“Motivational Interviewing (with a Criminal Justice Focus) Annotated Bibliography.” National Institute of Corrections. National Institute of Corrections. Information Center (NICIC) (Aurora CO), 2016.
Motivational Interviewing (MI) was introduced to the field of corrections in the 1990s through the Evidence-based Practices (EBP) Model as a method for enhancing intrinsic motivation. Since that time, agencies throughout the U.S., in all criminal justice settings, have—to a greater or lesser degree—explored if, when, and how to implement this approach to communicating, building rapport, and tapping into the internal motivation of the clients and staff members they work with. This annotated bibliography contains the written resources pertaining specifically to the criminal justice field. In addition, certain documents considered seminal to the training, implementation, evaluation, coaching, and quality assurance of MI skills are included.

Bush, Jack, Barry Glick, and Juliana Taymans. “Thinking for a Change 4.0 | National Institute of Corrections.” Thinking for a change 4.0. National Institute of Corrections, 2016.
The program is designed to be provided to justice-involved adults and youth, males and females. It is intended for groups of eight to twelve and should be delivered only by trained facilitators. Due to its integrated structure, T4C is a closed group, meaning members need to start at the beginning of a cycle, and may not join the group mid-stream (lesson five is a logical cut-off point for new group members).

Taxman, Faye S. “Tools of the Trade: A Guide to Incorporating Science Into Practice.” National Institute of Corrections . Maryland Dept. of Public Safety and Correctional Services, National Institute of Corrections (NIC) (Washington DC), 2004.
The application of evidence-based research findings to the practice of offender supervision is explained. Sections of this manual include: introduction -- supervision as a behavioral management process to reduce recidivism; behavior and change; assessment and planning; communication tools; information tools; incentives to shape offender behavior; service tools; offender types; and guiding principles.

Dierkhising, Carly B, and Shawn C Marsh. “A Trauma Primer for Juvenile Probation and Juvenile Detention Staff.” National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention, October 24, 2019.
Juvenile justice probation and detention workers play an important role in helping system-involved youth and families navigate justice and social service systems; achieving goals of accountability, competency, and community safety; and promoting safety, self-determination, and social connectedness as conditions of healing. In doing this work, juvenile probation and detention staff are also uniquely poised to serve a critical social support function for vulnerable youth and families. Although much work remains to be done to elucidate the key policies and procedures associated with a true “trauma-informed” justice system, the tips offered here provide juvenile justice staff a foundation for understanding the basic dynamics of trauma, recognizing trauma reactions, and maintaining self-care.This brief presents definitions of key concepts, overviews how children respond to trauma, and offers tips for juvenile probation and detention staff seeking to be more trauma-informed in their work.

“Publications About Brain Anatomy and Physiology.” National Institute of Mental Health. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2020.
This science education activity book intended for children ages 8-12 years old helps kids learn facts about the brain through games and puzzles about brain science and research. This activity book can be downloaded and printed. This fact sheet outlines how a teenager’s brain grows, matures, and adapts to the world. It also presents information on the teen brain’s resiliency, vulnerability to stress and mental health problems, and sleep patterns in teens.

“Behavior Management of Justice-Involved Individuals: Contemporary Research and State-of-the-Art Policy and Practice.” National Institute of Corrections. Center for Effective Public Policy (CEPP) (Silver Spring MD), National Institute of Corrections (NIC) (Washington DC), 2015.
There remains an endless “revolving door” of individuals who are placed on community supervision, engage in further problematic behavior, and return to correctional facilities to likely repeat the cycle again. This paper provides a policy and practice framework to support the development of effective behavior management systems that will increase the compliance and prosocial behavior of justice-involved individuals both during and following their community supervision. [Abstract from Introduction] 

Case Study: How Joe was Affected by His Officer 

Community corrections officers can have a significant influence on outcomes by the ways in which they interact with individuals on supervision. Much of the leading training models teach officers the proper skillset using cognitive-behavioral techniques that, when used properly, encourage both short- and long-term prosocial change among individuals under supervision. Here is one case study that explains this process in practice. Note the terms that are highlighted as references to this and other learning domains on this website. 

Joe is a 32-year-old, white man who lives in a rural part of Arizona. A couple of years ago, after losing his manufacturing job, he started using various pain killers on a regular basis, coupled with his continued alcohol use. He started stealing from friends and family members. Eventually, he was arrested on theft and drug charges and placed on probation for a period of two years. That’s when he first met Cliff, his probation officer. In their first couple of meetings together, Cliff laid out exactly what Joe had to do in order to get off probation: abide by his terms, attend drug treatment, and maintain employment, among others. At first, Joe didn’t like of any of what Cliff had explained to him. He didn’t think he needed treatment at all; he just got caught up with life by losing his job. He thought he could get back on his feet in no time. After a few months of being on probation, Joe kept using drugs, had a positive drug screen, and missed one treatment session. Cliff immediately addressed this with Joe in a constructive manner. Joe was expecting Cliff to berate him about his violations and possibly throw him in jail. However, Cliff gave Joe an opportunity to provide his side of the story of what’s going on in his life. Through that interaction, Joe realized that maybe he did need some help; much more than he realized before. Over the next several meetings with Cliff, which seem to generally be about 30 minutes each time, Joe actually began look forward to talking with Cliff. They talked about his progress, his problem areas, and ways that he still needed help. In Joe’s mind, Cliff was always firm, consistent, and always held him accountable, but he was also supportive and compassionate. After about six months, Joe became sober and found a good job that paid the bills and kept him out of trouble. What Joe didn’t know about Cliff is that he was trained in a particular program that provided him with the skills to enhance the quality of his interactions with probationers and encourage positive behavioral changes among probationers. It certainly seemed to be working, because Joe was on his path to becoming a changed man…in a good way.

