THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

1

What is the Impact of Long-Term Supervision Orders on Recidivism Rates among
Adult Male Offenders?

Thomas Labrecque
J0345206
Bachelor of Law Enforcement Studies, School of Criminal Justice & Security, Justice
Institute of British Columbia

Author Note
This paper was completed for LAWS-4003: Capstone Research Project, instructed
by Melanic Chernoff. Submitted December 1, 2023. This paper is 5941 words.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

2
Abstract

This research project aims to uncover the impact of Long-Term Supervision Orders on
recidivism rates among adult males. The findings from this study can help policy-makers
and the judiciary determine what sentences are most appropriate to apply when
considering public safety and an offender’s rehabilitation. This study consist of secondary
research, as the results to the research question are derived from existing research on
recidivism rates and Long-Term Supervision Orders. The scope of the study includes all
male offenders who are subject to a long-term supervision order. Some key findings from
this research are that Long-Term Supervision Orders are not effective at reducing
recidivism. The length of the order and the imposition of residency conditions were found
to have no impact on recidivism. As such, this study suggests that the judiciary and the
Parole Board adopt new policies and requirements when making decisions regarding
Long-Term Supervision Orders.

Keywords: long-term supervision orders, recidivism, community supervision,
rehabilitation, corrections.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

3

Table of Contents
Introduction …………………………………………………………………………… 4
Research Question and Methodology ………………………………………………... 5
Research Question ……………………………………………………………… 5
Methodology …………………………………………………………………… 7
Worldview and Theoretical Perspectives ………………………………………. 8
Literature Review …………………………………………………………………….. 9
Search Methodology …………………………………………………………… 9
Article Selection ………………………………………………………………. 10
Description of the Selected Articles …………………………………………... 11
Critical Analysis of the Literature …………………………………………….. 14
Concluding Remarks on the Literature Review ………………………………. 15
Results and Critical Appraisal ……………………………………………………… 16
Discussion ……………………………………………………………………………. 19
Recommendations …………………………………………………………………… 21
Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………… 22
Reference ……………………………………………………………………………... 24

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

4

What is the Impact of Long-Term Supervision Orders on Recidivism Rates among
Adult Male Offenders?
Community supervision is a challenging component of an offender’s correctional
journey. In fact, offenders face a significant change in their freedom, responsibilities and
accountabilities when they are released from a prison and return to their communities.
Due to the various challenges they face, a significant number of male federal offenders,
approximately 36% to 56% depending on certain demographic factors, have their
conditional release revoked prior to the end of their sentence and are returned to prison
(Stewart et al., 2018).
This high proportion of offenders who fail to complete the community supervision
portion of their sentence highlights the importance of ensuring released offenders are
adequately supported while in the community. This high figure also suggests that
community supervision is particularly challenging for some offenders who perform
poorly once released.
Community supervision gained importance within the field of corrections recently
with the addition of Long-Term Supervision Orders. In fact, LTSOs only became
available to judges in 1997 (Trevethan, Crutcher & Moore, 2002). These orders extend
the period of time that an offender is supervised by correctional staff while in the
community. In other words, LTSOs are applied once an individual completes their
custodial sentence, of which the last third is generally spent in the community while
supervised on Statutory Release, a non-discretionary release from custody (Grant,
Johnson & Muirhead, 2000). LTSOs can last a maximum of 10 years (Correctional
Service Canada, 2013).

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

5

Although some claim that LTSOs are an effective tool to mitigate the risk posed
by a dangerous offender, that it promotes their reintegration in society and that it is a fair
alternative to the dangerous offender designation, this text argues that the addition of
LTSOs to the criminal justice apparatus consists of net-widening. This term is used to
describe “the problem of expanding the social control over individuals through different
new programmes. Although the initial goal […] is usually to divert people from the
criminal justice system, sometimes just the opposite occurs” (Kantorowicz, 2013, p. 5).
Given their somewhat recent addition into the criminal justice system, LTSOs are
the subject of limited research. Indeed, a summary search of research journal databases
reveals little to no research on the topic of how LTSOs affect the recidivism rates of
offenders.
This text will begin with a description of the research question of the project, as
well as a description of the methodology used to answer the question. Next, a
comprehensive review of the existing literature on the topic of LTSOs and recidivism is
provided. The text continues with a critical analysis of the literature and a summary of the
findings. The report then includes a discussion on the findings and concludes with policy
recommendations based on the findings of this research project.
Research Question and Methodology

