Effective Practice Principles

Introduction to effective practice and risk management
Effective practice principles
This assignment will explain three effective practice principles: criminogenic need, programme integrity and responsivity, followed with a brief case example of how it is used in my professional practice.
Criminogenic Need
The criminogenic need principle involves the basic idea of identifying key dynamic risk factors related to offending behaviour (Chapman & Hough 1998, Winstone & Heath 2010), such as unemployment or drug dependency, and then implementing prevention methods designed to counteract them (Farrington, 2002: 660). This idea is at the core of rehabilitative practice (Burnett & Roberts, 2004), if the practitioner assesses the criminogenic
It is important to be able to distinguish between criminogenic and non criminogenic needs, i.e. an individual’s problem that supports or contribute to offending to those more distantly related or unrelated to it. (McGuire, 1995:15). Programmes which target criminogenic needs and behaviours related to offending are more likely to be effective (Chapman & Hough, 1998: 8). This underpins work on offending behaviour, however addressing non-criminogenic needs may provide some benefit to the offender, but because the needs are not related to the likelihood of criminal behaviour it is less likely to reduce recidivism (Warren & Crime and Justice Institute, 2007:31). Chui (2003:63) cites Day and Howells (2002:41) as also arguing that offender rehabilitation should focus on criminogenic /dynamic risk factors rather than static non criminogenic needs such as self-esteem, anxiety, depression and psychological distress. However these factors can have some impact on re-offending as they can be linked, for example gaining employment may eliminate depression, or re-offending. (Chui,
It is imperative that criminogenic needs of an offender is identified and addressed in the report as sentencing decisions and sentence plans will be based on this assessment. The given proposal should demonstrate on how best to address the individual’s criminogenic needs to reduce re-offending. Mr KV was a young single man who had a history of acquisitive type offending. Mr KV admitted at the interview for the report that he has been using cannabis for the past 7 years; he had no money to buy cannabis and decided to shoplift to fund his habit. As I need to address factors contributing directly to criminal behaviour (Stanley, 2009:154) I requested a DRR assessment and he was found suitable for a low level DRR. After the interview with Mr KV I completed the OASYS assessment which gives clinical and actuarial scores to inform my sentence proposal in the report. My proposal had to demonstrate that the intervention would effectively address his criminogenic need (Chapman & Hough, 1998:15). I proposed a 12 month Community Order with a 6 month DRR to target his substance misuse and a 12 month supervision to address his pro criminal attitudes and