Risk-need-responsivity model

1. Introduction

Version followed: the current 15-principle RNR model (Bonta & Andrews, The Psychology of Criminal Conduct, 6th ed., 2017, as summarised by Bonta, 2023), with the central eight risk/need factors and their intervention targets from Bonta & Andrews (2007). Session-level procedures come from STICS, the Public Safety Canada supervision model built by the RNR authors (Bourgon et al., 2009/2010; Bonta et al., 2021). Step-by-step core correctional practice (CCP) skills come from US derivatives (EPICS, STARR, Hawaii CCP training materials), which are secondary and named wherever used.

RNR is a framework, not a single therapy. It is a model for assessing people who have offended and for deciding who gets how much service, what to change, and how to deliver it. It was first proposed by Andrews, Bonta and Hoge (1990) in Canada, building on earlier offender-classification research; Paul Gendreau was a key collaborator [source: Wikipedia; Bonta 2023]. Within it, the actual clinical work is cognitive-behavioural and social-learning intervention delivered with specific relationship and structuring skills.

Core idea of change. Criminal behaviour is explained by General Personality and Cognitive Social Learning (GPCSL) theory: it is learned, maintained by its rewards and costs, and driven largely by procriminal thinking, associates and personality patterns. Change happens when (a) service intensity matches the person's risk of reoffending, (b) work targets the dynamic risk factors that drive their offending (criminogenic needs), and (c) delivery uses cognitive-behavioural and social-learning methods (modelling, reinforcement, rehearsal, cognitive restructuring) adapted to the person's learning style, motivation and circumstances [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Bonta 2023; Bourgon et al. 2010].

2. Framework

RNR does not prescribe numbered therapy phases. The sequence below is the case-management cycle the sources describe (assessment, then RNR-based planning, then relationship-based CBT delivery, then reassessment), with STICS's session structure for individual contacts [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Bourgon et al. 2009, 2010]. STICS divides the supervision period into eight stages running from intake assessment to partnering with community resources; only some stages are described in the reports (assessment; relationship building and collaborative goal setting; later cognitive-behavioural work on procriminal thoughts) [source: Bourgon et al. 2009] [uncertain: the full list of eight stages was not found].

Phase A: Structured assessment

Goal: estimate risk of reoffending, identify criminogenic needs, strengths and responsivity factors, using a validated structured instrument rather than unstructured judgement.
Format: interview plus file review with a risk-need tool (e.g. LSI-R, LS/CMI, OASys in England and Wales); LS/CMI adds a responsivity section and links assessment to case management [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Bonta 2023].
Move on when: risk level, the main criminogenic needs, key strengths and responsivity barriers are documented.

Phase B: RNR case plan and dosage matching

Goal: set intensity by risk (more for higher risk; little or none for low risk), choose criminogenic needs as targets (as many as the case presents: breadth), plan responsivity adaptations. STICS uses an Action Plan linking procriminal attitudes to the person's other needs [source: Bonta 2023; Bourgon et al. 2010].
Dosage: the sources give no numeric session counts. A commonly cited guideline (Bourgon & Armstrong, 2005) of roughly 100 programme hours for moderate risk and 200 or more for high risk is not drawn on here [uncertain].
Move on when: the person has a written plan naming targets, dose, and any barriers to address first (e.g. debilitating anxiety, childcare) [synthesis].

Phase C: Engagement

Goal: a warm, respectful, collaborative working relationship; role clarification (helper and authority); collaborative goals; motivational work [source: Bourgon et al. 2010; Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Move on when: the person can state at least one goal tied to a criminogenic need and understands your dual role [synthesis].

Phase D: Intervention delivery

Goal: change procriminal attitudes and other dynamic needs through CBT and social-learning techniques, and broker programmes and community resources for needs you do not treat directly.
Format (STICS): each session has check-in (5–10 min), review of last session and homework, intervention (about 20 min, e.g. the Behaviour Sequence or structured problem solving), agreed homework. This structure applies to almost all sessions except acute crises [source: Bourgon et al. 2009; Bonta et al. 2021]. EPICS uses the same four parts [source: Multco EPICS presentation].
Higher-risk cases get more frequent contact and more referrals [source: Multco EPICS presentation].

Phase E: Reassessment, maintenance, transition

Goal: rescore dynamic factors to check whether risk is falling and revise targets; build links to prosocial community supports (continuity of service and community linkages are RNR principles) [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
STICS recorded sessions at intake, about 3 months and about 6 months, a practical rhythm for reviewing progress [source: Bonta et al. 2021].
Criteria for stepping down or ending: falling dynamic scores, skills used outside sessions (homework, real situations), prosocial ties in place [synthesis].

