“What Works” Approach and Evidence-Based Practices

The Risk Principle

The first is the risk principle, or the “who” to target: those offenders who pose the higher risk of continued criminal conduct. Risk in this context refers to those offenders with a higher probability of recidivating. This principle states that the most intensive, structured correctional treatment and intervention programs should be reserved for higher-risk offenders. Why waste programs on offenders who do not need them? More important, research has clearly demonstrated that when lower-risk offenders are placed in highly structured programs, their failure rates tend to increase (and thus the overall effectiveness of the program is decreased). There are several reasons this occurs. First, placing low-risk offenders with higher-risk offenders only serves to increase the chances of failure for those at low risk. For example, a teenager who got into some trouble with the law but did not use drugs would not benefit from being placed in a program or group with heavy drug users; it is more likely that the higher-risk, drug-using youths would influence the non-drug-using teen rather than the other way around.

Second, placing low-risk offenders in these programs also tends to disrupt their prosocial networks; in other words, the very attributes that make them low risk—such as school, employment, and family—become interrupted. (If they do not have these attributes, it is unlikely that they are low risk to begin with.) The risk principle can best be seen from a 2002 study of offenders in Ohio who were placed in a halfway house or community-based correctional facility (CBCF). The study found that the recidivism rate for higher-risk offenders who were placed in a halfway house or CBCF was reduced, whereas the recidivism rates for the low-risk offenders who were placed in the programs actually increased. This study was later replicated with more than 20,000 offenders and once again saw the same effect; overall, there was a 3 percent increase in recidivism rates for low-risk offenders and a 14 percent reduction for high-risk offenders.

The Need Principle

The second principle is referred to as the need principle, or the “what” to target: criminogenic factors that are highly correlated with criminal conduct. The need principle states that programs should target crime-producing needs, such as antisocial [Page 452]attitudes, values, beliefs, and peer associations, as well as substance abuse, lack of problem-solving and self-control skills, and other factors that are highly correlated with criminal conduct. Researchers such as D. A. Andrews, James Bonta, and Paul Gendreau have identified a major set of risk factors:

• 1.
  Antisocial and procriminal attitudes, values, beliefs, and cognitive emotional states
• 2.
  Procriminal associates and isolation from anticriminal others
• 3.
  Temperamental and antisocial personality patterns conducive to criminal activity, including the following:

  • Weak socialization
  • Impulsivity
  • Adventurousness
  • Restlessness and aggressiveness
  • Egocentrism
  • A taste for risk
  • Weak problem-solving, self-regulation, and coping skills
• 4.
  A history of antisocial behavior
• 5.
  Familial factors that include criminality and a variety of psychological problems in the family of origin, including the following:

  • Low levels of affection, caring, and cohesiveness
  • Poor parental supervision and discipline practices
  • Outright neglect and abuse
• 6.
  Low levels of personal, educational, vocational, or financial achievement
• 7.
  Low levels of involvement in prosocial leisure activities
• 8.
  Substance abuse

Although these eight domains constitute the major set, the first four are considered the most important and are often referred to as the “big four.” If these four can be successfully targeted and changed, the others often follow.

...