Strategic Training Initiative in Community Supervision (STICS)

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Bonta ◽  
Tanya Rugge ◽  
Guy Bourgon ◽  
Kayla A. Wanamaker

2021 ◽  
Vol 74 ◽  
pp. 101816
Author(s):  
James Bonta ◽  
Guy Bourgon ◽  
Tanya Rugge ◽  
Chloe I. Pedneault ◽  
Seung C. Lee

Author(s):  
James Bonta ◽  
Guy Bourgon ◽  
Tanya Rugge

The Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) Model of offender assessment and rehabilitation is one of the mostly widely used paradigms for the design and delivery of offender treatment programs. However, there has been relatively little research on providing RNR-informed services by front-line correctional staff. The Strategic Training Initiative in Community Corrections (STICS) is the first RNR-based intervention that trains probation officers to use the RNR principles in the everyday supervision of offenders. This chapter describes the development, evaluation, and application of STICS in community supervision. Special attention is given to issues faced during large-scale implementation of the STICS model and the generalizability of the model. The chapter ends with a description of the influence of STICS on international developments in providing evidence-based community supervision.


Author(s):  
Heather Toronjo ◽  
Faye S. Taxman

Face-to-face contacts are the cornerstone of community supervision. As community supervision in the United States and Canada emerges into a new behavioral management approach, new training curricula have emerged to conceptualize the techniques of supervision and develop the skill sets of officers. This chapter reviews five such curricula--Proactive Community Supervision (PCS) (Taxman, Shephardson, & Byrne, 2004; Taxman, 2008), Strategic Training Initiative in Community Supervision (STICS) (Bonta et al., 2011); Staff Training Aimed at Reducing Rearrest (STARR) (Robinson et al., 2012); Effective Practices in Community Supervision (EPICS) (Smith et al., 2012); and Skills for Offender Assessment and Responsivity in New Goals (SOARING2) (Maass, 2013). The comparison reveals similarities but major differences in an emphasis on the operational components for client-level change. The question remains as to which supervision intervention components are mechanisms facilitating client level change.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document