Progress toward Motivational Interviewing Proficiency in Corrections: Results of a Colorado Staff Development Program

• Author: Brad Bogue,Diane Pasini-Hill,Fred Pampel
• Date: 01 June 2013
• Published date: 01 June 2013
• DOI: 10.3818/JRP.15.1.2013.37
• Subject Matter: Toward Evidence-Based Decision Making in Community Corrections: Research and Strategies for Successful Implementation



*



PROGRESS TOWARD MOTIVATIONAL INTERVIEWING

PROFICIENCY IN CORRECTIONS: RESULTS OF A COLORADO

STAFF DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Brad Bogue

Justice Assessment and Training

Fred Pampel

University of Colorado, Boulder

Diane Pasini-Hill

Colorado State Off‌ice of Research and Statistics

JUSTICE RESEARCH AND POLICY, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2013

© 2013 Justice Research and Statistics Association

DOI: 10.3818/JRP.15.1.2013.37

* Abstract

This study examines the outcomes of one effort to implement motivational interviewing

practices among selected agents working in 17 Colorado criminal justice agencies. As

part of a project designed to improve implementation capacity, 90 participating off‌icers

underwent systematic training and coaching and then were observed via audiotapes

or direct observation in sessions with offenders. Project staff coded interactions with

offenders using measures of motivational interviewing skills (e.g., open questions, com-

plex ref‌lections). Analysis of pre- and post-intervention changes showed considerable

improvement from the training/coaching regime, but use of taped sessions with subse-

quent feedback did most to facilitate off‌icer prof‌iciency and offender change talk.

We thank Kim English and David Bonaiuto of the Colorado Department of Public Safety

and Statistics, training participants, and off‌icials from several Colorado State organizations:

Off‌ice of Public Safety, Department of Human Services, Department of Corrections, and Ju-

dicial Branch. For more information about J-SAT or about the coding and coaching services

we offer, contact Brad Bogue, J-SAT, 2450 Central Avenue, Boulder CO 80301 (phone: 303-

544-9876, email: BradBogue@aol.com).

To w a r d Ev i d E n c E -Ba s E d dEc i s i o n Ma k i n g i n co M M u n i T y co r r E c T i o n s :

rE s E a r c h a n d sT r a T E g i E s f o r su c c E s s f u l iM p l E M E n Ta T i o n

P



Scholars and practitioners in the criminal justice f‌ield have devoted much attention

to identifying programs that prevent or reduce substance abuse, recidivism, and be-

havioral problems of offenders. Many programs have proven successful not only by

treating the offenders (Andrews et al., 1990; Aos, Miller, & Drake, 2006; Dowden

& Andrews, 2004; Lowenkamp, Latessa, & Holsinger, 2006; Smith, Gendreau, &

Swartza, 2010), but also by utilizing staff development strategies that are broader in

scope than formal training alone (Bonta et al., 2010; Bonta et al., 2011; Robinson

et al., 2012; Taxman, 2008). These latter programs help off‌icers interact more ef-

fectively with offenders and help agencies better guide and motivate staff.

However, program change encompasses the diff‌icult tasks of reorienting the

culture of an agency and the actions of individual off‌icers. Structural change with-

in organizations comes slowly and habits of off‌icers tend to persist. Under these

conditions, implementing new practices through training alone often proves in-

suff‌icient (Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005; Madson & Camp-

bell, 2006; Miller, Yahne, Moyers, Martinez, & Pirritano, 2004; Ruark, Bogue, &

Diebel, 2007; Simpson, 2002).

A huge literature on organizational change highlights the diff‌iculties in imple-

menting new strategies for improvement in criminal justice agencies. For example,

studies of program evaluation have increasingly been supplemented by studies of

program implementation (Belenko, Wexler, & Taxman, 2008; Blase & Fixsen,

2005; Mihalic, Irwin, Fagan, Ballard, & Elliot, 2004; Van Dyke & Naoom, 2011).

Indeed, the f‌ield of implementation science has emerged to study the gap between

what is known to be effective practice (theory and science) and what is actually

done (policy and practice). In the words of Fixsen and colleagues (Fixsen et al.,

2005, p. 2), “implementation is a decidedly complex endeavor, more complex than

the policies, programs, procedures, techniques, or technologies that are the subject

of the implementation efforts.”

This study presents the results from one strategy used to implement program

change in criminal justice agencies in Colorado. At the behest of the Colorado

Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, f‌ive departments and 17 agencies

of the Colorado state government implemented an evidence-based program to im-

prove treatment of offenders. Motivational interviewing (MI) was originally devel-

oped by William Miller and Stephen Rollnick (Miller & Rollnick, 1991; Miller &

Rollnick, 2002) to assist in preparing people to change addictive behavior. Over

the past 20 years MI has additionally proven to be useful in working with broader

and more diverse populations than originally intended. MI has been shown to

improve client engagement (Carroll et al., 2006; Lundahl & Burke, 2009), reten-

tion (Burke, Dunn, Atkins, & Phelps, 2004; McMurran, 2009), treatment compli-

ance (Lundahl, Kunz, Brownell, Tollefson, & Burke, 2010), and clinical outcomes

(Burke et al., 2004; Rubak, Sandboek, Lauritzen, & Christensen, 2005; Vasilaki,

Hosier, & Cox, 2006). It has had success with alcohol and other drug addiction

populations, as well as with mental health clients—groups that overlap consider-

ably with corrections populations. By implementing MI, the agencies aimed to