ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 1
Anticrime Prevention Part 1-Sex Offender Treatment Program
Elliott J. Clemente
The Helms School of Government, Liberty University
CJUS 801
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1
2
Abstract
The subject of sexual crimes brings forth emotions that include fear, anxiety, anger, and
repulsion among the public. The feelings of anxiety and fear contribute to the overly punitive
policies meant to protect the public, which often lead to extra judicial exclusions and violations
of the civil and constitutional rights of the offenders. Isolation, surveillance, and registries are
just a few of the overly punitive policies enforced on this offender population applied to keep the
communities safe. Researchers and mental health professionals are working to develop and
maintain treatment modalities that are in use to address the issue of sexual deviance. Cognitive-
behavior therapy (CBT), Multisystemic Therapy, and Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT)
treatments have effectively reduced offender rates among offenders. These treatments serve as
the foundation for many of the sexually deviant behavioral modification processes. These
treatment programs are in practice in all Western countries. Thus, they are subject to policy and
treatment program evaluation for their reported outcomes in decreasing the sexual offender
recidivism rate in the countries where the procedures are in regular use. As with numerous
procedures, additional research is compulsory to establish causal relationships and develop
supplementary theories and applications.
Keywords: Criminal justice policy, public perceptions, recidivism, sexual offenders,
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 2
Introduction
Sexual crimes involving adults and children are one of the most reprehensible offenses an
individual(s) can undertake. Victims, their families, law enforcement, and prisoners are repulsive
to the act. Sexual offenders find themselves targets (victims) of sexual assaults upon entering the
prison system. Sex offenders are at the bottom of the criminal social order and often find
themselves isolated and the target of violent attacks by other prisoners. A significant number of
correctional staff share the same worldview as the prisoners within the facility for this class of
offenders. Correctional officers and administrative staff were the safety of these individuals;
however, there have been many incidents when officers provided other, more violent prisoners
access to these offenders, leading to severe, and in some cases, death.
The Attitudes exhibited by criminal justice system officials, including attorneys,
correctional staff, and politicians, play a significant role in the sentencing of offenders.
Community surveys have found that 5% to 20% of men admitted to at least one instance of
sexual aggression, and official records indicate that 1% to 2% of the male population will
eventually convicted of sexual crime (Hanson& Mort-Bourgon, 2005).
Because of the perceived level of recidivism among this offender group, Western
populations view them with the most significant level of trepidation statistically; the rate of
reoffending increases with time among this population. The observed sexual recidivism rate is
typically 10% to 15% after five years, but for some offenders, the rate is much higher (Hanson&
Mort-Bourgon, 2025). The recidivism rate indicated the difficulties involved in interacting with
these class offenders. Many in academia view these behaviors as troubling or concerning, which
lends itself to asking why to try rehabilitating. The universally accepted view of these offenders
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 3
allows legislators, regardless of party affiliation, to vote against any attempt to solve the issue.
In-
stead, they often defund or back programs that designate public resources to anything seen as
helping this group.
Often, social program funding is subject to influence by media headlines. The higher the
profile of crime that involves sex offenses, the more the public wants any programs for sex
offenders to be defunded or canceled. Opportunistic politicians will use these headlines to push
their tough-on-crime agenda, which often is accompanied by laws designated for sex offenders.
The laws directed to sex offender programs focus on the need to review policy and the program
by federal, state, or local governments that often provide the grants necessary for the program’s
operation. Two principal arguments used by lawmakers to justify special laws for sex offenders
are the impact of sexual abuse on its victims and society and the high rates of recidivism by sex
offenders (Wilson & Petersilia, 2011).
There is a program that has yielded promising results in reducing the likelihood of sex
offenders reoffending. The Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) program was designed
with the primary aim of reintegrating offenders into society, despite prevailing beliefs that this
group is destined to remain imprisoned indefinitely. Given that many of these individuals will
eventually be released and returned to communities across America, supporting them is crucial.
CoSA offers a means for offenders to successfully transition back into society.
Purpose and Scope of the Assessment
The primary goal of the Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) reintegration
program is to offer practical and mental assistance to sexual offenders, thus curbing the
likelihood of recidivism resulting from the negative impact of societal reactions to the nature of
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 4
their offense(s). This model first emerged in Canada and has since been implemented in various
countries, including New Zealand, England, Wales, and select regions within the United States,
with California being the most notable adopter.
In the Early days of the program, it was all volunteers with their primary objective to
provide support for high-risk sex offenders who completed the maximum sentence assigned by
the courts and were required to be released back into the community. The CoSA model is
designed to be a volunteer-based support network surrounding an offender who is at risk for
reoffending, in part, because of his or her isolation safety (Fox, 2015). Professionals from
different domains collaborate to determine the most effective approach to tackle the myriad of
issues that offenders face. The central objective of the model is to assimilate these offenders into
the mainstream population. Establishing social connections is a crucial component of preventing
participants from committing additional crimes.
Goal and Objectives
The primary objective of a sexual offender program is to prevent the occurrence of such
behavior and eliminate the potential threat it poses. The goal of CoSA is there to promote the
successful integration of released men into the community by providing support, advocacy, and a
way to be meaningfully accountable in exchange for living safely in the community (Wilson et
al., 2008). Research expertise from behavioral scientists, researchers, and criminologists can help
minimize the risks that sexual offenders pose to society. To ensure the safety of everyone
involved, experts have created treatment methods that cater to the specific needs of sexual
offenders to aid in their rehabilitation, and reintegration into safety is a crucial element in any
treatment plan.
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 5
Meeting the unique needs of this specific population has been a top priority, with a
particular focus on high-risk offenders. This group, when compared to others, has the highest
likelihood of reoffending, resulting in longer sentences and a greater detachment from society.