Research Question
Considering the objectives of LTSOs, which includes the reintegration of
offenders, this text aims to answer the following question: What is the impact of LTSOs
on recidivism rates among adult male offenders? Additional sub-questions were raised
during the project, as the author studied the existing knowledge on the topic.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

6

The first sub-question relates to how specific conditions of an LTSO affect
recidivism. In fact, just like any other form of conditional release (e.g. Day Parole,
Statutory Release), an LTSO includes various conditions. These conditions can include
not consuming alcohol, residing at a halfway house or abiding by a curfew, to name a
few. Given that one offender’s LTSO can be significantly different than another
offender’s LTSO, this text will attempt to uncover what impact the type and quantity of
conditions on an LTSO has on recidivism.
The second sub-question is whether the length of the LTSO has an impact on
recidivism. Considering that an LTSO can range from one to ten year, this text will
attempt to determine whether there is a correlation between the length of the order and
recidivism rates. An additional consideration is whether the length of the prison sentence
that precedes the LTSO combined with the length of the LTSO itself impacts recidivism
rates.
The last subsection is whether the demographic factors of the offenders who are
subject to an LTSO affect their rates of recidivism. Given that various factors, such as
indigeneity and age, are associated with variations in recidivism for offenders subject to
various community-based sentences, this text will attempt to find whether these
variations are also true when analyzing recidivism rates of offenders subject to LTSOs
(Stewart et al., 2019). The demographic factors studied will also include the type of the
offence, such as whether the offender is sentenced for sexual offences, violent offences or
sexual offences.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

7

Methodology
Given that this research project consists of a critical appraisal of the existing
research, the methodology used to answer the research question consisted of finding
accurate and relevant sources on the topic. The relevant articles were selected by using
research databases, including Correctional Service of Canada’s (CSC) internal search
database. The selected articles were tested for validity, accuracy and reliability mainly by
ensuring that they were peer-reviewed, that the number of participants was sufficient and
by ensuring that their conclusions were based on evidence gathered in their research. All
articles that selected in the end were deemed to be reliable, accurate and valid.
Tracking the keywords and search parameters throughout the search process
proved to work well in data selection. More particularly, this strategy ensured that the
search would not produce the same results repeatedly and made it easier to retrieve the
articles again later. Making a request for publications to CSC also proved to be an
effective strategy in data selection. In fact, the agency’s expertise in administering
LTSOs and access to internal data on recidivism results in them publishing relevant and
reliable articles. What proved to be challenging in data selection, as discussed earlier in
the text, was the limited existing knowledge directly relating to LTSOs and their impacts
on recidivism. Also, accessing the JIBC library in-person would have facilitated access to
some relevant research published in books, which is typically less accessible through
online search databases. If the research project was to restart, visiting the JIBC library, or
a different post-secondary institution’s library, to retrieve relevant research from books
would be advisable. Details from the data selection and the methodology will be
discussed further in the next section, the literature review.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

8

Given that this research project consisted of secondary research, no ethical issues
were identified in the data selection or the methodology.

Worldview and Theoretical Perspectives
This research project adopts an advocacy and participatory worldview. This
worldview suggests that “research inquiry needs to be intertwined with politics and
political agenda and contains an action agenda through intervention for reform that may
change the lives of the participants” (Petersen & Gencel, 2013, p. 1). The term
“participants” in the case of this research project relates to offenders who are subject to
LTSOs. In fact, this research is based in the view that the political context is intricately
linked to the administration of justice. Although the judiciary benefits from significant
discretion and are required to be separate from politics, the government in power still has
the ability to create, amend or get rid of types of sentences. The government in power is
also involved in the nomination of judges and the development of policies, procedures
and programs regarding correctional services, which are responsible for applying and
enforcing sentences handed by the judiciary. It is with this close proximity of politics and
administration of justice in mind that this research project uses an advocacy and
participatory worldview. This research paper seeks to make recommendations for
intervention and reform that can benefit the lives of offenders subject to LTSOs, while
maintaining public safety.
Various theoretical perspectives are used when discussing the topics of the impact
of LTSOs on recidivism. Theses perspectives include the concept that the creation of
LTSOs widened the correctional net, as it resulted in the issuance of LTSOs to offenders
who would not qualify as dangerous offenders and would otherwise only serve a regular

