Enabling change: An assessment tool for adult offenders that operationalises risk needs responsivity and desistance principles
| Author | Kevin Wong,Kirstine Szifris,Rachel Horan |
| DOI | 10.1177/2066220319883555 |
| Published date | 01 April 2020 |
| Date | 01 April 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Original Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/2066220319883555
European Journal of Probation
2020, Vol. 12(1) 1 –16
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/2066220319883555
journals.sagepub.com/home/ejp
Enabling change: An
assessment tool for adult
offenders that operationalises
risk needs responsivity and
desistance principles
Rachel Horan
The Averment Group Ltd, UK
Kevin Wong
Kirstine Szifris
Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
Abstract
This article examines the extent to which the risk needs responsivity (RNR) model
and desistance principles have been integrated and operationalised in the development
of the Enablers of Change assessment and sentence planning tool developed by a
Community Rehabilitation Company provider in England. We consider the constructs
that underpin the tool, identifying points of departure and similarity between RNR
principles (Andrews and Bonta, 2007), the ‘good lives’ model (Ward and Maruna,
2007) and desistance principles (McNeil and Weaver, 2010) and their integration. We
examine how these constructs have been operationalised in the tool, which aims to
assess needs, strengths, protective factors and contribute to risk assessment. Given
the tool’s innovation, this article is of international significance and will make an original
contribution to the evidence base on operationalising desistance in the management of
people with convictions in England and Wales and other jurisdictions.
Keywords
Enablers of change assessment and sentence planning tool, desistance, integration,
offender assessment, operationalise, risk needs responsivity model
Corresponding author:
Rachel Horan, c/o Policy Evaluation and Research Unit, Department of Sociology, Manchester Metropolitan
University, Department of Sociology and Criminology, Geoffrey Manton Building, Rosamund Street West,
Manchester M15 6HB, UK.
Email: rachel@horanhome.com
883555EJP0010.1177/2066220319883555European Journal of ProbationHoran et al.
2019
Original Article
2 European Journal of Probation 12(1)
Introduction
Operationalising desistance principles as an embedded part of probation needs assess-
ment and sentence planning practice has proved elusive in the United Kingdom and other
jurisdictions despite calls for their inclusion (Canton, 2014; Council of Europe, 2010).
This reluctance is understandable, founded on reservations about shifting from the
empirically evidenced risk need responsivity (RNR) corrections model (Bonta and
Andrews, 2017) to the less well evidenced ‘good lives’ model (GLM) (Ward and Maruna,
2007) and desistance principles (McNeill and Weaver, 2010). Superficially, it would
seem that the maxim of ‘if it’s not broken – don’t fix it’ has prevailed. However, the RNR
corrections approach, although well evidenced, is not without limitations (Polaschek,
2012; Public Safety Canada, 2011). Integrating RNR with asset-based desistance
approaches is an important and welcome innovation (Horan, 2015; Serin and Lloyd,
2017). This is the approach that is embodied in the Enablers of Change (EOC) assess-
ment and sentence planning tool. Developed by Interserve, a Community Rehabilitation
Company (CRC) provider in England, the EOC tool aims to meet the enduring challenge
that a responsive criminal justice process must start with an effective and robust assess-
ment that guides intervention planning and rehabilitation for people with convictions
(Canton, 2014; Council of Europe, 2011; Moore, 2015).
This article examines the theoretical underpinning for the EOC tool and the concep-
tual integration of desistance with the RNR and GLM models. It acts as a companion
piece to an article that provides an account of the development, early testing and forma-
tive evaluation of the EOC tool (Wong and Horan, 2019); and other papers that will
examine the innovations intended by the tool: more effective offender engagement; and
co-production. In this article, we start by considering the rationale for desistance-based
tools integrated with RNR and GLM; then examine how these models and principles
have been incorporated into policy and practice in the UK and Europe. We follow this
with an account of the construct development of the EOC tool; and how the tool is
intended to operationalise RNR, GLM and desistance. We then discuss the extent of this
operationalisation as evidenced by the formative evaluation of the tool and the practical
challenges of using an assessment tool that aims for this theoretical integration.
Why integrate?
Debate abounds regarding RNR and desistance approaches, which are often pitted
against each other (Horan, 2015). Drawing on an explicitly evidence-focused framework
from its inception (Cullen et al., 2009), RNR principles have guided the assessment of
offender risk and needs for over 30 years (in Canada, England and Wales and other juris-
dictions in Europe). However, RNR approaches have been criticised for being deficits
based (Looman and Abracen, 2013). In contrast, desistance research, which focuses on
‘why people stop committing crime’ rather than ‘why people commit crime’ (Maruna,
2017: 291), seeks to identify and develop the strengths of people with convictions.
However, desistance does not have the empirical support generated from extensive quan-
titative research and testing, as acknowledged by some of its leading proponents (McNeill
and Weaver, 2010, Maruna, 2017), although an empirical evidence base is emerging (e.g.
see Savolainen, 2009; Skardhamar and Savolinen, 2014).
To continue reading
Request your trial