Using Pre-Implementation Assessment to Advance Trauma-Informed Probation Supervision

Background and Purpose: Compared with the general population, people with criminal legal system involvement experience disproportionately high rates of trauma exposure and adverse childhood experiences. Exposure to trauma can lead to inhibited self-regulation, increased impulsivity, criminal legal system involvement, and subsequent recidivism. In response, corrections systems are looking to trauma-informed approaches to improve criminal legal outcomes (e.g., reduce recidivism). Although trauma-informed approaches within corrections demonstrate potential, there is limited guidance on what trauma-informed approaches look like within community supervision settings and how to implement them. This study shares findings from a pre-implementation assessment conducted prior to launching a trauma informed supervision initiative for specialty probation caseloads (e.g., domestic violence, sex offense, gang-related). The aims of the assessment were to (a) assess officer perspectives about trauma-informed supervision, and (b) identify factors that may impact implementation and strategies to address potential barriers.

Methods: The research team interviewed 25 probation administrators and officers. Participants were asked about their perspectives on trauma-informed supervision, anticipated challenges the agency may face in implementing the initiative, and potential strategies to address those challenges. The research team used rapid qualitative analysis methods. Officer perspectives about trauma-informed supervision were assessed for appropriateness (i.e., perceived relevance, usability, practicability). Factors impacting implementation of trauma-informed supervision were coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation strategies identified by participants were categorized based on Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change.

Results: In terms of appropriateness, participants noted the high prevalence of traumatic experiences among people on their caseload, and they believed trauma-informed supervision was relevant to their role and could help decrease recidivism. In terms of factors that could impact implementation, participants noted the importance of individual characteristics of officers, such as their attitudes about trauma-informed supervision and willingness to try new strategies as factors that may impact implementation. Additionally, participants noted factors related to the inner setting (i.e., probation agency), including the potential for inconsistent utilization of trauma-informed supervision strategies and differing levels of leadership support across jurisdictions. In terms of the implementation process, participants noted that ongoing engagement from leaders encourages utilization of supervision strategies. Lastly, participants suggested implementation strategies aligned with changing infrastructure (e.g., changing items in the case management system) and providing interactive assistance to officers (e.g., implementation meetings and case debriefs).

Conclusions and Implications: These findings demonstrate how pre-implementation assessments can aid agency leaders during the preparation phase of a new initiative. Specifically, these assessments provide important information about the implementation context (e.g., the organization and the individuals tasked with implementing the initiative) and allow leaders to develop implementation strategies prior to program implementation. Ultimately, the pre-implementation phase offers a valuable opportunity to lay the groundwork for successful implementation by evaluating the appropriateness of an initiative and identifying strategies an agency can use to overcome implementation barriers.