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

9

sentence that is not followed by an additional period of community supervision.
Another theoretical perspective is that excessive supervision and intervention interferes
with an offender’s successful reintegration in the community.
Literature Review
A LTSO is a sentencing option available to the judiciary that is commonly seen as
an effective means to manage the risk of serious offenders in the community that do not
meet the threshold to be designated as a dangerous offender. The application of this
sentence consists of adding a portion of community supervision, up to ten years,
following a prison sentence.

Search Methodology
Identifying relevant and specific articles on the topic of LTSOs and recidivism
was particularly challenging, given the limited body of research on the matter. The
articles selected for review were drawn from two resources: the Justice Institute of British
Columbia (JIBC) library database and the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC)
database of research reports. The latter was selected in particular, as CSC is the sole
agency responsible for administering LTSOs and supervising offenders subject to such
orders.
When identifying relevant articles in the JIBC library database, the following
keywords were used: long-term supervision order, LTSO, community corrections,
community supervision, Canada and recidivism. An initial search of all these keywords
combined produced no hits. Various combination of the search keywords continued to
produce no hits, or less than 10 hits, most of which were not relevant to the current topic.
However, some articles somewhat related to the topic were selected, including one

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

10

doctoral thesis. In the end, upon adding “extended supervision,” which is a similar type
of sentence to LTSOs used in other Commonwealth jurisdictions and “recidivism” in the
search terms, 9 hits were received. Inclusion criteria, such as restricting the search to
peer-reviewed articles, and exclusion criteria, such as ignoring articles older than 2007,
produced 6 hits.
The remaining articles were drawn from CSC research database. Given that no
search engine is available on their website, likely due to their relatively small quantity of
research reports, each title under the category “community corrections” was read, and
titles related to the research topic were individually selected. An email request for the
publications was required, and all the requested publications were sent to this writer
within one business day.
Overall, these was a combined total of 24 titles reviewed from the JIBC database
and the CSC website.

Article Selection
Of the 24 titles selected, the 15 most relevant were picked for abstract review. The
particular articles were chosen for abstract review due to the fact that their content
consisted of primary research, and not secondary research. Given that CSC has access to
their own internal samples and databases, most of their articles already consisted of
primary research, which streamlined the selection process. The CSC articles were also of
particular interest, given that most chosen directly related to LTSOs, and not solely on the
broader theme of “community supervision.”
Of the 15 articles selected for abstract review, eight were selected for full review.
Of those eight, five were drawn from CSC’s research database and three were drawn

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

11

from the JIBC Library database. Two of the selected articles relate to extended
supervision orders in New Zealand. However, given the resemblance between New
Zealand’s extended orders and LTSOs, the articles were still considered valuable for the
purpose of this research project.

Description of the Selected Articles
The six most relevant articles from the eight selected articles will be described
briefly in this section of the literature review.
In their article titled The Relationship between Length of Incarceration and
Recidivism, Rubenfeld and Shanahan Sommerville attempted to answer the question of
whether sentence length influences recidivism. This article consisted of a quantitative
research study that looked at the sentence information and recidivism rates of federal
offenders. The study showed that a weak relationship between a longer sentence length
and reoffending prior to the end of one’s sentence exists. However, no relationship was
identified following an offender’s sentence completion. The conclusions appear accurate
and relevant, based on the various strengths identified in the research methods of this
article. These strengths include a large sample and rigorous correlation between existing
research. However, the articles present some weaknesses, such as the fact that it solely
includes data from federal offenders, meaning that all those included the sample served a
sentence of more than two years. This suggests that the conclusion may not be applicable
to those serving short sentences (Rubenfeld & Shahanan Somerville, 2017).
Stewart, Wilton, Baglole and Miller published an article titled A Comprehensive
Study of Recidivism Rates among Canadian Federal Offenders. The objective of the
mixed methods research study was to paint a currently portrait of recidivism among

