In the past few years several major reports highlighted the gap between our knowledge of effective treatments and services currently being received by consumers. These reports agree that we know much about interventions that are effective but make little use of them to help achieve important behavioral health outcomes for children families and adults nationally. This theme is repeated in reports by the Surgeon General (United States Department of Health and Human Services 1999; 2001) the National Institute of Mental Health [NIMH] National Advisory Mental Health Council Workgroup on Child and Adolescent Mental Health Intervention Development and Deployment (2001) Bernfeld Farrington & Leschied (2001) Institute of Medicine (2001) and the Presidents New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (2003). The authors call for applied research to better understand service delivery processes and contextual factors to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of program implementation at local state and national levels. Our understanding of how to develop and evaluate evidence-based intervention programs has been furthered by on-going efforts to research and refine programs and practices to define "evidence bases" and to designate and catalogue "evidence-based programs or practices". However the factors involved in successful implementation of these programs are not as well understood. Current views of implementation are based on the scholarly foundations prepared by Pressman & Wildavskys (1973) study of policy implementation Havelock & Havelocks (1973) classic curriculum for training change agents and Rogers (1983; 1995) series of analyses of factors influencing decisions to choose a given innovation. These foundations were tested and further informed by the experience base generated by pioneering attempts to implement Fairweather Lodges and National Follow-Through education models among others. Petersilia (1990) concluded that "The ideas embodied in innovative social programs are not self-executing." Instead what is needed is an "implementation perspective on innovation--an approach that views postadoption events as crucial and focuses on the actions of those who convert it into practice as the key to success or failure". (excerpt)

Implementation research: a synthesis of the literature.

Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product.

Can hardened criminals really reform? "Making Good" provides resounding proof that the answer is yes. This book provides a fascinating narrative analysis of the lives of repeat offenders who, by all statistical measures, should have continued on the criminal path but instead have created lives of productivity and purpose. This examination of the phenomenology of "making good" includes an encyclopedic review of the literature on personal reform as well as a practical guide to the use of narratives in offender counseling and rehabilitation.The author's research shows that criminals who desist from crime have constructed powerful narratives that aided them in making sense of their pasts, finding fulfillment in productive behaviors, and feeling in control of their future. Borrowing from the field of narrative psychology, Maruna argues that to truly understand offenders, we must understand the stories that they tell - and that in turn this story-making process has the capacity to transform lives. "Making Good" challenges some of the cherished assumptions of various therapy models for offenders and supports new paradigms for offender rehabilitation. This groundbreaking book is a must read for criminologists, forensic psychologists, lawyers, rehabilitation counselors, or anyone interested in the generative process of change.

Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Reform and Rebuild Their Lives

This 1966 paperback edition of a publication which first appeared in 1963 has by now been widely reviewed as a worthy contribution to the sociological study of deviant behavior. Its current appearance as a paperback is a testimonial both to the quality of the work and to the prominence of deviant behavior in this generation. In general the author places deviance in perspective, identifies types of deviant behavior, considers the role of rule makers and enforcers, and some of the problems in studying deviance. In addition, he develops a sequential model of deviance relying on the concept of career, a concept originally developed in studies of occupations. In his study of a particular kind of deviance, the use of marihuana, the author posits and tests systematically an hypothesis about the genesis of marihuana use for pleasure. The hypothesis traces the sequence of changes in individual attitude

Outsiders Studies in the Sociology of Deviance.

It comes as something ofa surprise to reflect that the New York Review ofBooks is now over twenty years old. Even people of my generation (that is, old enough to remember the revolutionary 196os but not young enough to have taken a very exciting part in them) think of the paper as eternally youthful. In fact, it has gone through years of relatively quiet life, yet, as always in a competitive journalistic market, it is the controversies that attract the interest of the reader and to which the history (especially an admittedly impressionistic survey that tries to include something of the intellectual context in which a journal has operated) must give some attention. Not all the attacks which the New York Review has attracted, both early in its career and more recently, are worth more than a brief summary. What do we now make, for example, of Richard Kostelanetz's forthright accusation that 'The New York Review was from its origins destined to publicize Random House's (and especially [Jason] Epstein's) books and writers'?1 Well, simply that, even if the statistics bear out the charge (and Kostelanetz provides some suggestive evidence to support it, at least with respect to some early issues), there is nothing surprising in a market economy about a publisher trying to push his books through the pages of a journal edited by his friends. True, the New York Review has not had room to review more than around fifteen books in each issue and there could be a bias in the selection of