3. Guiding principles

The 15 principles below follow Bonta (2023), summarising Bonta & Andrews (2017); one-line meanings are partly drawn from Bonta & Andrews (2007) and partly [synthesis].

Overarching

Respect for the person and the normative context: deliver services ethically, legally, humanely and with regard to the person's culture and setting. Practically: no humiliation, coercion beyond legal requirements, or one-size approaches [source: Bonta 2023].
Psychological theory (GPCSL): base formulation and intervention on a general personality and cognitive social learning account of crime. Practically: formulate offending in terms of learned thoughts, associates, rewards and costs.
General enhancement of crime prevention services: extend RNR-based services across justice and community settings. Practically: link your work to probation, programmes and agencies rather than working in isolation.

Core RNR principles and key clinical issues

4. Introduce human services: rehabilitation, not punishment or deterrence, reduces reoffending. Practically: sanctions alone are not treatment; always pair them with change work.
5. Risk: match intensity to risk of reoffending. Practically: concentrate time on higher-risk clients; keep low-risk clients away from intensive programmes and higher-risk peers, as intensive service can raise their recidivism [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
6. Need: target criminogenic needs (the dynamic central eight) rather than non-criminogenic needs such as self-esteem or vague distress. Practically: ask of every goal, "does this link to the offending?"
7. General responsivity: use cognitive-behavioural and cognitive social learning methods. Practically: model, rehearse, reinforce, restructure thinking; avoid insight-only, purely talk-based or punitive approaches.
8. Specific responsivity: adapt to strengths, learning style, personality, motivation, gender, ethnicity, age, mental health. Practically: treat debilitating symptoms first, simplify for concrete thinkers, remove practical barriers [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Bonta 2023].
9. Breadth (multimodal): target several criminogenic needs when present. Practically: the plan should not stop at one target if the assessment shows several.
10. Strength: assess and use strengths for prediction and treatment. Practically: record prosocial ties, skills and interests and build goals on them.
11. Structured assessment: use validated tools for risk, need, strengths and responsivity; reassess. Practically: score a tool; do not rely on impression.
12. Professional discretion: depart from the principles only for specified, documented reasons. Practically: write down why you override a score.

Organisational

13. Community-based: services in the community are preferred, though RNR applies in custody. Practically: favour community interventions and prepare custody clients for release.
14. GPCSL-based staff practices: staff use relationship and structuring skills (core correctional practices). Practically: your interpersonal skill is part of the treatment.
15. Management: select, train and clinically supervise staff in RNR. Practically: seek supervision and recorded-session feedback.

Bonta & Andrews (2007) also list dosage, continuity of service and community linkages as principles: provide enough service for the risk level, keep services connected across custody and community, and connect clients to community resources [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].

4. Intervention inventory

Organisation: A. assessment and planning; B. relationship skills; C. structuring skills and CBT techniques (the core correctional practices); D. need-specific targets (the central eight); E. practitioner fidelity. RNR's founders name the CCP skills and their purposes but, in the sources, give few step lists; step lists below come from STICS, EPICS, STARR and Hawaii CCP training materials as tagged. All example language is illustrative unless quoted [source for list of CCPs: Bonta 2023; Bonta & Andrews 2007; Trotter 2013; UCCI CCP overview].

A. Assessment and planning

A1. Structured risk-need assessment

Purpose: establish risk level (for dosage) and the criminogenic needs (for targets). Use at intake and before any intensive service is allocated [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps:
1. Use a validated third- or fourth-generation tool that you are trained in (e.g. LSI-R, LS/CMI; OASys in England and Wales). These are licensed instruments: use the official forms and scoring rules; do not improvise items [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Bonta 2023].
2. Combine a semi-structured interview with file and collateral information (criminal record, probation reports, family, employer where consented) [synthesis].
3. Score; record risk band and the domain scores that are elevated (these are your candidate targets).
4. Prefer tools that measure dynamic factors over purely static actuarial tools (e.g. VRAG, Static-99), which predict but rarely guide intervention [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
5. Feed back results collaboratively: what raises risk, what lowers it, what the plan will focus on [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "This checklist looks at areas that research links to people getting into trouble again. Some we can't change, like your record. Most we can, and those are what we'll work on together."
Watch for: scoring from impression; ignoring dynamic domains; the client experiencing assessment as accusation. Working: the plan's targets map onto the elevated dynamic domains.

