Research Summary: Evidence‐based supervision is the newest in a long line of efforts to advance community corrections. This new model adopts a risk‐need‐responsivity model where the agency uses a risk and need tool to identify appropriate treatment and control services and then assigns offenders to such services. Underscoring this new approach is the creation of a social learning environment that makes supervision officers active in facilitating offender change. The goal is to empower the offender. Maryland's Proactive Community Supervision (PCS) model was one of the first to implement this approach. Controlling for length of time on supervision and prior history, logistic regression results found that offenders who were supervised in this new style were less likely to be rearrested (30% for the PCS and 42% of the non‐PCS sample; p < 0.01) and less likely to have a warrant issued for technical violations (34.7% of the PCS group and 40% for the non‐PCS group; p < 0.10).Policy Implications: The study findings indicate that a behavioral management approach can increase the frequency of contacts and obtain positive offender outcomes. More importantly, the PCS model illustrates that supervision agencies can be transformed to achieve public safety goals through focusing on offender change strategies. Providing officers with new behavioral skills to work with offenders and creating an empowering environment can yield positive outcomes. Criminal justice policy should focus on reengineering community supervision to prevent additional penetration into the justice system, to reduce churning, and to reduce incarceration.

Substance use and substance use disorders are highly prevalent among youth under juvenile justice (JJ) supervision, and related to delinquency, psychopathology, social problems, risky sex and sexually transmitted infections, and health problems. However, numerous gaps exist in the identification of behavioral health (BH) problems and in the subsequent referral, initiation and retention in treatment for youth in community justice settings. This reflects both organizational and systems factors, including coordination between justice and BH agencies. This paper presents a new framework, the Juvenile Justice Behavioral Health Services Cascade ("Cascade"), for measuring unmet substance use treatment needs to illustrate how the cascade approach can be useful in understanding service delivery issues and identifying strategies to improve treatment engagement and outcomes for youth under community JJ supervision. We discuss the organizational and systems barriers for linking delinquent youth to BH services, and explain how the Cascade can help understand and address these barriers. We provide a detailed description of the sequential steps and measures of the Cascade, and then offer an example of its application from the Juvenile Justice - Translational Research on Interventions for Adolescents in the Legal System project (JJ-TRIALS), a multi-site research cooperative funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. As illustrated with substance abuse treatment, the Cascade has potential for informing and guiding efforts to improve behavioral health service linkages for adolescent offenders, developing and testing interventions and policies to improve interagency and cross-systems coordination, and informing the development of measures and interventions for improving the implementation of treatment in complex multisystem service settings. Clinical Trials Registration number - NCT02672150.

The concepts of justice and fairness are commonly examined in the literature on criminal justice, except for the issues affecting organizational justice in the workplace. Organizational justice has two properties: distributive justice (the focus on the outcome of a decision) and procedural justice (the decision-making process that leads to the outcome). The authors surveyed 1,200 correctional officers across one state's prison system. Both organizational justice dimensions were leading predictors of job stress and variants of organizational commitment (i.e., climate for learning and type of organizational climate). Procedural justice was related to individual perceptions of fear and perceived risk of inmate victimization. A positive work environment was more likely to occur when employees had a moderate to high sense of equity, which influenced factors related to acceptance of change, stronger commitment to the organization, and better understanding and agreement with organizational goals. Study findings reaffirm the need for administrators to support organizational justice through expanded use of work team processes whereby staff are involved in assessing organizational functionality and recommending improvements.

Research Summary: The current study used latent class analysis (LCA) to identify profiles of criminogenic needs in a sample of 17,252 community‐supervised individuals from one state's probation system. The purpose of this research was to illustrate the complexity of offender need profiles to inform the development and implementation of correctional interventions. The LCA analyses revealed four classes of dynamic needs. Conditional item probabilities were examined to label the four classes based on their likelihood of presenting with static risk, criminogenic needs, and destabilizing factors (i.e., factors that indirectly relate to recidivism). The four classes were characterized by the following: a low probability of both risks and destabilizers (LN‐LD), a moderate probability of risk and criminogenic needs with a high probability of multiple destabilizers (MN‐HD), a high probability of risk and needs with moderate probabilities of destabilizers (HN‐MD), and a high probability of static and criminogenic needs and destabilizers (HN‐HD). Finally, the relationship between latent class membership and three separate recidivism outcomes was assessed. Consistent with study hypotheses, individuals in latent classes characterized by a greater probability of criminogenic needs and lifestyle destabilizers were more likely to experience subsequent criminal justice involvement, regardless of risk level.Policy Implications: Simplifying the complexity of offender risk and need profiles through empirical classification has direct implications for policy and practice. First, it clarifies whether dynamic needs and/or risk should drive decision making. Second, the integration of dynamic risk factors into the case management process can inform strategies to mitigate static risk and inform the development of new and improved interventions. The current study findings provide insight into the clustering of dynamic risk factors within individuals. This classification structure has the potential to increase the precision of case management decisions by identifying targets for programming that are likely to co‐occur for many offenders. Specifically, programs can be developed to tailor components to specific static risk and need profiles.

The use of screening and assessment tools to gauge substance abuse disorders and the risk for recidivism are two widely recommended practices. A national survey of adult prisons, jails, and community correctional agencies was conducted to examine the practices used to place offenders in appropriate treatment services. Study findings indicate that 58.2% of the surveyed respondents report the use of a standardized substance abuse-screening tool, and that 34.2% use an actuarial risk tool. The provision of higher intensity treatment programs, the use of standardized risk tools, and the provision of more community referral services were all independently associated with the use of a standardized substance abuse-screening tool. Because practices vary considerably, agencies desiring to improve correctional programming should consider different dissemination, implementation, and technology transfer strategies.

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is among the most prevalent medical condition experienced by incarcerated persons, yet medication assisted therapy (MAT) is uncommon. Four jail and prison systems partnered with researchers to document their adoption of MAT for incarcerated individuals with opioid use disorders (OUD) using their established treatment protocols. Employing the EPIS (Exploration, Planning, Implementation, and Sustainment) framework, programs report on systematic efforts to expand screening, treatment and provide linkage to community-based care upon release. Results: All four systems were engaged with implementation of MAT at the outset of the study. Thus, findings focus more on uptake and penetration as part of implementation and sustainment of medication treatment. The prevalence of OUD during any given month ranged from 28 to 65% of the population in the participating facilities. All programs developed consistent approaches to screen individuals at intake and provided care coordination with community treatment providers at the time of release. The proportion of individuals with OUD who received MAT ranged considerably from 9 to 61%. Despite efforts at all four sites to increase utilization of MAT, only one site achieved sustained growth in the proportion of individuals treated over the course of the project. Government leadership, dedicated funding and collaboration with community treatment providers were deemed essential to adoption of MAT during implementation phases. Facilitators for MAT included increases in staffing and staff training; group education on medication assisted therapies; use of data to drive change processes; coordination with other elements of the criminal justice system to expand care; and ongoing contact with individuals post-release to encourage continued treatment. Barriers included lack of funding and space and institutional design; challenges in changing the cultural perception of all approved treatments; excluding or discontinuing treatment based on patient factors, movement or transfer of individuals; and inability to sustain care coordination at the time of release. Conclusions: Adoption of evidence-based medication assisted therapies for OUD in prisons and jails can be accomplished but requires persistent effort to identify and overcome challenges and dedicated funding to sustain programs.