Once released back into their communities, they also experience the most isolation and require
the
highest level of supervision. Many experts in the academic community agree that the most
effective approach to addressing reintegration challenges facing high-risk sexual offenders is to
offer comprehensive emotional and psychological support.
Addressing the unique requirements of this target population has served the primary
goal(s) with particular emphasis on high-risk offenders. This group, more than others, has the
highest recidivism rate. Because of the elevated probability of reoffending, these offenders tend
to serve the maximum sentences. Due to this, they are the furthest removed from society. At the
same time, incarcerated experience the highest amount of isolation once released back to the
community and
require the highest level of supervision.
Many in the academic community believe the most optimal way to address designated
issues of reintegration for high-risk sexual offenders is to provide intense emotional and
psychological support. The Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA) was conceived in
conjunction with the Canadian Correctional system to provide such support. Another aspect of
the original character found that those high-profile individual(s) required similar reintegration
supervision as high-risk offenders.
Goal and Objectives of the Circles of Support & Accountability
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 6
The goal of the Circle of Support & Accountability (CoSA) is to assist in the integration
of sex offenders while providing support services that include mental health and other social
services. Multiple fields have worked collaboratively to address the issue of individuals who
target minors and susceptible individuals for sexual pleasure. The scientific and clinical
communities have attempted to devise best practice models demonstrating efficacy in reducing
recidivism; however, the total eradication of sexual offending is unlikely shortly (Wilson et al.,
2009).
When developing, executing, and assessing sexual offender programs, it is crucial to con-
sider the interests of all parties involved and measure the efficacy of the models directly.
Professionals in the fields of healthcare, science, and research are persistently seeking optimal
solutions that balance community safety and the successful reintegration of sexual offenders.
Various physiological principles have demonstrated the potential to decrease the actions that lead
to sexual re-offense, including the Cognitive-behavior treatment intervention technique, which
has been reported to result in a reduction of recidivism. Often the Cognitive-behavior treatment
works in conjunction with risk-need-responsivity principles. The responsivity principle states
that the selection of modes and styles of treatment for offenders should also be based on findings
about which type of treatment generally works with offenders (Wilson et al., 2009).
Questions that Narrow Down the Scope of the Circles of Support & Accountability
Program
To ensure a successful research assignment, it is crucial to formulate questions that are
relevant to the subject matter. Conducting a comprehensive investigation with efficiency and
professionalism is key to extracting valuable information from the research. These thoughtfully
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 7
crafted questions will serve as a guide and maintain a clear focus for your thesis. The following
queries focus on the scope of the Circle of Support & Accountability (CoSA) program.
Are participants considered high-risk offenders?
Have they served an inappropriately long sentence as compared to other offenders?
Are other modalities other than long harsh prison sentences that can accomplish similar
outcomes?
Has social isolation served as an effective deterrent?
Is the implementation of treatment programs viewed favorably by the communities where they
are located?
Does the Circle of Support & Accountability (CoSA) hold offenders accountable for their
conduct?
Although the Circle of Support & Accountability (CoSA) has shown some success in Canada
and some US states, such as California, it is unclear whether it can be implemented nationwide,
and if so, will it produce similar results?
Is the use of the STATIC-99 tool still relevant to assessing risk for sexual and violent
recidivism?
Does the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sexual Offenses Recidivism (RRASOR) serve as a
replacement for the STATIC-99 tool?
What are the fundamental features of the CoSA treatment program?
How does the CoSA program measure compared to other treatment programs for sexual
offenders?
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 8
Conclusion
Based on recent research, there is ongoing discussion regarding the effectiveness of
supervising sexual offenders in an unrestricted setting. Studies have demonstrated that high-risk
offenders tend to respond better to a combination of supervision and management support. The
CoSA model has presented compelling evidence that sexual offenders, particularly those with
high-risk profiles, can overcome their patterns of repeated failure (Wilson et al., 2008). Evidence
suggests that a positive interaction with the criminal justice system can provide a viable solution.
Such an approach offers a unique opportunity to increase offender accountability while
simultaneously providing the community with a greater sense of safety.
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 9
Christian Worldview
Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for
him if a great milestone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea (English
Standard Version, Mark 9:42).
References
Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual
offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies.
Clinic forensic psychology and law (pp.67-76). Routledge.
http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1154
Fox, K. J. (2015). Contextualizing the Policy and Pragmatics of Reintegrating Sex Offenders.
Sexual Abuse, 29(1), 28-50.
http://doi.org/10.1177/1079063215574711
Olver, M. E., Marshall, L. E., Marshall, W. L., & Nicholaichuk, T. P. (2018). Long-term
ANTICRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM: PART 1 10
Outcome Assessment of the Effects on Subsequent Re-offense Rates of a Prison-Based
CBT/RNR Sex Offender Treatment Program with Strength-Based Elements.
Sexual Abuse, 32(2),127-153.
http://doi.org/10.1177/1079063218807486
Polizzi, D. M., Mackenzie, D. L., & Hickman, L. J. (1999). What works in adult sex offender
treatment? A review of prison-and-non-based treatment programs.
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43(3), 357-
374.
The English Standard Version Bible. (2001). Crossway.
Tyler, N., Gannon, T. A., & Olver, M. E. (2021). Does Treatment for Sex Offenders Work?
Current Psychiatry Reports, 23(8), 51.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-021-01259-3
Wilson, J. Q., & Peterson, J. (2011). Crime and Public Policy.
Oxford University Press.
Wilson, R. J., Cortoni, F., & McWhinnie, A. J. (2009). Circles of Support & Accountability: A
Canadian national replication of outcome findings.
Sex Abuse, 21(4), 412-430.
http://doi.org/10.1177/1079063209347724
