Risk, Need, and Responsivity (RNR)
Risk, Need, and Responsivity (RNR) web_adminWhile risk, need, and responsivity (RNR) falls under EBP (Hanser, 2014), its high level of importance to the field of community supervision necessitates its redundancy within this website. To achieve long-term public safety, it is not enough just to monitor and enforce court-ordered conditions of supervision. These activities of community corrections aid in protecting short-term public safety objectives; however, long-term public safety can be achieved only if justice-involved individuals stay out of the justice system by not committing new crimes.
RNR principles are the cornerstones of modern community corrections practice based on EBP to reduce recidivism. Understanding RNR is essential for implementing effective correctional interventions aimed at reducing recidivism with individuals on supervision (Andrews, Bonta, & Hoge, 1990). The risk principle asserts that the likelihood of future criminal and delinquent behavior can be reliably predicted and that treatment/interventions should focus on the higher risk offenders (i.e., those most likely to re-offend). The need principle highlights the importance of identifying and focusing interventions and treatments based on the criminogenic needs of the individual offender (i.e., need factors that are highly correlated with the likelihood of recidivism). The responsivity principle recognizes that how an individual will respond to certain interventions and treatment will depend largely on his or her unique characteristics and attributes; therefore, interventions and treatment options should be chosen for individuals based on their responsivity factors (e.g., gender, learning differences) (Crime and Justice Institute at Community Resources for Justice, 2009).
Brian Lovins PhD, Assistant Director, Community Supervision and Corrections Department, Harris County, TX
Brian talks about the need to tailor the intervention response to the individual.
Principles of Risk, Needs and Responsivity
- Research has shown that treatment delivered to high-risk offenders can reduce recidivism, AND it has shown that treatment for low-risk offenders has little positive effect on recidivism rates. Consequently, a reliable assessment of offender risk can ensure that high-risk offenders receive more treatment services than low-risk offenders. [1]
- This principle tells us what to treat. Risk assessments should examine criminogenic needs -- meaning those needs correlated to crime. [1] and [2]
- Responsivity Principle:
“Be responsive to temperament, learning style, motivation, gender, and culture when assigning to programs.”(p. xi) [2]
Although the focus of these recommendations is on enhancing education about community corrections, the RNR model is not limited to application within the community corrections component of corrections. In essence, screening/assessment should be used throughout the corrections process to inform the decision-making process about appropriate classification levels, level of supervision needed, targeted interventions and programming, etc. from the time a person enters the justice system until they are successfully discharged from the system. Using actuarial tools based upon known risk factors and criminogenic needs takes the decisions made about risk level, classification and supervision levels, and interventions to a level beyond subjective judgment and intuition.
Barbara Broderick, Chief Adult Probation Officer, Maricopa County Adult Probation Department
Barbara shares her insight on using a validated risk assessment.
Colleges and universities should incorporate specific instruction on the risk, need and responsivity principles of effective correctional intervention within criminal justice degree programs, along with examples of how RNR principles are implemented when working with individuals on supervision.
In general, community corrections leaders are interested in entry-level workers having a general understanding of actuarial versus non-actuarial assessment instruments, the history of risk assessment in corrections, what the RNR principles are, and how they can be applied in the work that corrections professionals do with justice-involved individuals. They also want entry-level workers to understand the difference between static and dynamic risk factors, what protective factors are and how they can contribute to reductions in recidivism.
In this vignette you will observe a community supervision officer interviewing a probationer for information to complete a risk assessment. The banners displayed throughout the video depicts demonstrated communication skills.
Endnote
[1] Bonta, J., & Andrews, D.A. (2017). The psychology of criminal conduct (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
[2] National Institute of Corrections. (October 2009). Implementing evidence-based policy and practice in community corrections (2nd ed). https://nicic.gov/implementing-evidence-based-policy-and-practice-community-corrections
RNR Learning Objectives and Resources
RNR Learning Objectives and Resources web_adminGoal
Incorporate specific instruction on the risk, need, responsivity principle (RNR) and implementation fidelity.
Sample Learning Objectives
- Define the RNR principles in community corrections.
- Describe how the RNR principles can be applied in working with individuals placed on community supervision.
- Demonstrate how to use RNR information on an individual to develop a supervision plan.
- Differentiate between actuarial versus non-actuarial assessment instruments.
- Describe how actuarial assessment tools in community corrections can be likened to assessments in other industries.
- Explain the evolution of risk assessment within community corrections.
- Differentiate between static vs. dynamic risk factors.
- Identify protective factors demonstrated to reduce recidivism.
RNR Self-Paced Online Courses
RNR Self-Paced Online Courses web_adminEBP Course 2 - Risk Assessment and Classification: Fundamentals for Criminal Justice Professionals.
This is course two in NIC’s six-course Evidence Based Practices in a Correctional Setting program. The main purpose of this course is to introduce you to actuarial risk assessments and describe how they are utilized as a tool within criminal justice professions. NIC offers this course free of charge.
Click here to create your account and log in.