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

12

federal offenders. The article did not attempt to make specific correlations, but rather
attempted to find which qualitative and quantitative factors affected an offender’s
likelihood of reoffending. All federal offenders released over two periods of
approximately two years were included in the sample, resulting in a large number of
participants (over 22,000). This large sample, as well as the usage of databases external
to CSC, namely the Canadian Police Information Centre, consist of strengths of this
research study. The study overall appears to be reliable, in part due to its large sample
and its specific definition of recidivism. An identified weakness of this article is that
Indigenous offenders were separated by gender, but no Black and South-Asian offenders.
This difference may make correlations more difficult to draw. Some key findings from
this study are that recidivism rates are higher for Indigenous people and for men. The
study also found that recidivism rates of federal offenders have been decreasing over time
(Stewart et al., 2019).
Sexual Offenders with an LTSO Designation Residing in Community Correctional
Centres (CCC’s): Comparison to Other Groups Residing in CCC’s is a thorough
examination by Axford and Abracen into how being a sexual offender, being subject to
an LTSO and residing in a CCC can affect the correctional experience and outcomes of
an offender. The study aimed to answer the following research question: what are the
risks and needs of LTSO sexual offenders residing in CCCs. This qualitative research
study compared various correctional demographic factors, such as mental health
diagnoses, risk levels and correctional plans of average offenders and LTSO offenders
residing in CCCs. The study found that the latter group had higher rates of mental health
issues and had a higher risk of recidivism. A strength of this study is the specificity of the

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

13

control group, being that is consists of three significant factors: being a sexual offender,
having an LTSO designation and residing in a CCC. However, this strength also resulted
in a weakness, which is the small sample size of main group, being only 56. This small
sample may cause the results to be less reliable than the previous articles described in this
literature review (Axford & Abracen, 2011).
In her article titled Offenders with Long Term Supervision Orders Assigned
Residency Conditions at Release, Gobeil attempted to find out whether residency
conditions contribute to the overall risk management of LTSO offenders in the
community. This qualitative research study included all LTSO offenders released in the
community since the enactment of the legislation authorising LTSO sentences. The study
found that although offenders subject to residency conditions were deemed as presenting
a higher recidivism risk, their risk of reoffending similar to those not subject to residency
conditions. A strength of this article is that it includes data collected over a significant
period of time. Based on the through consideration for other possible contributing factors,
the conclusions from this article appear reliable. A weakness of the overall article is that
it does not make clear recommendations for how its findings can be used by decisionmakers within CSC and the Parole Board when determining appropriate risk-management
measures, such as residency conditions (Gobeil, 2012).
In his doctoral thesis titled The Long-Term Offender Provisions of the Criminal
Code: An Evaluation, Hassan paints a comprehensive portrait of the state of LTSO
designations and the situation in which they are applied. The overarching research
question of this mixed-methods publication was: how has the LTSO designation been
used and monitored in the first ten years of its creation in British Columbia? The author

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

14

made various findings, such as demographic factors of offenders subject to LTSOs and
noticed some issues in how these orders are supervised in the community. An obvious
strength of this article is the scope and extensiveness of the study, which is apparent in
the length of the article (over 300 pages). As with some of the other articles described
above, a weakness of the article is the small sample, which is below 100 participants.
Nonetheless, the conclusions appear reliable, in fact due to how the author builds and
expands on the existing knowledge (Hassan, 2011).
In Risk Assessment of Sexual Offenders for Extended Supervision Orders in New
Zealand: Basic Principles and Current Practice, Vess attempted to identify what
principles decision makers should be aware of and understand when applying extended
supervision orders, which are similar to LTSOs. This article made several conclusions in
regard to how the judiciary should assess the risk of sexual offenders for whom they
consider subjecting to an LTSO. The article consisted more so of an analysis than a
research study. A strength of the article is how it is clear and consistent in how it applies
existing knowledge in correctional risk assessment and makes it relevant to the context of
Extended Supervision Orders in New Zealand. A weakness identified by this writer is
that the article is particular to child sex offenders, therefore making the recommendations
less relevant for types of offenders (Vess, 2009).