A2. Strengths assessment

Purpose: identify protective factors and resources for prediction and treatment (Strength principle) [source: Bonta 2023; Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: (1) for each central-eight domain, ask what is going well (a supportive partner, a job held, a non-using friend, a hobby); (2) note personal strengths (persistence, skills, values); (3) record them on the plan beside each target; (4) use them as levers in goal setting [steps: synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "You held that warehouse job for two years. What did you do then that helped you keep it?"
Watch for: strengths listed but never used. Working: goals are phrased as building on named strengths.

A3. Responsivity assessment and plan

Purpose: find what will block or help learning: motivation, cognitive ability, literacy, verbal skill, concrete thinking, anxiety or mental disorder, personality, age, gender, culture, practical barriers [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Bonta 2023].
Steps:
1. Use the responsivity section of your tool where it has one (LS/CMI) [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
2. Screen literacy, learning difficulty, mental health, substance withdrawal, trauma-related arousal and practical barriers (transport, childcare, work hours) [synthesis].
3. Decide adaptations: treat debilitating anxiety or mental disorder first so the person can participate; for limited verbal skills keep abstract concepts minimal and use behavioural practice; reduce barriers (e.g. childcare for women); for Indigenous clients consider including elders and ceremony alongside structured CBT [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
4. Write the adaptations into the plan.
Example language (illustrative): "Some people learn best by talking things through, others by practising. Which works better for you?"
Watch for: labelling low engagement as resistance when it is a responsivity barrier. Working: attendance and homework completion rise after adaptations.

A4. RNR case plan and dosage matching (STICS Action Plan)

Purpose: turn assessment into a plan: intensity by risk, targets by need, delivery by responsivity [source: Bonta 2023; Bourgon et al. 2010].
Steps:
1. Set intensity: low risk, minimal service and no mixing with higher-risk groups; moderate and high risk, more frequent contact, programme referral, and more referrals to community agencies [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Multco EPICS presentation].
2. Choose targets from elevated dynamic domains, several if present (Breadth).
3. STICS approach: identify the procriminal attitudes that sit under each other need (e.g. a thought justifying drinking under substance misuse, a thought devaluing work under employment) and link them in the plan, because attitudes are treated as underlying the other needs [source: Bourgon et al. 2009, 2010; Bonta et al. 2021].
4. Decide which needs you will work on in session and which you will broker to programmes (substance treatment, accredited cognitive-skills programmes, employment services).
5. Add non-criminogenic needs only where they block participation or for humane reasons, and label them as such [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Example language (illustrative): "From what we found, three things matter most for keeping you out of trouble: the drinking, who you spend weekends with, and how you think about work. Shall we start with the one you care most about?"
Watch for: plans full of non-criminogenic goals (self-esteem, general wellbeing) at the expense of criminogenic ones. Working: session time shifts towards criminogenic needs and attitudes; STICS found trained officers spent more time on these and less on conditions [source: Bonta et al. 2021].

A5. Reassessment and monitoring

Purpose: check whether dynamic risk is falling and revise targets [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: rescore the dynamic domains at set intervals (e.g. around 3 and 6 months, mirroring STICS recording points [source: Bonta et al. 2021]) and after major life events; compare with baseline; drop resolved targets, add new ones; adjust intensity [synthesis for intervals].
Watch for: reassessment done as paperwork only. Working: falling dynamic scores and observable prosocial behaviour.

A6. Professional discretion (documented override)

Purpose: allow departure from the tool or principles for specified reasons [source: Bonta 2023].
Steps: state the reason (e.g. information the tool does not capture, such as a stated specific threat), the change made, and a review date; get supervisory sign-off where your service requires it [steps: synthesis].
Watch for: overrides used routinely to raise everyone's risk or to justify gut feeling.

B. Relationship skills (general responsivity: relationship)

B1. Relationship building

Purpose: create a warm, respectful, collaborative working alliance that values autonomy; necessary but not sufficient for change [source: Bonta 2023; Bonta & Andrews 2007; Whetzel & Lowenkamp 2011].
Steps: use warmth, flexibility, active listening, showing understanding, reflecting back what was said, and constructive feedback [source: Bourgon et al. 2009]. Communicate openly and respectfully and treat the person as an equal [source: Whetzel & Lowenkamp 2011]. Begin every STICS/EPICS session with a check-in to maintain the relationship [source: Bourgon et al. 2009].
Example language (illustrative): "It sounds like this week was a lot, losing the shift and the argument with your brother. What's been hardest?"
Watch for: warmth without structure (pleasant sessions, no change work); a non-blaming attitude was associated with lower recidivism in Trotter's research [source: Trotter 2013]. Working: the client discloses risky situations voluntarily.

