Skip to main content

Can circles of support and accountability (CoSA) significantly reduce sexual recidivism? Results from a randomized controlled trial in Minnesota

Journal of Experimental Criminology volume 14, pages 463–484 (2018)Cite this article

Abstract

Objectives

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Minnesota Circles of Support and Accountability (MnCOSA), a sex offender reentry program implemented by the Minnesota Department of Corrections in 2008.

Methods

Using a randomized controlled trial, this study compares recidivism and cost–benefit outcomes among sex offenders in the MnCOSA (N = 50) and control groups (N = 50).

Results

The results suggest MnCOSA significantly reduced sexual recidivism, lowering the risk of rearrest for a new sex offense by 88%. In addition, MnCOSA significantly decreased all four measures of general recidivism, with reductions ranging in size from 49 to 57%. As a result of the reduction in recidivism, findings from the cost–benefit analysis reveal the program has generated an estimated $2 million in costs avoided to the state, resulting in a benefit of $40,923 per participant. For every dollar spent on MnCOSA, the program has yielded an estimated benefit of $3.73.

Conclusions

Although difficult to implement, the CoSA model is a cost-effective intervention for sex offenders that could also be applied to other correctional populations with a high risk of violent recidivism.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. J. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 7–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aos, S., & Drake, E. (2013). Prison, police, and programs: Evidence-based options that reduce crime and save money (Doc. No. 13-11-1901). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bales, W. D., & Mears, D. P. (2008). Inmate social ties and the transition to society: Does visitation reduce recidivism? Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 45, 287–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bates, A., Macrae, R., Williams, D., & Webb, C. (2012). Ever-increasing circles: A descriptive study of Hampshire and Thames Valley circles of support and accountability 2002–2009. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 18, 355–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bates, A., Saunders, R., & Wilson, C. (2007). Doing something about it: A follow-up study of sex offender participating in Thames Valley circles of support and accountability. British Journal of Community Justice, 5, 19–42.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bates, A., Williams, D., Wilson, C., & Wilson, R. J. (2014). Circles south east: The first 10 years 2002–2012. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58, 861–885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Berg, M., & Huebner, B. M. (2010). Reentry and the ties that bind: An examination of social ties, employment, and recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 28, 382–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Berk, R. A., Sherman, L., Barnes, G., Kurtz, E., & Ahlman, L. (2009). Forecasting murder within a population of probationers and parolees: A high stake application of statistical learning. Journal of Royal Statistical Society, 172, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Camp, S. D., Daggett, D. M., Kwon, O., & Klein-Saffran, J. (2008). The effect of faith program participation on prison misconduct: The Life Connections program. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 389–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Caudy, M. S., Durso, J. M., & Taxman, F. S. (2013). How well do dynamic needs predict recidivism? Implications for risk assessment and risk reduction. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 458–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cochran, J. C. (2014). Breaches in the wall: Imprisonment, social support, and recidivism. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 51, 200–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cohen, M. A., & Piquero, A. R. (2009). New evidence on the monetary value of saving a high risk youth. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 25, 25–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. DeLisi, M., Kosloski, A., Sween, M., Hachmeister, E., Moore, M., & Drury, A. (2010). Murder by numbers: Monetary costs imposed by a sample of homicide offenders. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 21, 501–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Derkzen, D., Gobeil, R., & Gileno, J. (2009). Visitation and post-release outcomes among federally-sentenced offenders. Research report. Ottawa, Ontario: Correctional Service of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Duwe, G. (2012). Predicting first-time sexual offending among prisoners without a prior sex offense history: The Minnesota Sexual Criminal Offending Risk Estimate (MnSCORE). Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39(1), 434–1,454.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Duwe, G. (2013). Can circles of support and accountability (COSA) work in the United States? Preliminary results from a randomized experiment in Minnesota. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 25, 143–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Duwe, G. (2014a). The development, validity, and reliability of the Minnesota Screening Tool Assessing Recidivism Risk (MnSTARR). Criminal Justice Policy Review, 25, 579–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Duwe, G. (2014b). To what extent does civil commitment reduce sexual recidivism? Estimating the selective incapacitation effects in Minnesota. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42, 193–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Duwe, G. (2015). What has worked and what has not with Minnesota sex offenders: A review of the evidence. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 21, 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Duwe, G. (2017). Better practices in the development and validation of recidivism risk assessments: The Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool-4 (MnSOST-4). Criminal Justice Policy Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403417718608.

