![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
As evidence-based practices becomes an increasingly popular term, it is crucial that correctional programs are assessed to ensure that research is being translated and implemented with fidelity. Too often the corrections field is quick to treat different interventions as a panacea, without truly understanding how the program does or does not meet the literature on effective practices. Data is provided based on decades of assessment using the Correctional Program Assessment Inventory and the Evidence-Based Correctional Program Checklist. Findings suggest program adherence to effective practices has shown some improvement, but still has a way to go, particularly in the area of treatment characteristics and quality assurance.
Notes
1. For additional information regarding the principles of effective intervention, see National Institute of Corrections (Citationn.d.).
2. The staff and program director interviews were not detailed enough and/or complete enough to include all indicators from the CPAI in the analysis.
3. These were also updated in 2015. Formerly, the categories were highly effective, effective, needs improvement, and ineffective.
4. In the Latessa, Brusman-Lovins, and Smith (Citation2010) study examining the relationship between items on the CPC and reductions in recidivism, items that were not found to be positively correlated with recidivism were removed from the analysis.
5. The remaining 41 programs were not reassessed by the state prior to the publication of this article.
6. It should be noted that the indicators that make up the different domains of the CPC and CPAI do not match item for item.