B2. Role clarification

Purpose: make your dual role explicit (helper and, in justice settings, officer of the court or reporter to the court/parole) so trust is not built on false expectations [source: Bonta et al. 2021; Bourgon et al. 2009].
Steps: at the start, and when roles collide: (1) explain what you can help with; (2) state what you must report or enforce and to whom; (3) say what is negotiable and what is not; (4) explain confidentiality limits; (5) invite questions and check understanding [steps: synthesis; the sources name the skill but not its steps].
Example language (illustrative): "Part of my job is helping you get what you want out of the next year. Part of it is reporting to the court if conditions are broken. I'll always tell you which hat I'm wearing."
Watch for: surprise breaches that the client experiences as betrayal. Working: the client can describe your role accurately.

B3. Collaborative goal setting

Purpose: agree goals tied to criminogenic needs that the client owns [source: Bourgon et al. 2009, 2010].
Steps: (1) share assessment findings; (2) ask what the client wants for themselves; (3) find the overlap between their goals and the criminogenic targets; (4) write goals in concrete, behavioural terms; (5) revisit at each review [steps: synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "You said you want to keep custody of your daughter. How do the weekends with that crowd fit with that?"
Watch for: goals the client cannot repeat back. Working: the client refers to goals spontaneously.

B4. Motivational interviewing (motivational enhancement)

Purpose: build motivation and reduce dropout among higher-risk clients; Bonta & Andrews (2007) map MI's early stages onto the relationship principle and its later stages onto structuring; EPICS is used alongside MI [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Multco EPICS presentation].
Steps: use open questions, affirmations, reflections and summaries; elicit the client's own reasons for change; explore ambivalence; roll with discord rather than arguing; move to a change plan when change talk dominates [source: Miller & Rollnick, MI texts] [uncertain: RNR sources do not specify an MI protocol].
Example language (illustrative): "On one hand the money's quick; on the other you've said you're tired of looking over your shoulder. Where does that leave you?"
Watch for: MI used to avoid ever addressing procriminal statements. Working: increasing change talk, attendance, homework completion.

C. Structuring skills and CBT techniques (core correctional practices)

C1. Structured session (check-in, review, intervention, homework)

Purpose: make every contact a learning session focused on criminogenic needs [source: Bourgon et al. 2009, 2010; Bonta et al. 2021; Multco EPICS presentation].
Steps:
1. Check-in (5–10 min): strengthen rapport, screen for crises or urgent needs, check compliance with conditions.
2. Review: revisit last session's content and homework (by discussion or rehearsal); in EPICS also referrals and goals.
3. Intervention (about 20 min): teach or practise one tool (Behaviour Sequence, cognitive restructuring, problem solving, skill building, cost-benefit) on a criminogenic need or responsivity barrier.
4. Homework: agree a task tied to the intervention with clear expectations, for use in real risky situations.
5. Summarise the session at the end [source: Bonta et al. 2021].
6. Drop the structure only for acute crises [source: Bonta et al. 2021].
Example language (illustrative): "Before we get into today, how did the practice go when your cousin turned up Friday?"
Watch for: sessions consumed by conditions and paperwork. Working: most session time on attitudes and other criminogenic needs.

C2. Prosocial (anticriminal) modelling

Purpose: demonstrate the behaviour you want to see; learning occurs through observation [source: Trotter 2013; Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5].
Steps: (1) be reliable, punctual, fair, honest and non-blaming yourself; (2) model specific skills explicitly in role-play ("watch me do it"), naming each step; (3) think aloud to model prosocial reasoning; (4) let the client practise in a low-stress setting with feedback [source: Trotter 2013; Hawaii ICIS 2024; steps 2–3: synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "I'll play you and you play your supervisor. Watch how I ask for the shift change without blowing up."
Watch for: inconsistency between what you ask and what you do (lateness, broken promises). Working: the client imitates phrasing or approaches you modelled.

C3. Effective reinforcement

Purpose: increase prosocial thoughts and behaviour; social reinforcers (praise, interest) are usually most powerful; reinforcement should be genuine and valued by the client [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5].
Steps (EPICS/Hawaii version):
1. Immediately and clearly show approval and name the specific behaviour or statement; reinforce small steps too.
2. Explain why you value it.
3. Have the client reflect on why it was good and its short- and long-term benefits.
4. Where available, add a verbal or tangible reward (e.g. a reduced reporting requirement where policy allows) [source: Multco EPICS presentation; Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5; STARR coding: identify the behaviour and explore consequences, Robinson et al. 2011].
Ratio: Hawaii materials name a 4:1 reinforcement-to-disapproval rule without elaborating [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5] [uncertain: origin of the ratio not checked].
Example language (illustrative): "You walked away when he started pushing you. That's exactly what we practised. What do you think that saved you, tonight and over the next year?"
Watch for: vague or automatic praise ("good job"), praising compliance only. Working: the reinforced behaviour recurs and the client names its benefits unprompted.