Critical Analysis of the Literature
Although the existing body of available research on the impact of LTSOs on
recidivism may be limited and mostly comes from one source, CSC, which can cause
some bias, the literature reviewed in this text provide a relevant background for this
writer’s research project.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

15

Some important themes, and their respective issues, that were observed in the text
above include how recidivism is subject to various definitions, which complicates its
assessment, the severity and length of sentences is rarely a deterrent, which may have
effects on recidivism predictions, time spent incarcerated versus supervised in the
community has different impacts on recidivism and lastly, demographic factors, such as
gender and age, have significant impacts on recidivism rates, which suggest that they
must be accounted for when evaluating correlation between recidivism and a specific
factor, such as LTSO designation.
Some views shared by the articles above are that decision-makers should have a
better understanding of risk assessment when determining appropriate sentences and
release conditions and that LTSOs have had conflicting impacts on recidivism and public
safety.
A trend observed by this writer is that what someone may immediately think as an
effective method in reducing recidivism, such as longer and harsher sentences, is often
not linked to reduced recidivism; in fact, it often surprisingly has the opposite effect.
All these items are relevant to the objective if this research project, which is to
determine the impact of LTSO on recidivism. Considerations such as sentence length,
demographic factors and release conditions, which were all discussed in the articles
above, will need to be appropriately analyzed in this final project.

Concluding Remarks on the Literature Review
This literature review provides an important background of the existing
knowledge on the topic of LTSOs and recidivism. Topics such as defining recidivism,
factors that affect recidivism and the importance of considering demographic factors in

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

16

those evaluations were shared among most of the publications described above.
However, there does appear to be any existing literature that specifically determines the
impact of assigning an LTSO to an offender on the likelihood of reoffending, which is
the objective of this writer’s final project. Conclusions on this topic will be relevant and
significant to decision-makers, such as judges and parole board commissioners, as they
make important decisions on whether to apply an LTSO and decide on its conditions, all
with the objective of promoting public safety.
Results and Critical Appraisal
Given its status as a secondary research project, the results described in this text
were drawn from the various academic articles selected and listed above. Each article
provided valuable results that, when combined with each other, help make strong
correlations between the LTSOs, and their characteristics, and recidivism.
Rubenfeld and Shanahan Sommerville found that the length of time an offender
spends incarcerated has no correlation with their recidivism rate after the end of their
sentence (2017). This finding suggests that the common belief that longer incarceration
deters future offending and rehabilitates offenders. Although their research does not
specifically address community supervision or LTSOs, but instead incarceration, the
finding may be applicable to LTSOs. Should this be true, the length of an LTSO would
not be associated with recidivism rates. Therefore, the argument that sentencing an
offender to a longer LTSO, such as 10 years, would protect society by reducing their
chance of reoffending is invalid.
Demographic factors of offenders subject to LTSOs were found to vary
recidivism rates. In fact, the recidivism rate within two years for male offenders was