  21. Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2013). Blessed be the social tie that binds the effects of prison visitation on offender recidivism. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 24, 271–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Duwe, G., & Clark, V. (2015). Importance of program integrity: Outcome evaluation of a gender-responsive, cognitive-behavioral program for female offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 14, 301–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Duwe, G., & Donnay, W. (2008). The impact of Megan’s law on sex offender recidivism: The Minnesota experience. Criminology, 46, 411–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Duwe, G., Hallett, M., Hays, J., Jang, S. J., & Johnson, B. (2015). Bible college participation and prison misconduct: A preliminary analysis. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 54, 371–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Duwe, G., & Johnson, B. (2016). The effects of prison visits from community volunteers on offender recidivism. The Prison Journal, 96, 279–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Duwe, G., & King, M. (2013). Can faith-based correctional programs work? An outcome evaluation of the InnerChange Freedom Initiative in Minnesota. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57, 813–841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Firth, D. (1993). Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika, 80, 27–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Fox, K. J. (2013). Circles of support & accountability: Final report prepared for the State of Vermont Department of Corrections. Retrieved from: http://www.doc.state.vt.us/about/reports/circles-of-support-accountability-final-report/view .

  29. Gendreau, P., French, S., & Gionet, A. (2004). What works (what doesn’t work): The principles of effective correctional treatment. Journal of Community Corrections, 13, 4–6.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works! Criminology, 34, 575–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hannem, S., & Petrunik, M. (2007). Circles of support and accountability: A community justice initiative for the reintegration of high-risk sex offenders. Contemporary Justice Review, 10, 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hoing, M., Vogelvang, B., & Bogaerts, S. (2017). “I am a different man now”—Sex offenders in circles of support and accountability: A prospective study. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61, 751–772.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Johnson, B. R., & Larson, D. B. (2003). The InnerChange freedom initiative: A preliminary evaluation of a faith-based prison program. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Research on Religion and Urban Civil Society.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kerr, N., Tully, R. J., & Vollm, B. (2017). Volunteering with sex offenders: The attitudes of volunteers toward sex offenders, their treatment, and rehabilitation. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063217691964.

  35. Landenberger, N., & Lipsey, M. (2005). The positive effects of cognitive behavioral programs for offenders: A meta-analysis of factors associated with effective treatment. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 451–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. McCollister, K.E., French, M.T., & Fang, H. (2010). The cost of crime to society: New crime-specific estimates for policy and program evaluation. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 108, 98–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mears, D. P., Cochran, J. C., Siennick, S. E., & Bales, W. D. (2011). Prison visitation and recidivism. Justice Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2011.583932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Mitchell, M. M., Spooner, K., Jia, D., & Zhang, Y. (2016). The effect of prison visitation on reentry success: A meta-analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 47, 74–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Northcutt Bohmert, M., Duwe, G., & Kroovand Hipple, N. (2016). Evaluating restorative justice circles of support and accountability: Can social support overcome structural barriers? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16652627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Penduzzi, P., Cocato, J., Kemper, E., Holford, T. R., & Feinstein, A. R. (1996). A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49, 1373–1379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Schmucker, M., & Lösel, F. (2015). The effects of sexual offender treatment on recidivism: An international meta-analysis of sound quality evaluations. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 597–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Vittinghoff, E., & McCulloch, C. E. (2007). Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and Cox regression. American Journal of Epidemiology, 165, 710–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ward, T. (2002). Good lives and the rehabilitation of offenders: Promises and problems. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 513–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Wilson, R. J., Picheca, J. E., & Prinzo, M. (2005). Circles of support & accountability: An evaluation of the pilot project in south-Central Ontario. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wilson, R. J., Cortoni, F., & McWhinnie, A. W. (2009). Circles of Support & Accountability: A Canadian national replication of outcome findings. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 21, 412–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Minnesota Department of Corrections, 1450 Energy Park Drive, Suite 200, St. Paul, MN, 55108, USA

    Grant Duwe

Authors
  1. Grant Duwe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grant Duwe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Duwe, G. Can circles of support and accountability (CoSA) significantly reduce sexual recidivism? Results from a randomized controlled trial in Minnesota. J Exp Criminol 14, 463–484 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-018-9325-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Sex offender
  • Recidivism
  • Social support
  • Cost–benefit
  • Restorative justice