C4. Effective disapproval

Purpose: reduce procriminal statements and behaviour without damaging the relationship [source: Bonta 2023; Trotter 2013].
Steps (EPICS/Hawaii version):
1. Respectfully and promptly state disapproval of the specific behaviour or statement (no generalisations or put-downs; be consistent).
2. Explain why it is a problem.
3. Have the client consider the short- and long-term consequences.
4. Identify or ask for a prosocial alternative [source for step 4: EPICS authority/disapproval; partly synthesis].
5. Stop disapproving as soon as the behaviour stops; reinforce the alternative when it appears [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5; Multco EPICS presentation; Robinson et al. 2011].
Example language (illustrative): "I'm not okay with the idea that he 'had it coming'. Hitting him put you back in front of a judge. What happens next time if that's the rule you follow?"
Watch for: lecturing, sarcasm, disapproving the person rather than the act; disapproval outnumbering reinforcement. Working: fewer procriminal statements in session, without dropout.

C5. Effective use of authority

Purpose: gain compliance firmly but fairly; be authoritative, not authoritarian [source: Whetzel & Lowenkamp 2011].
Steps (EPICS version): focus on the behaviour, not the person; keep a calm tone; make rules and roles explicit and unambiguous; identify the prosocial alternative; state the choices and their consequences, leaving the choice with the client [source: Multco EPICS presentation; Whetzel & Lowenkamp 2011].
Example language (illustrative): "The condition is no contact with the victim. You can stick to that and we keep working on the job plan, or there's contact and I have to report it. Your call; what will help you stick to it?"
Watch for: threats, domination or abuse of power (counter-productive); avoiding authority to stay liked. Working: compliance with less conflict; the client can state rules and consequences.

C6. Effective punishment / sanctions

Purpose: respond to violations with proportionate consequences that support learning; named as a STARR skill and an RNR-trained skill [source: Robinson et al. 2011; Bourgon et al. 2009].
Steps: the sources do not give steps [uncertain]. A synthesis consistent with the reinforcement/disapproval steps: apply the least restrictive sanction that policy requires, promptly and predictably; explain the link to the behaviour; pair it with teaching the alternative; return to reinforcement quickly [synthesis].
Watch for: RNR's human-service principle: sanctions without treatment do not reduce reoffending [source: Bonta 2023].

C7. Teaching the cognitive model (Behaviour Sequence / ABC)

Purpose: show the client that thoughts drive behaviour, so procriminal thoughts can be identified and changed; the foundation for cognitive restructuring [source: Bourgon et al. 2009, 2010; Trotter 2013].
Steps (STICS/STARR):
1. Explain in plain language that behaviour follows from outside triggers, the thoughts we have about them, and the consequences that follow. STICS uses client-friendly terms: "outside cues" (antecedents), "tapes" (procriminal thoughts), "counters" (prosocial thoughts) [source: Bourgon et al. 2009].
2. Take a recent real event from the client; map cue, tape, behaviour, consequences.
3. Ask what other thought (counter) would have led to a different behaviour and consequence.
4. Apply the model to new situations in later sessions and review it (STARR coded whether the model was taught, applied or reviewed, and whether cues, consequences and counter thoughts were covered) [source: Robinson et al. 2011].
Example language (illustrative): "So the cue was him calling you out in front of everyone. What was the tape playing in your head right then?"
Watch for: abstract teaching with no personal example; concrete thinkers losing the thread (draw it). Working: the client can map a new event independently. Cognitive techniques showed the strongest association with lower recidivism in STICS [source: Trotter 2013; Bonta et al. 2021].