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

17

twice as high as the female offender’s recidivism rate. The recidivism rate for Indigenous
males is also higher than non-Indigenous offenders (Stewart et al., 2019).
Stewart et al.’s study did not specifically consider the variation of recidivism rates
based on demographic factors for offenders subject to LTSOs (2019). Instead, it studied
these variations for all offenders under CSC’s jurisdiction. However, given the significant
differences in recidivism rates for gender, race and indigeneity for all federal offenders,
these findings are deemed to be applicable to offenders subject to LTSOs.
Sexual offenders subject to LTSOs and that reside in CCCs have a higher rate of
recidivism than sexual offenders on Statutory Release that reside in CCCs (Axford &
Abracen, 2011). This finding, which isolates the status as a sexual offender and the
residency in a CCC, suggests that an offender subject to an LTSO poses a higher risk of
recidivism than an offender not subject to an LTSO. However, this finding does not
consider whether the circumstances and the profile of the offender may have influenced a
judge in deciding to impose an LTSO, which prevents the suggestion that the imposition
of the LTSO is directly responsible for the increase in the risk of recidivism. In other
terms, a causal relationship, which requires three criteria: “(a) temporal precedence (i.e.,
the cause precedes the effect), (b) covariance (i.e., the cause and effect are related), and
(c) disqualification of alternative explanations (i.e., no third variable accounts for the
observed relationship)” is not confirmed (Duckworth, Tsukayama & May, 2010, p. 312).
In this case, the disqualification of alternative explanation is not confirmed, given that the
differences in circumstances and offender profile of an LTSO offender and a non-LTSO
offender are not considered in Axford and Abracen’s (2011) study.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

18

Although LTSO offenders who are subject to residency conditions are presumed
to present a higher risk of recidivism and a lower reintegration potential than LTSO
offenders who are not subject to residency conditions, “offenders in each group returned
to custody at similar rates” (Gobeil, 2012, p. 30). This finding suggests that the
imposition of a residency condition by the Parole Board of Canada is “likely not
contributing significantly to the management of the risk presented by offenders with
LTSOs” (Gobeil, 2012, p. 30).
Hassan’s (2011) comprehensive analysis of the LTSO sentence raises several
concerns with how it is administered. Some key concerns raised by Hassan relate to how
dangerousness is assessed by the various professionals that are involved in the risk
assessment of an offender. These assessments are crucial to judges, who use them to
make informed decisions on whether certain sentences, such as LTSOs, are appropriate.
Risk assessments are also read by the Parole Board of Canada, who is responsible for
making decisions regarding which conditions will be placed on an offender’s LTSO.
Hassan (2011) suggests that the assessment tools used to assess an offender’s risk may
cause inaccurate high-risk results and may be racially discriminatory, given the higher
average ranking for Indigenous offenders. Hassan (2011) raises additional concerns in the
administration of LTSOs, notably that LTSO offenders are subject to heightened
surveillance, resulting in net-widening. Lastly, Hassan found that agencies involved in
the administration of LTSOs had poor communication with each other and had
significantly different perspectives on the goals and objectives of LTSOs.
Of note is that Hassan’s (2011) findings were raised in 2010. Some of his findings
may have changed since the publication of his thesis.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

19

The various shortfalls identified by Hassan may influence the impact that an
LTSO has on recidivism. In fact, the over-surveillance of LTSO offenders and the
labelling associated with heightened risk assessments may negatively impact an LTSO
offender by increasing their chances of reoffending.
Increased supervision and surveillance are linked with higher rates of recidivism.
In fact, “tight supervision results in higher technical violations” (Weinrath, Doerksen &
Watts, 2015, p. 278). The concerns regarding increased surveillance raised by Hassan
(2011) could suggest that LTSO offenders are breached for more technical violations,
resulting in increased recidivism rates. These violations are particularly impactful for
LTSO offenders, given that their breaches can result in new criminal charges, which is
not the case for breaches of Parole of Statutory Release.
Vess (2009) highlighted the importance of providing accurate and valid risk
assessments to the courts when they are considering imposing sentences such as New
Zealand’s extended supervision order, which shares many similarities with Canada’s
LTSO designation. As stated above, the risk assessments submitted by correctional
professionals have significant impact on the imposition of sentences.
Discussion
As previously mentioned in this text, limited research exists on the topic of the
impact of LTSOs on recidivism. The limited availability of existing knowledge creates
challenges when attempting to answer this text’s research question. However, the
results identified above still assist in partially answering the main question and the subquestions.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

