skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 243832 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Evaluability Assessments of the Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) Model, Cross-Site Report
Author(s): Ian A. Elliott, Ph.D.; Gary Zajac, Ph.D.; Courtney A. Meyer, M.A.
Date Published: July 2013
Page Count: 94
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Grant Number: 2012-IJ-CX-0008
Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Grants and Funding; Program/Project Evaluation; Report (Grant Sponsored)
Format: Document; Document (Online)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This report assesses the viability of an evaluation of the Circles of Support and Accountability model (COSA), which is a restorative justice based reentry program for high-risk sex offenders with little or no pro-social support.
Abstract: The assessment of COSA across five sites concludes that there is no methodological or ethical reason why a randomized control trial of COSA could not be conducted in the United States; however, there are five potential obstacles that must be addressed in order to conduct a successful experimental evaluation of COSA: choice of outcomes; significant differences in program implementation; core member selection issues; sample size, site capacity, and low baselines of recidivism; and ownership of data. These potential obstacles can be addressed with a combination of realistic precision in program implementation, rigorous experimental control, and an increase in real-world resources. Three recommendations for action are proposed. First, conduct an experimental evaluation of the Vermont COSA program alone. Second, conduct an experimental evaluation that combines the Vermont COSA and COSA Fresno programs. A third possibility is to allow the fledgling sites to develop and conduct a multi-site evaluation of COSA in the future. Under the general COSA structure, participants commit to 1 year of participation in COSA meetings, through which they develop new social bonds with other members and staff, receive assistance in assessing the types of services they need, engage in recognition of their risky behaviors, and develop problem solving skills. To date, there has been no widely accepted evaluation of any COSA program. The current study assessed the viability of a rigorous evaluation of COSA based on site visits to five locations where COSA is operating in the United States: Fresno, CA; Denver, CO; Durham, NC; Lancaster, PA; and Burlington, VT. Extensive data tables, 51 references, and appended supplementary data and information
Main Term(s): Corrections research
Index Term(s): Corrections volunteers; National Evaluation Program; NIJ final report; Post-release programs; Program evaluation; Reentry; Restorative Justice; Sex offender treatment; Sex offenders; Social conditions; Social reintegration; Socialization; Volunteer programs
Note: For individual site reports, see NCJ-243833-37
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=265909

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.