C8. Cognitive restructuring of procriminal attitudes

Purpose: identify and replace procriminal attitudes, rationalisations and identity (the STICS central target) [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Bourgon et al. 2010].
Steps:
1. Notice procriminal expressions in session (excuses, minimising, justifying, devaluing work or law); STICS examples include justifications for drinking and dismissals of legitimate work [source: Bourgon et al. 2009].
2. Use the Behaviour Sequence to link the thought to past behaviour and consequences.
3. Examine the thought: is it fully true, is it helpful, does it harm self or others [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5].
4. Generate prosocial counters with the client and rehearse them aloud.
5. Practise repeatedly in session and as homework until the counter becomes automatic; generalise to other needs [source: Bourgon et al. 2010].
6. Optional tool: a thinking report recording situation, thoughts, feelings (rated), beliefs, and a replacement thought (from the Thinking for a Change tradition) [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5].
7. Reframe procriminal statements into prosocial ones and reinforce statements showing the client grasps the thought-behaviour link [source: Trotter 2013].
Example language (illustrative): "You said 'working is for suckers'. When that tape plays, where does it lead you? What would a counter sound like, one you'd actually believe?"
Watch for: arguing the client into agreement (creates reactance); counters that sound like your words, not theirs. Working: the client catches and counters their own tapes.

C9. Structured skill learning (skill building)

Purpose: teach new prosocial behaviours step by step with modelling, rehearsal and feedback [source: Bonta 2023; Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5].
Steps (Hawaii five-step lesson): (1) explain why the skill matters and when to use it; (2) model it step by step with the steps visible; (3) the client role-plays a situation relevant to them; (4) debrief: how it felt, reinforce steps done well, specific suggestions; (5) practise again and identify other situations where it applies [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5].
Skills commonly taught: active listening, giving feedback, responding to another's anger, dealing with an accusation, saying no to pressure, asserting yourself, calming self-talk, taking time out, considering another's perspective [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5, drawing on Thinking for a Change].
Example language (illustrative): "Let's practise saying no to Danny. I'll be Danny. Remember the steps on the card."
Watch for: skipping role-play and only discussing; graduated practice from easy to harder situations helps [source: Multco EPICS presentation]. Working: the client performs the skill in role-play and reports using it.

C10. Problem solving

Purpose: teach a structured way to handle offence-related problems (housing, family, drugs, money) instead of impulsive or criminal solutions [source: Trotter 2013; Bourgon et al. 2010].
Steps: (1) stop and define the problem; (2) gather information; (3) set a goal; (4) generate options and weigh each option's consequences; (5) choose and carry out a plan; (6) evaluate [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5; Trotter 2013]. Problems can be client-defined or assessment-defined; let the client articulate the problem and possible solution where possible [source: Trotter 2013].
Example language (illustrative): "Okay, the problem is you've got nowhere to stay after Friday. What are all the options, even ones you don't like?"
Watch for: you solving it for them. Working: the client applies the steps to a new problem.

C11. Self-management and anger management

Purpose: target the antisocial personality pattern (impulsivity, restless aggression, irritability) [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007]; STICS teaches self-management alongside problem solving [source: Bourgon et al. 2010].
Steps: identify early warning signs (body, thoughts); use a pre-planned interrupt (time out, calming self-talk); apply problem solving once calm; rehearse with role-play; log uses as homework [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5 for time out and calming steps; sequence: synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "What's the first sign in your body that you're heading to a nine out of ten?"
Watch for: high-risk anger or violence needs specialist programmes; refer. Working: fewer incidents, earlier self-interruption.

C12. Cost-benefit analysis

Purpose: help the client weigh short- and long-term costs and benefits of a behaviour; an EPICS intervention [source: Multco EPICS presentation]. The sources give no step list [uncertain].
Steps (synthesis): draw a grid of short-term and long-term benefits and costs of continuing the behaviour and of changing; let the client fill it; highlight where short-term gains drive behaviour and long-term costs dominate.
Example language (illustrative): "What does selling give you this week? And what does it cost you over five years?"

C13. Homework and graduated practice

Purpose: generalise skills to real life [source: Bourgon et al. 2009; Multco EPICS presentation].
Steps: agree a specific task tied to that session's intervention; state clear expectations; start easy and build to harder situations; review at the next session's review segment; reinforce attempts [source: Multco EPICS presentation; Bourgon et al. 2009].
Watch for: literacy barriers (use verbal or picture tasks). Working: completion and reported real-world use.

C14. Advocacy, brokerage and use of community resources

Purpose: connect clients with services and prosocial supports for needs you do not treat directly; community support and referral are linked with lower recidivism [source: Trotter 2013; Whetzel & Lowenkamp 2011].
Steps: arrange services; help with employment; involve family; coordinate with substance and mental health treatment; meet clients in the community where possible [source: Whetzel & Lowenkamp 2011]. A social network map or eco-map can be completed during assessment: list formal and natural supports, rate each connection as strong, stressful or wanted, and mark direction of support [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5].
Watch for: referral without follow-up; referring low-risk clients into intensive programmes. Working: the client attends and stays in the services.

D. Need-specific targets (the central eight)

Indicators and intervention goals per factor follow Bonta & Andrews (2007); the techniques to use are from section C; matching is [synthesis].