Webinar: Addressing Responsivity Issues for American Indian/Alaska Native Individuals on Community Supervision
The responsivity principle suggests that an individual's characteristics affect how he or she responds to treatment and interventions. Characteristics such as learning style, personality, culture, gender, education level, etc. should play an important part in choosing which services and interventions a justice-involved individual is assigned to. In this era where practitioners are encouraged to incorporate strategies and practices that are “evidence-based,” we should be cautious not to discount indigenous, tribal or culture-based interventions that could work more effectively with American Indian/Alaska Native populations, even though they have not been evaluated and labeled as “evidence-based.”
https://appa.academy.reliaslearning.com/Addressing-Responsivity-Issues-for-American-Indian-Alaska-Native-Individuals-on-Community-Supervisi-.aspx
RNR Publications
RNR Publications web_adminBougue, Brad, Bill Woodward, Nancy M Campbell, Elyse Clawson, and Dorothy Faust. “Implementing Evidence-Based Practice in Community Corrections: The Principles of Effective Intervention.” National Institute of Corrections. Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) (Boston MA), 2004. https://nicic.gov/implementing-evidence-based-practice-community-corrections-principles-effective-intervention
Research supports several principles for effective offender interventions. NIC highlights eight principles in its "Evidence-Based Policy and Practice" initiative. They are listed below in developmental sequence.
Polaschek, Devon L L. “An Appraisal of the Risk'-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Model of Offender Rehabilitation and Its Application in Correctional Treatment.” Semantic Scholar. Legal and Criminological Psychology v. 17, pp. 1-17., 2012. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230492408_An_appraisal_of_the_Risk-Need-Responsivity_RNR_model_of_offender_rehabilitation_and_its_application_in_correctional_treatment
The RNR (risk-need-responsivity) model is evaluated. This article discusses: what the RNR model is; contextualizing the RNR model as a rehabilitation framework; model appraisal criteria; strengths; weaknesses; knowledge transfer issues; and future directions. '[A]lthough the RNR model's empirical validity and practical utility justify its place as the dominant model, it is not the 'last word' on offender rehabilitation; there is much work still to be done' (p. 1). (NIC Information Center has a copy)
Looman, Jan, and Jeffrey Abracen. “The Risk Need Responsivity Model of Offender Rehabilitation: Is There Really a Need For a Paradigm Shift?” American Psychological Association. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 2013. https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2014-12592-007.html
The current paper critically reviews the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) and Good Lives Model (GLM) approaches to correctional treatment. Research, or the lack thereof, is discussed in terms of whether there is a need for a new model of offender rehabilitation. We argue that although there is a wealth of research in support of RNR approaches, there is presently very little available research demonstrating the efficacy of the GLM in terms of the impact that programs based on this model of rehabilitation have on observed rates of recidivism among offender populations.
Desmarais, Sarah, and Jay Singh. “Risk Assessment Instruments Validated and Implemented in Correctional Settings in the United States.” Justice Center. Council for State Governments, March 27, 2013.https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Risk-Assessment-Instruments-Validated-and-Implemented-in-Correctional-Settings-in-the-United-States.pdf
A report designed to provide foundational knowledge and a working framework of risk assessment instruments for criminal justice and social service agencies, practitioners, and policymakers.
“Risk and Needs Assessment.” APPA (American Probation and Parole Association). The Council of State Governments, March 2015. https://www.appa-net.org/eweb/Dynamicpage.aspx?webcode=IB_IssuePaper&wps_key=59dd054a-36d3-464c-ba97-bd8b032d12ea
A statement enacted in March 2015 by the American Probation and Parole Association regarding the use of risk and needs assessments to predicate recidivism.
Picard-Fritsche, Sarah, Michael Rempel, Jennifer A Tallon, Julian Adler, and Natalie Reyes. “Demystifying Risk Assessment: Key Principles and Controversies 2017.” Innovating Justice. Center for Court Innovation, March 2017.https://www.innovatingjustice.org/sites/default/files/documents/Monograph_March2017_Demystifying%20Risk%20Assessment_1.pdf
This paper explains the science underlying risk-based decision-making and explores both the promise and controversies associated with the increasing application of “big data” to the field of criminal justice. While the technology has contributed to important policy reforms, such as the diversion of low-risk groups from jail and prison, debate has arisen over the potential for risk assessments to reproduce existing racial biases, the lack of transparency of some proprietary tools, and the challenge of applying classifications based on group behavior to individual cases. Along with identifying an emerging professional consensus that the careful and ethical implementation of risk assessment tools can improve outcomes, the paper closes with a series of best practices urging jurisdictions to adopt a localized, collaborative approach.
James, Nathan. “Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System.” Congressional Research Service Reports. Congressional Research Service, July 10, 2018. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R44087
This document provides a high-level overview of risk and needs assessment and can be used to form talking points or used as a handout for students to improve their understanding of the risk and needs principle, the types of instruments that can be used, and what they do. It was prepared for members of committees of Congress by the Congressional Research Services.
