What is Making Choices?

“Making Choices” is an intensive 100 hour programme which targets general offending and utilises a range of treatment methods which have been shown to be effective in reducing recidivism, including relapse prevention planning, problem solving, safety planning, mood management techniques and the use of cognitive behavioural methods. The programme uses offence mapping to assist the offender to examine the pathways which led him/her to offending while providing the opportunity to identify offence decision making and alternative choice pathways, and to develop skills to help manage these situations more effectively in the future. Key themes of accepting responsibility and being accountable for one's own behaviour are threaded throughout the programme.

By targeting a range of criminogenic needs related to general offending, the programme aims to reduce an individual’s overall risk of recidivism. Treatment targets include offence-related cognitions, violence propensity for moderate level offenders, lifestyle balance, and emotional regulation. It also addresses poor self control/impulsivity, self management, problem solving skills, relationship difficulties and substance abuse as it relates to offending.

The programme has been designed for moderate to high risk offenders in both community and custodial settings with assessed criminogenic needs which match those targeted by the programme.

Making Choices has been adapted from M-PRO or Mixed Programme to Reduce Offending. This programme was designed for the New Zealand Department of Corrections to target diverse groups of high risk offenders in need of intensive intervention.

Hall McMaster & Associates Ltd designed the programme for the Department of Corrections in New Zealand. HMA is a consultancy that has provided consistently high quality training to corrective services in New Zealand for a number of years and has been involved in the design of four 100-hour intensive criminogenic-based programmes.

What are the key features of the Making Choices programme?

The programme design is inclusive of the following key features and themes:

• Motivation and buy in at front end of programme
• Offence mapping process as a way of clearly identifying criminogenic need
• Skill building emanating out of offence process work targeted at internal states (mood state regulation, cognitions/thinking, chill-out)
• Skill building in terms of interpersonal relationships (managing conflict, feedback processes)
• Developing an alternative life map to replace the offence related pathways
• Family accountability systems to ensure long-term maintenance of behaviours

What is the theoretical basis for the programme?

Making Choices has been developed on the basis of the principles of effective rehabilitation. Research in the past two decades has focused on identifying the characteristics of those programmes which are effective in reducing recidivism, forming a body of literature known as ‘what works’ (McGuire 1991, 2002). Treatment programmes consistent with ‘what works’ principles have been shown to be much more effective than those that do not have those characteristics. Recidivism reduction of 25% points can be shown for programmes that adhere to the principles, whereas no effect can be identified for programmes lacking those characteristics (Andrews and Bonta, 2003).

These evidence-based principles, of which five principally inform rehabilitation policy and practice in corrections agencies in Canada, the USA, the UK, New Zealand and Australia, underpin the Department’s Integrated Offender Management Strategy and guide the Department’s offender management practices. Contemporary rehabilitation programme development, delivery and evaluation are strongly influenced by these principles.

In brief, the five principles in the Department’s Integrated Offender Management Strategy indicate that intervention should target higher risk offenders as they have been shown to benefit the most from rehabilitation programmes (risk principle); that intervention should target the underlying causes of re-offending (need principle); that efforts should be made to increase offenders’ responsiveness to intervention (responsivity); that programme delivery should be described in a manual and facilitators should be well trained, supervised and adhere to the manual (programme integrity); and, that there should be some scope for facilitators to use their professional discretion in participant assessment and programme delivery (professional discretion).

The What Works literature has also helped to identify other characteristics of programmes which are effective in reducing recidivism. This includes:

• Using methods shown to be effective in reducing recidivism such as Cognitive Behavioural Approaches
• An orientation to the development of practical self management and life skills,
• The appropriate duration, frequency and intensity – this includes longer, more intensive programmes for higher risk offenders and sufficient frequency of sessions per week to gain “traction” in moving offenders to change their behaviour,
• A focus on engagement and motivation,
• Integrated within offender management processes,
• Provision of continuity of programmes and services,
• And are subject to ongoing programme monitoring and evaluation.

Along with the five principles of risk, need, responsivity, programme integrity and professional discretion, this research has formed the basis of programme accreditation approaches used worldwide. The Making Choices programme has been assessed against the National Offender Programme Standards to ensure it is consistent with contemporary rehabilitation research and practice.

Training challenges

Because of the need for robust training to augment the programme design, HMA was contracted to provide eight four-week training programmes for programme facilitators. The trainings were split into two two-week blocks. There were several reasons for investing in staff in this way:

• ensure that the programme staff were skilled in delivering a therapeutic intervention
• ensure that sites had additional capacity in case of staff attrition
• build competency across sites so that those who were undertaking assessment had a full appreciation of the programme content and expectations on participants
• ultimately upskill staff in terms of effective criminal justice practice, in particular group faciliation with reluctant participants, and/or those with entrenched patterns of behaviour
• ensure that Queensland Corrections had the internal capability to deliver the intensive programme in an ongoing manner