D1. Antisocial personality pattern

Purpose: reduce impulsivity, thrill-seeking, restless aggression, irritability by building self-management, problem-solving and anger-management skills [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: C11 self-management; C10 problem solving; C9 skill learning for pressure and conflict situations; C7 to slow down the cue-behaviour link.
Watch for: confusing this with a personality-disorder diagnosis; the target is behaviour patterns. Working: fewer impulsive incidents, use of interrupts.

D2. Procriminal attitudes

Purpose: counter rationalisations for crime and negative attitudes to the law; build a prosocial identity [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007]. STICS treats this as the hub need [source: Bourgon et al. 2010].
Steps: C7 and C8 throughout; C3/C4 in response to every pro- or anti-criminal statement; build identity by reinforcing prosocial self-descriptions [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "You described yourself as 'someone who doesn't get pushed around'. Who else are you, outside that?"

D3. Procriminal associates (social supports for crime)

Purpose: replace procriminal friends and associates with prosocial ones [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: map the network (C14 eco-map); identify risky people and places; problem-solve contact reduction; rehearse refusal skills (C9 saying no to pressure); plan prosocial activities where new contacts can form [synthesis].
Watch for: demanding abrupt cut-offs from family members with offending histories; work on managing contact instead [synthesis].

D4. Substance abuse

Purpose: reduce use and the attitudes supporting it, build alternatives [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: C8 on permission-giving thoughts; C11 for cravings; broker specialist treatment (C14); monitor per conditions [synthesis].

D5. Family/marital relationships

Purpose: improve relationship quality, warmth and caring; for parents, improve monitoring and discipline skills [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: skill learning for communication and conflict (C9); refer to parenting or couples work; involve family where safe and consented [synthesis]. Screen for domestic abuse before any joint sessions [synthesis].

D6. School/work

Purpose: improve performance, satisfaction and relationships at work or school [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: C8 on attitudes devaluing legitimate work; C10 for job search and workplace problems; C9 for interviews and handling supervisors; broker employment and education services [synthesis].

D7. Leisure/recreation

Purpose: increase involvement in satisfying prosocial leisure [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: identify past and possible interests (use strengths, A2); schedule activities as homework; link to clubs or groups [synthesis].

D8. Criminal history

Purpose: static; used for risk level only, not a treatment target [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007]. You can still work on how the client relates to their history (e.g. a criminal identity) under D2 [synthesis].

D9. Non-criminogenic (minor) needs

Purpose: self-esteem, vague personal distress, major mental disorder, physical health are weaker targets for reducing reoffending but are not unimportant [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Steps: address them when they block participation (specific responsivity) or for humane reasons; do not let them replace criminogenic targets. Raising self-esteem alone risks producing "confident criminals" [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].

E. Practitioner fidelity and clinical support

E1. Recorded-session review and coaching

Purpose: maintain skills after training; STICS and STARR used audio-recorded sessions, monthly skill meetings, coaching feedback and annual refreshers [source: Bourgon et al. 2010; Bonta et al. 2021; Robinson et al. 2011].
Steps: with client consent and service approval, record a sample of sessions; rate them against the session structure and CCP skills (was the cognitive model taught or applied? were reinforcement and disapproval specific with consequences explored?); get feedback from a trained supervisor or peer group; set one skill to improve per month [source: Robinson et al. 2011; Bonta et al. 2021; self-rating procedure: synthesis].
Watch for: drift back to compliance-focused contacts. Working: rising proportion of session time on attitudes and criminogenic needs.

5. Handling problems

The RNR sources say little about managing individual difficulties beyond responsivity, MI, relationship and authority skills. Items tagged [synthesis] are my guidance, built from those principles.

