How Assessment Tool Design Shapes Case Managers' Behaviour in Sentence Planning

Abstract

Time spent in prison does not automatically lead to rehabilitation. To support rehabilitation, the Estonian Prison Service prepares an individual treatment plan for each inmate serving a sentence exceeding one year. According to Justice Minister’s Regulation No. 21 (2008), the plan is based on a structured risk assessment conducted by the inmate’s case manager. The quality of this plan therefore depends on how well the assessment tool supports case managers’ work in practice. Previous research and the empirical findings of this thesis indicate that the current assessment tool, based on the Offender Assessment System (OASys), is perceived as time-consuming, unclear and insufficiently aligned with case managers’ practical needs (Rikka et al., 2023). The Estonian Prison Service has set the development of an improved risk assessment system as a strategic priority (Estonian Prison Service, n.d.). The aim of this thesis was to prototype an alternative assessment tool, adapted from the Norwegian BRIK (Behovs- og ressurskartlegging i kriminalomsorgen) tool, designed to support case managers’ behaviour and create conditions for improving the quality of sentence planning. The initial framing of the four behavioural dimensions that structure this thesis builds on prior analysis of the current tool’s limitations (Rikka et al., 2023), which the empirical interview data subsequently supported and refined: (1) decision-making and cooperation with inmates, (2) understanding of the inmate, (3) producing relevant input for sentence planning and (4) using the tool consistently and confidently. The COM-B framework (Michie et al., 2011) is used to explain how capability, opportunity and motivation shape these four dimensions, both in the limitations of the current tool and in the improvements perceived in the prototype. Empirical data were collected in February 2026 through a semi-structured focus group interview with six case managers from one Estonian prison who interacted with the prototype of the new assessment tool. Thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) of the interview was used to map case managers’ experience of using the prototype. The findings indicate that the prototype was perceived as more structured, easier to use and more focused on currently relevant information than the existing tool. Across all four behavioural dimensions, participants associated the prototype with improvements in capability (clearer structure, more flexible reasoning), opportunity (transparent process supporting shared decision-making, less administrative duplication) and motivation (relevant content, reduced negativity, stronger sense of professional judgement). Participants also anticipated that the prototype could support a better understanding of inmates’ needs and strengths. However, this remains hypothetical, as the tool was not tested with inmates themselves. The main strength of this thesis is the combination of theoretical frameworks (Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) theory, desistance theory, COM-B) with empirical testing through prototyping. The main limitations are the small sample size, the use of a text document prototype rather than an implemented system and the absence of inmate participation. The findings should therefore be understood as case managers perceived and anticipated responses to the prototype, rather than as evidence of its effects in routine practice. Based on the findings, the recommendation is to continue refining the prototype in a real-life setting and to ensure clear guidelines and training for case managers. This thesis offers a behaviourally grounded roadmap for the next stage of development and proposes an impact assessment framework for examining the prototype’s effect in a future implementation study. The prototype is therefore best understood as a design reference for supporting sentence planning process, not as a validated replacement for OASys.