The Risk-Need-Responsivity Model: How Do Probation Officers Implement the Principles of Effective Intervention?

Abstract

The advancement of evidence-based practices (EBP) and the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model suggests several key practices for probation agencies, including validated risk and needs assessments and appropriate treatment matching. Despite evidence supporting use of practices aligned with the RNR model to improve offender outcomes, research identifies significant implementation challenges in probation practice. Using 1,084 hours of ethnographic data, the current study sought to examine how probation staff implemented best practices aligned with the risk, need, and responsivity principles. Analyses suggest probation staff supervision practices misaligned with research evidence on RNR and associated agency trainings. Probation officers rarely used the risk and needs assessment to inform supervision decisions, creation of case plans, and referrals to treatment programs. Findings highlight the challenges associated with moving evidence on the RNR model to routine probation practice. Implications for policy and research are discussed, including a focus on perceived liability and implementation of best practices.

Examining the policies of paroling authorities in the United States to support evidence-based practices

“…One limitation to the survey is the lack of context on fidelity of different policies. Research by Viglione et al (2015) and Viglione (2019) found that although probation officers received training on risk and needs assessment, they were not used in practice to inform supervision decisions. Additional research in corrections stresses the importance of fidelity in using and applying the risk, need, and responsivity principles to reduce recidivism (Lowenkamp et al, 2006b).…”

Evaluation of the Implementation of a Risk-Need-Responsivity Service in Community Supervision in Sweden

“…A lack of adherence to the risk principle may be linked to a higher motivation and compliance to treatment among those with low risk of reoffending (e.g., Andrews & Dowden, 2006; Bonta & Andrews, 2007). Alternatively, or in combination, the level of risk may be poorly matched in sentence plans due to a lack of trust in or understanding of structured risk/needs assessments (Viglione, 2019) or evidence-based practice more generally (Viglione & Blasko, 2018). Although it could not be established in this study, it is possible that a low, undifferentiated intensity of Krimstics and the poor quality of key behavior change techniques—separately or interactively—dampen the model’s potential to reduce recidivism rates.…”

Effective Practices in Community Supervision model: Staff perceptions of the model and implementation

“…The RNR model “combines an actuarial, managerial approach with a rehabilitative, clinical model for supervision” (Viglione, 2019: 656; see also Bonta and Andrews, 2017). That is, the RNR model uses standardized, validated assessments using a science-based statistical approach to enhance the efficacy of decision-making among POs (Bonta and Andrews, 2017; Taxman and Dezember, 2018; Viglione, 2019).…”

“…The RNR model “combines an actuarial, managerial approach with a rehabilitative, clinical model for supervision” (Viglione, 2019: 656; see also Bonta and Andrews, 2017). That is, the RNR model uses standardized, validated assessments using a science-based statistical approach to enhance the efficacy of decision-making among POs (Bonta and Andrews, 2017; Taxman and Dezember, 2018; Viglione, 2019). The RNR model describes three primary principles that help identify risk factors to target for intervention that are the most effective at reducing risk of recidivism for individuals under probation or parole supervision: risk, need, and responsivity principles (Bonta and Andrews, 2017).…”