“The Science of Adolescent Risk-Taking: Workshop Report.” National Library of Medicine. Institute of Medicine (US) and National Research Council (US) Committee on the Science of Adolescence, 2011.
The workshop discussions of biobehavioral and psychological perspectives on adolescent risk behavior alluded repeatedly to the importance of the cultural and social contexts in which young people develop. Presenters described research on the ways family, peers, schools, communities, and media and technology influence adolescent behavior and risk-taking. 

“The Potential of Community Corrections to Improve Safety and Reduce Incarceration.” Vera Institute of Justice. Center on Sentencing and Corrections, July 2013.
As the size and cost of jails and prisons have grown, so too has the awareness that public investment in incarceration has not yielded the expected return in public safety. This creates an opportunity to reexamine the wisdom of our reliance on institutional corrections—incarceration in prisons or jails—and to reconsider the role of community-based corrections, which encompasses probation, parole, and pretrial supervision. However, it could also be an opportunity wasted if care is not taken to bolster the existing capacity of community corrections. With this report, Vera’s Center on Sentencing and Corrections provides an overview of the state of community corrections, the transformational practices emerging in the field (including those in need of further research), and recommendations to policymakers on realizing the full value of community supervision to taxpayers and communities.

Taxman, Faye S. “Tools of the Trade: A Guide to Incorporating Science Into Practice.” National Institute of Corrections . Maryland Dept. of Public Safety and Correctional Services, National Institute of Corrections (NIC) (Washington DC), 2004.
The application of evidence-based research findings to the practice of offender supervision is explained. Sections of this manual include: introduction -- supervision as a behavioral management process to reduce recidivism; behavior and change; assessment and planning; communication tools; information tools; incentives to shape offender behavior; service tools; offender types; and guiding principles.

Bourgon, Guy, Leticia Gutierrez, Jennifer Ashton, and Public Safety Canada. “The Evolution of Community Supervision Practice: The Transformation from Case Manager to Change Agent.” United States Courts. The Journal of the American Probation and Parole Association: Perspectives, 36(3), 64-81, 2012.
With the introduction of risk and need assessments into routine practice, Community Supervision Officers are now required to administer and score these instruments. Not only must Community Supervision Officers communicate this risk/need information to other criminal justice professionals, but they are asked to utilize this information for classification purposes and to interpret the information to develop case-management plans. Officers are also asked to make efforts to maximize offender compliance, plan and manage the client’s rehabilitative services, and are often expected to facilitate positive prosocial changes in the clients that they work with.

Gifford-Smith, Mary, Kenneth A Dodge, Thomas J.  Dishion, and Joan McCord. “Peer Influence in Children and Adolescents: Crossing the Bridge from Developmental to Intervention Science,” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 33, no. 3 (2005): 255–265.
Considerable evidence supports the hypothesis that peer relationships influence the growth of problem behavior in youth. Developmental research consistently documents the high levels of covariation between peer and youth deviance, even controlling for selection effects. Ironically, the most common public interventions for deviant youth involve segregation from mainstream peers and aggregation into settings with other deviant youth. Developmental research on peer influence suggests that desired positive effects of group interventions in education, mental health, juvenile justice, and community programming may be offset by deviant peer influences in these settings. Given the public health policy issues raised by these findings, there is a need to better understand the conditions under which these peer contagion effects are most pronounced with respect to intervention foci and context, the child's developmental level, and specific strategies for managing youth behavior in groups.

Green, Amy E., et al. "Predicting Delinquency in Adolescence and Young Adulthood: A Longitudinal Analysis of Early Risk Factors." Youth Violence & Juvenile Justice 6, no. 4.
This study examined the ability of early risk factors to predict delinquency referrals. Significant risk factors included externalizing behaviors, prenatal smoking, parent marital status, and mother's education. Students with three or more risk factors had eight times the number of delinquency referrals than those with no identified risk factors.

Taxman, Faye. “Reentry and Supervision: One is Impossible Without the Other,” Corrections Today, April 2007, 69, 2: 98-101,105. 
The article focuses on the use of the supervision process to help an offender become a productive citizen. It cites the similarities between case management and supervision. It details the model of supervision that is focused on facilitating offender change. It mentions the selection criteria that have been used for the Proactive Community Supervision (PCS) project.