Fidelity Measures for Risk-Need Assessment (RNA) Tools Usage in Case Plans
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13102507 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Teneshia Thurman (0009-0003-6772-0635, George Mason University), Sharmistha Roy Chowdhury (0000-0003-2684-7384, George Mason University), Faye S Taxman (0000-0001-9530-731X, George Mason University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 6 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 383-399 |
| Publication date | 2019-11-26 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Corrections (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2377-4657 • E-ISSN: 2377-4665 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/23774657.2019.1696252 |
| OpenAlex | W2991071553 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 19 |
Risk-need assessment (RNA) tools are considered the gold standard of probation and parole supervision. The value of having an RNA tool is that the information can be used in case plans and supervising individuals. Practitioners and researchers frequently observe that officers fail to use RNA results in case plans. This study fills in this research gap by providing four fidelity measures to assess how well probation officers incorporated RNA tool results in case plans. The four measures are: 1) whether a person has a criminogenic or responsivity need in a particular area; 2) the consistency between the LSI-R subscale criminogenic/responsivity need area(s) and special condition(s), 3) whether the officer incorporated the LSI-R need areas into a case plan (yes/no), and, 4) the degree to which the special conditions are reflected in the case plan. A review of 116 RNA tools (using one specific instrument) and case plans was conducted to illustrate the feasibility of these fidelity measures. The study found discrepancies between the RNA tool results and case plans, and a tendency to emphasize special conditions over criminogenic needs. The use of the fidelity measures can assist agencies in identifying areas to improve operations and greater adherence to the quality supervision measures. Implications for future practice are covered in the discussion of this study
Business · Consistency (knowledge bases · Fidelity · Plan (archaeology · Quality (philosophy · Risk analysis (engineering · Computer Science · Crime Patterns and Interventions · Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis · Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending · Artificial Intelligence
Is implementation science a science? Not yet
The Impact of Community Supervision Officer Training Programs on Recidivism
What Makes or Breaks Evidence-Based Supervision? Staff and Organizational Predictors of Evidence-Based Practice in Probation
Changes in Risk Profiles
Sorting Through the Evidence
Implementation science (IS)—A game changer for criminology and criminal justice
Using latent class analysis to identify the complex needs of youth on probation
Needing More Guidance
The Psychology of Criminal Conduct
An Experimental Demonstration of Training Probation Officers in Evidence-Based Community Supervision
Exploring the Black Box of Community Supervision
The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or Need Assessment
Risk Principle of Case Classification in Correctional Treatment
The Importance of Staff Practice in Delivering Effective Correctional Treatment
Misalignment in Supervision
The Challenge of Change
Probation in the United States
Intensive Probation and Parole
Does Correctional Treatment Work? A Clinically Relevant and Psychologically Informed Meta‐analysis
Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice
| Citations per year | 1.33 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2020 - 2026 (7) |
| Highly cited | No |