Low motivation / "I'm only here because I have to be". Treat motivation as a specific responsivity factor to plan for, not a reason to exclude; engaging higher-risk cases and minimising dropout is an explicit RNR concern [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007]. Respond with role clarification (B2), MI (B4) and goals built on what the client wants (B3). Reinforce every small engagement behaviour (C3) [synthesis for sequence].
Persistent procriminal talk in session. Don't let it pass, and don't argue: respond each time with brief effective disapproval (C4), then move to the Behaviour Sequence (C7) on a concrete example. Keep reinforcement well above disapproval (Hawaii materials name a 4:1 rule) [source: Hawaii CCP manual ch. 5; synthesis].
Denial or minimising of the offence. RNR targets attitudes and dynamic needs, not confession. Work on current risky thinking and situations rather than demanding full admission; record denial as relevant to attitudes [synthesis] [uncertain: the sources do not address offence denial].
Resistance to authority / anger at the system. Use effective authority (C5): calm tone, behaviour-not-person, explicit choices and consequences. Reflect the anger before structuring. Avoid power struggles over non-negotiables; negotiate everything that is negotiable [source: Multco EPICS presentation; Whetzel & Lowenkamp 2011; synthesis].
Ruptures from the dual role (e.g. after you report a breach). Plan ahead with role clarification so it is never a surprise. Afterwards: name the rupture, explain what you did and why, acknowledge their reaction without retracting the decision, re-link to their goals, and return to reinforcement quickly [synthesis].
Non-adherence to homework. Check responsivity first (literacy, chaos, misunderstanding); shrink the task; rehearse it in session; agree when and where it will be done; reinforce partial completion; review every time so homework is seen to matter [source: Multco EPICS presentation for clear expectations; rest synthesis].
Non-compliance with conditions. Apply graduated, proportionate responses (C6) paired with problem solving on the underlying need (e.g. missed appointments due to work hours); avoid escalating to intensive or custodial responses for low-risk clients, given RNR's warning that intensive services can raise low-risk recidivism [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; synthesis].
Overwhelm, crisis or acute distress. Drop the session structure for acute crises [source: Bonta et al. 2021]. Stabilise, then return to the structure next session. If symptoms (anxiety, mental disorder) block learning, treat or refer for them first as a specific responsivity step [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007].
Suicide or self-harm risk. Not addressed in the RNR sources [uncertain]. Follow current standard risk assessment and safety-planning practice and your service's protocol; for people in custody or recently released, be aware these are recognised high-risk periods; lethal-means counselling covers safe storage and removal of means only; coordinate with mental health services and document [synthesis].
Disclosure of new offending or risk to others. Clarify reporting duties at the outset (B2); when disclosure occurs, follow legal and service obligations, tell the client what you must do, and continue the work where possible [synthesis].
Cognitive limitations, low literacy, concrete thinking. Minimise abstract concepts, emphasise behavioural practice and role-play, use visuals for the Behaviour Sequence, shorter intervention segments, more repetition [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; specifics synthesis].
Gender, culture and Indigenous clients. Plan specific responsivity: remove barriers such as childcare; for Indigenous clients, include elders and ceremony alongside structured CBT [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007]. Check the validity of your risk tool for the client's group [synthesis].
Client wants to work on non-criminogenic issues (e.g. trauma, self-esteem). Acknowledge them and address them if they block participation or refer them on; explain your focus on what drives reoffending, and link their concerns to criminogenic targets where honest to do so [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; synthesis].
"Deficit-focused" feel; client disengages from risk talk. Use the Strength principle (A2) and frame goals as approach goals. Some services combine RNR with the Good Lives Model; Andrews, Bonta & Wormith (2011) argue GLM adds little that RNR does not already contain, while Ward and colleagues argue the reverse [uncertain: see Wikipedia references]. Bonta (2023) notes the 15-principle model already includes respect, strengths and human service [source: Bonta 2023].
Low-risk client referred for intensive treatment. Advocate for minimal intervention and against mixing with higher-risk groups; document the risk-principle rationale; use professional discretion only for specified reasons [source: Bonta & Andrews 2007; Bonta 2023].
Practitioner drift (sessions become compliance checks). Use recorded-session review and peer coaching (E1); STICS showed trained officers shifted time toward attitudes and criminogenic needs [source: Bonta et al. 2021].

Sources

Sources

Further reading (not drawn on)

Bonta, J., & Andrews, D. A. (2017). The Psychology of Criminal Conduct (6th ed.). Routledge. (Source of the 15 principles; content taken via Bonta 2023.)
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R. D. (1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17(1), 19–52.
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2011). The Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model: Does adding the Good Lives Model contribute to effective crime prevention? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(7), 735–755.
Ward, T., Melser, J., & Yates, P. M. (2007). Reconstructing the Risk-Need-Responsivity model. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12(2), 208–228.
Dowden, C., & Andrews, D. A. (2004). The importance of staff practice in delivering effective correctional treatment. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48(2), 203–214.
Bourgon, G., & Armstrong, B. (2005). Transferring the principles of effective treatment into a "real world" prison setting. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32(1), 3–25. (Dosage-hours figures, not verified.)
Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. Motivational Interviewing (various editions).
Bush, J., Glick, B., & Taymans, J. Thinking for a Change curriculum (National Institute of Corrections).

← Previous · II-153Structured cognitive-behavioural training Next · II-155 →Good Lives Model