Viglione, Jill. “The Risk-Need-Responsivity Model: How Do Probation Officers Implement the Principles of Effective Intervention?” SAGE Journals. Criminal Justice and Behavior, May 2019. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0093854818807505
The advancement of evidence-based practices (EBP) and the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model suggests several key practices for probation agencies, including validated risk and needs assessments and appropriate treatment matching. Despite evidence supporting use of practices aligned with the RNR model to improve offender outcomes, research identifies significant implementation challenges in probation practice. Using 1,084 hours of ethnographic data, the current study sought to examine how probation staff implemented best practices aligned with the risk, need, and responsivity principles. Analyses suggest probation staff supervision practices misaligned with research evidence on RNR and associated agency trainings. Probation officers rarely used the risk and needs assessment to inform supervision decisions, creation of case plans, and referrals to treatment programs. Findings highlight the challenges associated with moving evidence on the RNR model to routine probation practice. Implications for policy and research are discussed, including a focus on perceived liability and implementation of best practices.
Marlowe, Douglas. “The Most Carefully Studied, Yet Least Understood, Terms in the Criminal Justice Lexicon: Risk, Need, Responsivity.” Policy Research Associates. SAMHSA Gains Center, October 14, 2021. https://www.prainc.com/risk-need-responsitivity/
Despite compelling evidence validating these RNR principles, many behavioral health and criminal justice professionals misconstrue the concepts of risk, need, and responsivity, leading them to deliver the wrong services to the wrong persons and in the wrong order. Even with the best of intentions to follow evidence-based practices, many programs inadvertently waste precious resources, frustrate consumers, and deliver lackluster results. To enhance program effectiveness and efficiency, it is necessary to translate these research-based principles into terms that are familiar to many practitioners, to help them select the most appropriate interventions under the right circumstances. [To aid in this process, a glossary of technical terms used in this article is provided in Table 1].
Ramezani, Niloofar, Avi Bhati, Amy Murphy, Douglas Routh, and Faye S. Taxman. “Assessing the Reliability and Validity of the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Program Tool - Health & Justice.” BioMed Central. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, July 7, 2022. https://healthandjusticejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40352-022-00182-w.
This article discusses fidelity scales from the RNR Program Tool and provides guidance on the importance of tool development processes to ensure accurate, valid, and reliable scales. The purpose of the RNR Program Tool is to create a modern, online tool integrating both the empirical (research) literature on effective practices and clinical standards on quality programming. This process minimizes the need for consultants by giving program administrators the ability to gather information on their programs, score them, and receive instant and targeted feedback with recommendations for improvement to assess their programs against empirical standards in the field. Furthermore, it provides a standardized tool that administrators can use to examine what type of individuals fare better in their programs. The provided targeted feedback can give the programs the ability to seek technical assistance or guidance in specific areas that can strategically strengthen their program.
RNR Textbooks
RNR Textbooks web_admin- Alarid, L. F. (2015). Community-based corrections (11th ed.). Cengage Learning.
- Bayens, G., & Smykla, J. (2012). Probation, parole, and community-based corrections: Supervision, treatment, and evidence-based practices (1st ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
- Champion, D. J. (2007). Probation, parole and community corrections (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.
- Hanser, R. D. (2013). Community corrections (2nd ed.). Sage.
- Latessa, E. J., & Smith, P. (2015). Corrections in the community (6th ed.). Routledge.
RNR Websites
RNR Websites web_adminYouth.gov
Includes a section on positive youth development that has information on protective factors for juveniles.
https://youth.gov/youth-topics/positive-youth-development
Family & Youth Services Bureau
Includes a section on positive youth development.
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/positive-youth-development
https://opa.hhs.gov/adolescent-health?resources-and-training/adolescent-health-library/positive-youth-development-health-resources-and-publications/index.html
Office of Adolescent Health (within the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services)
The Office of Adolescent Health has identified a comprehensive range of federal resources on positive youth development.
https://opa.hhs.gov
RNR Videos/Podcasts
RNR Videos/Podcasts web_adminRisk Assessment Tool Helps Probation Officers
This video provides an overview of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts Post Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA) tool and how it is used to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of post-conviction supervision. PCRA helps probation officers identify which persons to target for correctional interventions, what characteristics or needs will mitigate future criminal behavior, and how best to deliver supervision and treatment. The PCRA tool is an Evidence Based Practice (EBP) that guides an officer's decision about what level of risk an offender poses and what interventions would be best to reduce recidivism rates.
Predicting Criminal Behavior through Risk Instruments
This podcast was produced by DC Public Safety Radio. In this podcast, DC Public Safety Radio interviewed Mason Burley, Senior Research Associate for the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP), and Zachary Hamilton, Assistant Professor, Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology, and Director of the Washington State Institute for Criminal Justice, Washington State University. They discussed a new report from WSIPP and the larger policy implications of risk instruments. The title of the report is “Assessing the Risk of Criminal Offense for Washington’s Involuntary Treatment and Forensic Commitment Populations.” It includes an assessment of a risk instrument for mental health and convicted populations.
Responding to Offenders’ Needs Motivates Behavior Change
This video from the Washington State Department of Corrections looks at how the responsivity principle—including gender responsiveness—is being applied in prisons and in the community.