Inmate Reentry and the Utility of The LSI-R in Case Planning

Corrections Compendium, Spring 2009 by Haas, Stephen M, DeTardo-Bora, Kimberly A

Authors' Note: Excerpts of this research work were previously presented at the 2006 Bureau of Justice Statistics /Justice Research and Statistics Association conference in Denver. This research was funded under a U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance grant (2002-RE-CX-0062). The viewpoints expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Justice, the Office of Justice Programs or the Bureau of Justice Assistance.

The development of effective inmate reentry programming is one of the most critical challenges facing corrections in the 21st century. With the number of inmates reaching an all-time high of 2. 1 million (Harrison and Beck, 2006), coupled with the fact that a vast majority of all inmates eventually return to society (Council of State Governments, 2005), the need for successful approaches to inmate reentry has never been greater. In 2004, a total of 672,202 inmates were released from state prisons, up from 604,858 in 2000 (Harrison and Beck, 2005). These trends underscore the need for effective transitional services and parole supervision for ex-offenders. Moreover, the sheer magnitude of inmates entering and exiting prison is not likely to recede anytime soon.

To address the need for better reentry services, greater emphasis has been placed on the use of evidencebased practices and, specifically, the use of risk and needs assessments to guide programming and case planning for offenders returning to the community. The current trend is to use objective, actuarial assessments instead of relying on intuition, common sense or discretion to inform treatment and supervision strategies (Latessa, Cullen and Gendreau, 2002). Such instruments are based on risk, need and responsivity principles, which in turn drive service delivery and aid correctional staff in the selection of correctional interventions shown to reduce recidivism (Andrews and Bonta, 1998). By identifying the dynamic factors most predictive of recidivism, the proper application of such assessments can ultimately serve as a guide for the development of purposeful case management plans for offenders returning to society (Lowenkamp and Latessa, 2005).

West Virginia is no different from other states that have begun to implement principies of effective correctional intervention for inmate release. Not only does the state have a prison population that is rapidly growing, but according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, it ranked third in terms of annual growth in the country from 1995 to 2004 (Harrison and Beck, 2005, 2006). As a result, the West Virginia Division of Corrections initiated the West Virginia Offender Reentry Initiative in 2004. To provide a systematic mechanism for the delivery of transitional services and support the Initiative, the DOC also developed a new case management system rooted in the use of the Level of Supervision Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) (West Virginia DOC, 2006). The prescriptive case management system is designed to enhance inmate readiness for release by matching institutional programming and transitional services based on the needs of inmates (Haas, Hamilton and Hanley, 2007). This is primarily accomplished through the development of individual reentry program plans for each soon-to-bereleased inmate based on the results of the LSI-R.

While considerable attention has been paid to the predictive validity of the LSI-R (Gendreau, Little and Goggin, 1996; Lowenkamp et al., 2004) and its utility with different offending populations (Dahle, 2006; Gentry, Dulmus and Theriot, 2005; Holsinger, Lowenkamp and Latessa, 2006; Reisig, Holfreter and Morash, 2006; Schlager and Simourd, 2007), far fewer studies have focused on how the instrument is used in the development of case plans. Moreover, it is not entirely clear how such factors as staff buy-in and training can impact the application of the LSI-R for the purposes of transitional case planning. As a result, and in spite of an ongoing concern for identifying "what works," little is still known about how correctional staff apply the LSI-R and, in particular, the role it plays in the development of reentry case plans.

Thus, this study seeks to examine how correctional staff use the LSI-R as they develop offender reentry case plans. Using a representative sample of correctional staff responsible for the delivery of West Virginia's Offender Reentry Initiative (i.e., case managers, counselors and parole officers), this research illustrates how correctional staff use the assessment's results when generating recommendations for offenders preparing to re-integrate back into the community. In particular, an effort is made to examine the degree to which the correctional staffs assessments of offender needs are congruent with subsequent recommendations for reentry referrals and services. Finally, given the importance of staff attitudes on the implementation of programs, the present study also assesses the level of support for the LSI-R among correctional staff. The relationship between LSI-R support and use of the instrument in guiding case planning decisions is examined. Potential implications for the use of standardized assessment information in guiding reentry case planning and improving offender reintegration are also discussed.