20

On the topic of whether specific conditions found on an LTSO impact recidivism,
the existing research is clear that a residency condition is an ineffective tool in managing
an offender’s risk, as it is not associated with a decrease in recidivism rates when applied
to an LTSO offender (Gobeil, 2012). This finding is significant, given that residency
conditions are amongst the most restrictive conditions that the Parole Board can impose.
Seeing that they are not an effective risk management tool, Parole Board commissioners
should restrain their use to very specific circumstances where it clear that imposing such
a condition is required to protect society or promote an offender’s rehabilitation.
No results were identified regarding the impact of other conditions, such as
conditions to abstain from alcohol and conditions to seek or maintain employment, on an
LTSO offender’s risk of recidivism.
Although no findings directly related to the impact of the length of an LTSO on
an offender’s risk of reoffending was identified, existing research suggests that longer
sentences of incarceration are not associated with a decrease in recidivism following
sentence completion (Rubenfeld & Shanahan Sommerville, 2017). Should this finding be
extrapolated to LTSO sentences, it could be argued that longer LTSO sentences are not
effective at managing an offender’s risk. This finding is also significant, as it implies that
the judiciary should restrict the application of longer LTSO sentences solely to offenders
for whom it can be demonstrated that a longer order is required to maintain public safety
or support rehabilitation.
It is also clear that demographic factors also have a correlation with recidivism
rates of LTSO offenders (Stewart et al., 2019). However, the causal relationship and the
exact explanation behind this correlation is difficult to identify. Nonetheless, this finding

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

21

is relevant to the judiciary and the Parole Board, as demographic factors should be
considered during sentencing and parole hearings. Practices such as recognizing Gladue
factors, which are the “unique background and circumstances” of Indigenous people
during decision-making is one way to address this finding (as cited in Dickson & Smith,
2021, p. 24).
All considered, it is clear that, despite the limited research, the imposition of
LTSOs have a strong impact on recidivism. Some conditions may have an effect on the
recidivism rate; however, residency conditions were found to have no impact on an
LTSO offender’s risk of reoffending (Gobeil, 2012). Longer LTSO sentences were also
not associated with decreased recidivism (Rubenfeld & Shanahan Sommerville, 2017).
Demographic factors, such as indigeneity and gender were found to have a significant
impact on recidivism rates of LTSO offenders (Stewart et al., 2019).
Recommendations
Based on the findings from this study, it appears that public safety could be
maintained, through stable recidivism rates, while adjusting certain parameters for the
judiciary and the Parole Board of Canada when taking decisions regarding LTSOs.
First, the Parole Board of Canada’s policies should be clear that commissioners
should not justify the imposition of a residency condition with the argument that it
manages the recidivism risk of an LTSO offender, given that this suggestion was found
to be invalid. In additional their policies should state that commissioners who chose to
apply such a condition must clearly describe their reasoning in their decision as to why
such a condition is necessary to promote public safety or to support the offender’s
rehabilitation.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

22

Second, the federal government should consider amending the Criminal Code to
reflect the finding that a 10-year LTSO is not linked to lower recidivism rates than a
shorter LTSO. The federal government should consider whether the 10-year maximum
should be reduced or should consider adding clear risk-related parameters to be present
(e.g. chronic history of repeat and violent reoffending) as a pre-requisite for judges to
impose 10-year LTSOs.
Lastly, the requirement to consider Gladue factors when sentencing offenders to
LTSOs or when deciding on which conditions to add to the LTSO should be codified in
the Criminal Code sections and the Parole Board policy sections relating to LTSOs.
Conclusion
The aim of this research project was to study the impact of long-term supervision
orders on recidivism rates among adult male offenders. More specifically, the project
attempted to find whether the length of an LTSO, the conditions applied to an LTSO and
demographic factors have an impact on the recidivism rates.
Using a secondary research approach, based on the existing knowledge, this
research project found that longer LTSO orders and the addition of residency conditions
do not result in a decreased recidivism rate. No findings were identified in regard to
conditions other than residency conditions. Demographic factors, such as gender and
indigeneity were found to have an impact on recidivism.
Based on these findings, this text argues that LTSOs may not be a full-proof risk
mitigation strategy. The text makes several recommendations in regard to how the
judiciary and the Parole Board of Canada should make-decision regarding LTSOs and
offenders subject to them.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

