Advertisement

Do Circles of Support and Accountability Work? A Review of the Literature

  • Rosie Kitson-Boyce
Chapter
Part of the Sexual Crime book series (SEXCR)

Abstract

Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) are growing in popularity on an international scale. To ensure that CoSA projects continue to grow in both success and public confidence, a solid research base is essential. The body of literature on the effectiveness of CoSA, particularly from Canada, US, UK and the Netherlands, is in fact growing. However, it has been argued that there is still not yet enough evidence to determine whether CoSA significantly reduces sexual recidivism by the Core Member (Elliott, Zajac, & Meyer, 2013). The following chapter includes an overview of this debate along with the key CoSA efficacy studies carried out to date. In addition, more qualitative explorations of the psychosocial implications of being involved are considered.

Keywords

CoSA Recidivism Reoffending Sex offenders 

References

  1. Aresti, A., Eatough, V., & Brooks-Gordon, B. (2010). Doing time after time: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of reformed ex-prisoners’ experiences of self-change, identity and career opportunities. Psychology, Crime & Law, 16(3), 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160802516273 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong, S., & Wills, S. (2014a). A review of the Fife circles of support and accountability project commissioned by SACRO—Final report. Research report. Edinburgh: Sacro. Retrieved from www.sccjr.ac.uk
  3. Armstrong, S., & Wills, D. (2014b). Circles of support and accountability (CoSA) in Scotland: Practice, progress and questions. The Scottish Journal for Criminal Justice Studies, 20, 2–13.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 2002–09. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 18(3), 355–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2010.544415 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bates, A., Saunders, R., & Wilson, C. (2007). Doing something about it: A follow-up study of sex offenders participating in Thames Valley circles of support and accountability. British Journal of Community Justice, 5(1), 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(7), 861–885. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X13485362 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bazemore, G., & Erbe, C. (2004). Reintegration and restorative justice: Towards a theory and practice of informal social control and support. In S. Maruna & R. Immarigeon (Eds.), After crime and punishment: Pathways to offender reintegration (pp. 27–56). Devon: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, S., Deakin, J., & Spencer, J. (2008). What people think about the management of sex offenders in the community. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice, 47(3), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2008.00519.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cann, J., Falshaw, L., & Friendship, C. (2004). Sexual offenders discharged from prison in England and Wales: A 21 year reconviction study. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1348/135532504322776816 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duwe, G. (2012). 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(2), 143–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063212453942 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elliott, I. (2014, June 6). CoSA: An inconvenient truth [blog post]. Retrieved from http://nextgenforensic.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/cosa-an-inconvenient-truth/
  12. Elliott, I. A., & Beech, A. R. (2012). A UK cost-benefit analysis of circles of support and accountability interventions. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 25(3), 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063212443385 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elliott, I. A., & Zajac, G. (2015). The implementation of circles of support and accountability in the United States. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 25, 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2015.07.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elliott, I. A., Zajac, G., & Meyer, C. A. (2013). Evaluability assessments of the circles of support and accountability (COSA) model: Cross site report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Office Justice Programs, US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  15. Farrall, S. (2002). Rethinking what works with offenders: Probation, social context and desistance from crime. Cullompton: Willan.Google Scholar
  16. Fox, K. J. (2015a). Theorising community integration as desistance-promotion. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42(1), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854814550028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fox, K. J. (2015b). Contextualizing the policy and pragmatics of reintegrating sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063215574711
  18. Hannem, S. (2011). Experiences in reconciling risk management and restorative justice how circles of support and accountability work restoratively in the risk society. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57(3), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x11432538 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 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(2), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580701372046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanson, R. K. (1997). The development of a brief actuarial risk scale for sexual offense recidivism. User Report 97-04. Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada.Google Scholar
  21. Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(6), 1154–1163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1154 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2009). The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies. Psychological Assessment, 21(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014421 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (2000). Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005482921333 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hanvey, S., Philpot, T., & Wilson, C. (2011). A community based approach to the reduction of sexual offending: Circles of support and accountability. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Höing, M., Bogaerts, S., & Vogelvang, B. (2013). Circles of support and accountability: How and why they work for sex offenders. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 13(4), 267–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2013.808526 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Höing, M., Bogaerts, S., & Vogelvang, B. (2015). Volunteers in circles of support and accountability: Job demands, job resources and outcome. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063215612441
  27. Höing, M., Vogelvang, B., & Bogaerts, S. (2015). “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, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x15612431
