Evaluation of the Practice Guide for Intervention (PGI): Staff Perceptions Five Years After Implementation

Authors: Sarah Cassidy, Sasha Nahleen, Chee Seng Chong, Ofir Thaler, & Mark Howard

Executive Summary

The Practice Guide for Intervention (PGI) is a suite of exercises that can be applied by Community Corrections Officers (CCOs) as part of routine supervision. These exercises are designed to enhance the behaviour change content of supervision sessions by providing a structure for officers to help supervisees address their criminogenic needs.

The PGI was introduced in 2016 and has since undergone further development to address identified limitations and integrate the growing evidence base for best practice. Ongoing delivery of the PGI in recent years has also been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The current study aims to understand current staff perceptions of the utility and delivery of the PGI, taking into account more recent developments in PGI content and practices in the context of officers’ more established use of the model as part of their business as usual. To achieve these aims, staff perceptions were sampled through a state-wide online survey administered to CCOs and semi-structured interviews conducted with Unit Leaders (ULs).

Key findings

Most officers perceived rehabilitation and monitoring compliance of people under their supervision as integral functions of their role. ULs provided a similar response, describing the role of a CCO as balancing compliance monitoring and behaviour change, the latter of which was deemed especially important.

Most respondents agreed that the PGI is a useful behaviour change tool that helped officers identify and address criminogenic needs and improve their interactions with their supervisees. However, they raised areas of improvement around the utility and inclusivity of PGI exercises to certain individuals such as those from culturally and linguistically diverse communities.

Officers reported feeling confident in their skills and ability to deliver the PGI model as intended. Some ULs, however, identified areas for improvement and felt that additional resources and support provided for officers’ continuous skill development would assist them with delivery. For example, ULs noted that advanced training on how to initiate difficult behaviour change conversations could help their officers be more effective in delivering the PGI.

Respondents noted several factors facilitating PGI delivery, including the new roles of phone and video supervision sessions that were introduced during the pandemic lockdowns, the positive attitudes of new officers that closely align with principles underlying the PGI, and the assistance of various support people and tools (e.g., Practice Managers, the PGI User Guide) in fostering officers’ skill development. Identified barriers to delivery included perceived challenges related to staff resistance to the PGI model, the tension between delivering quality service versus meeting quantitative KPIs, and the need for ongoing staff skills development. Respondents identified opportunities for continuous improvement around continued reinforcement of positive perceptions of the model with clear communications about the directions and purposes of the PGI, and the provision of additional training and resources to support officers in performing their roles.

Conclusion

The current study gives indications that the PGI model continues to be widely accepted and applied by Community Corrections staff. Staff viewed the PGI as a useful tool in promoting behaviour change and improving the structure of sessions. The findings also emphasise how support resources for the PGI are key to ongoing skills development and confidence in service delivery. While some continued resistance to the model was noted by senior staff, this was moderated by perceptions that officers’ attitudes and buy-in had improved over time. The study identified some opportunities for improvement and avenues for best practice, including increasing the inclusivity of content and further integrating the PGI into training regimes, highlighting the value of continuous cycles of evidence-based review and development of the PGI as part of its ongoing implementation by Corrective Services NSW.