Stated differently, intensive services delivered to a treatment group comprised of high risk sex offenders i. Group treatment is advantageous for several reasons, not the least of which are resource and time efficiency. Finally, with juvenile sex offenders specifically, treatment providers must remain cognizant of the research on aggregating juveniles for intervention see, e. It is, however, important to note that not all subpopulations of sex offenders should be placed in treatment groups together. Rather, depending upon the needs and circumstances of each client, programs should also employ the following treatment modalities: One question that often arises when conducting groups is whether they should be heterogeneous composed of different types of sex offenders or homogeneous made up of very similar offenders. After almost 20 years in Canada and now functioning internationally, COSA outlines a restorative approach to the risk management of high-risk ex-offenders, using professionally facilitated volunteerism. Wilson says that offenders targeted for COSA are usually those who have long histories of re-offending, have typically failed in treatment and have displayed intractable antisocial values and attitudes. It also allows treatment providers to be aware of the types of factors that may not require a considerable investment of time and energy during the course of treatment, as they may not yield significant dividends in the long term. Research suggests that using MST as the framework for intervention with juvenile sex offenders can yield similarly positive outcomes see, e. Put simply, the emphasis on criminogenic needs provides the major thrust of intervention for sex offender treatment, but many current treatment programs also target non—criminogenic needs, including the following Marshall et al. Also included are pervasive hostility, impulsivity, and employment instability.