Performance Outcomes in the Delivery of the Integrated Correctional Program Model (ICPM) to Federal Offenders
Why we did this study
Reporting change and reduction in recidivism has become common practice in the delivery of effective correctional programs. Typically, the change and reduction in recidivism is measured relative to a control group, matched comparison group (sometimes “wait list” controls) or general base rate of recidivism for a similarly situated correctional population. For evaluating a correctional system’s performance, reporting recidivism rates over time is also popular. Comparing where the Integrated Correctional Program Model (ICPM) has been implemented relative to where it has not provides a unique opportunity to explore operational results and improve correctional service delivery objectives.
What we did
Public safety outcomes reflected in Correctional Service of Canada’s (CSC) Performance Management Framework (PMF) were extracted from the automated Performance Direct (PD) system. The PD system standardizes the historical reporting of two important metrics at the national and regional levels: 1) the percentage of offenders successfully reaching sentence completion without readmission, and 2) number and rate per 1,000 of serious (Schedule 1) convictions while on supervision. Performance outcomes over a three year period (2012/13 to 2014/15) were examined for a region (Pacific) where ICPM has been implemented and a region that has not as yet done so (Prairies). Results for Aboriginal offenders were also examined separately.
What we found
The percentage of offenders successfully reaching sentence completion without readmission in the ICPM region steadily improved from 51.5% in 2012/13, 55.5% in 2013/14 to 56.4% in 2014/15 whereas in the non-ICPM region the performance outcome remained constant (44.5% in 2012/13, 44.2% in 2013/14 to 44.6% in 2014/15). The performance gap >10% between the regions was notable.
The same performance outcome held true for Aboriginal offenders. For the ICPM region, improvement in the percentage successfully reaching sentence completion without readmission increased from 38.8% in 2012/13, to 43.7% in 2014/15, whereas in the non-ICPM region the percentage was lower and did not improve (32.4% in 2012/13 to 31.1% in 2014/15).
Even more compelling is the PMF metric of number and rate per 1,000 of serious (Schedule 1) convictions while on supervision. In the ICPM region, the number of serious convictions fell from 60 in 2012/13 to 20 in 2014/15 (a 67% reduction). Moreover, the rate per 1,000 has dropped from 51.7 in 2012/13 to 15.6 in 2014/15 (a 70% reduction). On the other hand, the non-ICPM region has a shown a decline in number from 71 in 2012-13 to 58 in 2014/15 as well as the rate per 1,000 of 38 in 2012/13 to 31 in 2014/15, representing an 18% reduction for both measures. While both ICPM and non-ICPM regions have shown relative reductions in number and rate of serious convictions while under supervision, the magnitude of the reductions for the ICPM region is more profound.
For Aboriginal offenders in the ICPM region, the rate per 1,000 has dropped from 36 in 2012/13 to 17.6 in 2014/15 (a 51% reduction); There was no change in the non-ICPM region (60.7 in 2012/13 to 60.5 in 2014/15).
What it means
An analysis of program effectiveness across regions that have implemented the ICPM over the traditional program array revealed that over time, ICPM was associated with recidivism reduction for both federal Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal men offenders.
For more information
Please e-mail the Research Branch or contact us by phone at (613) 995-3975.
You can also visit the Research Publications section for a full list of reports and one-page summaries.
Prepared by: Larry Motiuk
- Date modified :