  28. LeBel, T. P., Burnett, R., Maruna, S., & Bushway, S. (2008). The chicken and egg’ of subjective and social factors in desistance from crime. European Journal of Criminology, 5(2), 131–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370807087640 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lussier, P., & Gress, C. L. (2014). Community re-entry and the path toward desistance: A quasi-experimental longitudinal study of dynamic factors and community risk management of adult sex offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(2), 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2013.09.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maguire, M., & Raynor, P. (2006). How the resettlement of prisoners promotes desistance from crime or does it? Criminology and Criminal Justice, 6(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895806060665 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marques, J. K., Wiederanders, M., Day, D. M., Nelson, C., & Van Ommeren, A. (2005). Effects of a relapse prevention program on sexual recidivism: Final results from California’s sex offender treatment and evaluation project (SOTEP). Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 17(1), 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320501700108 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Marshall, W. L. (2010). The role of attachments, intimacy, and loneliness in the etiology and maintenance of sexual offending. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 25(1), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681990903550191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marshall, W. L., & Marshall, L. E. (2007). The utility of the random controlled trial for evaluating sexual offender treatment: The gold standard or an inappropriate strategy? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 19(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320701900207 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McAlinden, A. (2005). The use of ‘shame’ with sexual offenders. British Journal of Criminology, 45(3), 373–394. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azh095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McAlinden, A. (2011). ‘Transforming justice’: Challenges for restorative justice in an era of punishment-based corrections. Contemporary Justice Review, 14(4), 383–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580.2011.616369 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McCartan, K., Kemshall, H., Westwood, S., Solle, J., MacKenzie, G., & Pollard, A. (2014). Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA): A case file review of two pilots. Ministry of Justice Analytical Summary. London: Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
  37. McNeill, F. (2009). What works and what’s just? European Journal of Probation, 1(1), 21–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McWhinnie, A. (2015). Circles of support in Canada. Paper presented at the Association of the Treatment of Sexual Abusers 34th Annual Research and Treatment Conference. Montreal, QC, Canada.Google Scholar
  39. Mingus, W., & Burchfield, K. B. (2012). From prison to integration: Applying modified labelling theory to sex offenders. Criminal Justice Studies, 25(1), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2012.657906 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Northcutt Bohmert, M. N., Duwe, G., & Hipple, N. K. (2016). Evaluating restorative justice circles of support and accountability can social support overcome structural barriers? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16652627
  41. Paternoster, R., & Bushway, S. (2009). Desistance and the “feared self”: Toward an identity theory of criminal desistance. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 99(4), 1103–1156.Google Scholar
  42. Richards, K., & McCartan, K. (2017). Public views about reintegrating child sex offenders via circles of support and accountability (COSA): A qualitative analysis. Deviant Behavior, 12(5), 1–17.Google Scholar
  43. Tewksbury, R. (2012). Stigmatization of sex offenders. Deviant Behavior, 33(8), 606–623. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2011.636690 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Thomas, T., Thompson, D., & K. Karstedt. (2014). Assessing the impact of circles of support and accountability on the reintegration of adults convicted of sexual offences in the community. Centre for Criminal Justice Studies, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
  45. Thornton, D., Mann, R., Webster, S., Blud, L., Travers, R., Friendship, C., et al. (2003). Distinguishing and combining risks for sexual and violent recidivism. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 989(1), 225–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2003.tb07308.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Ward, T., Fox, K. J., & Garber, M. (2014). Restorative justice, offender rehabilitation and desistance. Restorative Justice, 2(1), 24–42. https://doi.org/10.5235/20504721.2.1.24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Weaver, B., & McNeill, F. (2015). Lifelines desistance, social relations, and reciprocity. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42(1), 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854814550031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson, C., Bates, A., & Völlm, B. (2010). Circles of support and accountability: An innovative approach to manage high-risk sex offenders in the community. Open Criminology Journal, 3, 48–57. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874917801003010048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilson, R. J., Cortoni, F., & McWhinnie, A. J. (2009). Circles of support & accountability: A Canadian national replication of outcome findings. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 21(4), 412–430. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063209347724 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilson, R. J., & McWhinnie, A. J. (2013). Putting the “community” back in community risk management of persons who have sexually abused. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 8(3-4), 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100987 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wilson, R. J., McWhinnie, A. J., & Wilson, C. (2008). Circles of support and accountability: An international partnership in reducing sexual offender recidivism. Prison Service Journal, 138, 26–36.Google Scholar
  52. Wilson, R. J., Picheca, J. E., & Prinzo, M. (2005). Circles of support and accountability: An evaluation of the pilot project in South-Central Ontario. Ottawa, ON: Correctional Service of Canada.Google Scholar
  53. Wilson, R. J., Picheca, J. E., & Prinzo, M. (2007a). Evaluating the effectiveness of professionally facilitated volunteerism in the community based management of high risk sexual offenders: Part One–Effects on participants and stakeholders. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 46(3), 289–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2007.00475.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wilson, R. J., Picheca, J. E., & Prinzo, M. (2007b). Evaluating the effectiveness of professionally facilitated volunteerism in the community based management of high risk sexual offenders: Part Two–A comparison of the recidivism rates. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 46(4), 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2007.00480.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rosie Kitson-Boyce
    • 1
  1. 1.Nottingham Trent UniversityNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations