Reliability in decision making about intervention plans is a necessary condition for evidence-based probation work and equal treatment of offenders. Structuring decision making can improve agreement between clinical decision makers. In a former study however, we found that in Dutch probation practice structured risk and needs assessment did not result in acceptable agreement about intervention plans. The Dutch probation services subsequently introduced a tool for support in decision making on intervention plans. This article addresses the question whether the use of this tool results in better agreement between probation officers. A significant and meaningful improvement in agreement was found on all domains of the intervention plan. Implications for probation practice are discussed
This systematic literature review describes what is known about the effectiveness of practices in probation supervision. Effectiveness is defined as: contributing to a reduction in recidivism, better functioning of clients in various areas, or prevention of non-compliance and drop-out. Based on a systematic research of Dutch and foreign literature, 141 articles and reports were selected and analysed
Reducing recidivism of individual offenders usually is a multifaceted task. Behavioural interventions, based on the ‘what works principles’ go along with interventions in the domains of education, work, housing and social networks. An integrative approach seems to improve the effectiveness of rehabilitation. In most accreditation panels for offender interventions, continuity in the planning and realization of the various services is one of the criteria. In the Dutch panel a distinction is made between synchronous continuity, that is integration of services at a given point in time, and diachronic, that is integration of the sequence of interventions in the course of the probation process. This contribution focuses on synchronous continuity.