http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/3507774.pdf

The New York Review of Books

Careful reading of the literature on the psychology of criminal conduct and of prior reviews of studies of treatment effects suggests that neither criminal sanctioning without provision of rehabilitative service nor servicing without reference to clinical principles of rehabilitation will succeed in reducing recidivism. What works, in our view, is the delivery of appropriate correctional service, and appropriate service reflects three psychological principles: (1) delivery of service to higher risk cases, (2) targeting of criminogenic needs, and (3) use of styles and modes of treatment (e.g., cognitive and behavioral) that are matched with client need and learning styles. These principles were applied to studies of juvenile and adult correctional treatment, which yielded 154 phi coefficients that summarized the magnitude and direction of the impact of treatment on recidivism. The effect of appropriate correctional service (mean phi = .30) was significantly (p <.05) greater than that of unspecified correctional service (.13), and both were more effective than inappropriate service (−.06) and non-service criminal sanctioning (−.07). Service was effective within juvenile and adult corrections, in studies published before and after 1980, in randomized and nonrandomized designs, and in diversionary, community, and residential programs (albeit, attenuated in residential settings). Clinical sensitivity and a psychologically informed perspective on crime may assist in the renewed service, research, and conceptual efforts that are strongly indicated by our review.

Does correctional treatment work? a clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis *

Meta-analytic techniques were used to determine which predictor domains and actuarial assessment instruments were the best predictors of adult offender recidivism. One hundred and thirty-one studies produced 1,141 correlations with recidivism. The strongest predictor domains were criminogenic needs, criminal history/history of antisocial behavior, social achievement, age/gender/race, and family factors. Less robust predictors included intellectual functioning, personal distress factors, and socioeconomic status in the family of origin. Dynamic predictor domains performed at least as well as the static domains. The LSI-R was identified as the most useful actuarial measure. Recommendations for developing sound assessment practices in corrections are provided.

/pdf/a-meta-analysis-of-the-predictors-of-adult-offender-4glo6e6fys.pdf

A meta‐analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: what works!*

Using 88 studies from 1980 to 2006, a meta-analysis compares risk instruments and other psychological measures on their ability to predict general (primarily nonsexual) violence in adults. Little variation was found amongst the mean effect sizes of common actuarial or structured risk instruments (i.e., Historical, Clinical, and Risk Management Violence Risk Assessment Scheme; Level of Supervision Inventory‐Revised; Violence Risk Assessment Guide; Statistical Information on Recidivism scale; and Psychopathy Checklist‐Revised). Third-generation instruments, dynamic risk factors, and file review plus interview methods had the advantage in predicting violent recidivism. Second-generation instruments, static risk factors, and use of file review were the strongest predictors of institutional violence. Measures derived from criminological-related theories or research produced larger effect sizes than did those of less content relevance. Additional research on existing risk instruments is required to provide more precise point estimates, especially regarding the outcome of institutional violence.

THE PREDICTION OF VIOLENCE IN ADULT OFFENDERS A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Instruments and Methods of Assessment

We reviewed the offender rehabilitation literature for the period 1981–87 and assessed the following types of interventions: biomedical, diversion, early/family intervention, education, getting tough, individual differences, parole/probation, restitution, and work. We evaluated treatments applied to specific subgroups of offender populations: sexual offenders, substance abusers, and violent offenders. The hypothesis that the “nothing works” credo has had a pervasive influence and has suppressed the rehabilitative agenda was not borne out when we examined the number and variety of successfully reported attempts at reducing delinquent behavior. In fact, the rehabilitative literature is growing at a noticeable rate; moreover, it suggests several strategies for developing more effective programs. Finally, we speculated why the “nothing works” doctrine continues to receive support in spite of empirical evidence to the contrary.

Revivification of rehabilitation: Evidence from the 1980s

A meta-analysis was conducted on 39 studies that generated 695 correlations with prison misconducts. Predictors of prison misconducts were grouped into 16 domains as follows: (a) personal character...

Paul Gendreau

Papers

Does correctional treatment work? a clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis *

A meta‐analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: what works!*

THE PREDICTION OF VIOLENCE IN ADULT OFFENDERS A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Instruments and Methods of Assessment

Revivification of rehabilitation: Evidence from the 1980s

Predicting Prison Misconducts