23

The author of this text recognizes that the research consisted of secondary
research and that no full-scale primary research study aimed at answering the research
question directly was initiated. The author also recognizes that extrapolation and to some
degree, assumptions based on the existing knowledge was used to draw some conclusions
in this text. However, the author believes that these shortcomings do not affect the
validity and importance of the recommendations made in this text.
Future research is necessary to expand the existing knowledge on the impact of
LTSOs on recidivism. Namely, future research should study the specific impact of
LTSOs on recidivism, the impact of conditions other than residency conditions on
recidivism, as well as seek the identify a causal relationship between certain demographic
factors and recidivism rates among LTSO offenders.

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

24
References

Axford, M., Abracen, J. (2011). Sexual offenders with an LTSO designation residing
in
community correctional centres (CCC’s):
Comparison to other groups residing in
CCC’s. Correctional Service of Canada. https://www.cscscc.gc.ca/research/005008-0252-eng.shtml
Correctional Service Canada. (2013). CSC and Long-Term Supervision Orders.
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2014/scc-csc/PS84-15-2013eng.pdf
Dickson, J., Smith, K. (2021). Exploring the Canadian judiciary’s experiences with and
perceptions of Gladue. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice,
63(3/4). 23-46. DOI: 10.3138/cjccj.2021-0031
Duckworth, A. L., Tsukayama, E., May, H. (2010). Establishing Causality Using
Longitudinal Hierarchical Linear Modeling: An Illustration Predicting
Achievement From Self-Control. Social Psychological and Personality Science,
1(4). 311-317.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2957016/pdf/nihms215388.pdf
Gobeil, R. (2012). Offenders with long term supervision orders assigned residency
conditions at release. Correctional Service of Canada. https://www.cscscc.gc.ca/research/005008-0285-eng.shtml
Grant, B. A., Johnson, S. L., Muirhead, M. (2000). Use of the residency condition with
statutory release: A descriptive analysis. Correctional Service of Canada.
https://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/092/r89_e.pdf

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

25

Hassan, S. (2011). The long-term offender provisions of the Criminal Code: An
evaluation [Doctoral dissertation, Simon Fraser University]. EbscoHost.
Kantorowicz, E. (2013). The 'Net-Widening' Problem and its Solutions: The Road to a
Cheaper Sanctioning System.
http://www.antoniocasella.eu/nume/Kantorowicz_2013.pdf
Petersen, K., Gencel, C. (2013). Worldviews, research methods, and their relationship to
validity in empirical software engineering research. Blekinge Institute of
Technology. http://www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:834169/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Rubenfeld, S., Shanahan Sommerville, M. C. (2017). The relationship between length of
incarceration and recidivism. Correctional Service of Canada. https://www.cscscc.gc.ca/research/r-389-eng.shtml
Stewart, L. A., Wilton, G., Baglole, S., Miller, R. (2019). A comprehensive study of
recidivism rates among Canadian federal offenders. Correctional Service of
Canada. https://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/005008-r426-en.shtml
Stewart, L., Thompson, J., Beaudette, J. N., Buck, M., Laframboise, R., Petrellis, T.
(2018). The impact of participation in victim-offender mediation sessions on
recidivism of serious offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and
Comparative Criminology, 62(12). 3910-3927. DOI:
10.1177/0306624X17752274
Trevethan, S., Crutcher, N., Moore, J.-P. (2002). A profile of federal offenders designated
as dangerous offenders or serving long-term supervision orders. Correctional
Service of Canada. https://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/092/r125_e.pdf

THE IMPACT OF LTSO ON RECIDIVISM

26

Vess, J. (2009). Risk assessment of sexual offenders for extended supervision orders in
New Zealand: Basic principles and current practice. Journal of Child Sexual
Abuse, 18(1). 174-189. DOI: 10.1080/10538710902751696.
Weinrath, M., Doerksen, M., Watts, J. (2015). The impact of an intensive supervision on
high-risk offenders: Manitoba’s COHROU program. Canadian Journal of
Criminology and Criminal Justice, 57(2). 253-288. DOI: 10.3138/cjccj.2014.E01