et al, 2019). For instance, Bosker and Witteman (2016) compared the quality of plans that were developed with a risk assessment tool alone versus a tool plus a decision support system. They found that when probation officers used a tool plus a decision support system, their case plans addressed a greater proportion of their clients’ needs.…”