What We Know About Assessment of Risk of Recidivism and Criminogenic Needs of Offenders: Why and How to Do Assessments? Robin J. Wilson, PhD, ABPP

Risk Assessment Risk Assessment  Risk assessment is the process of identifying the probability or likelihood of future dangerousness or harm, such as a sexual offense or domestic assault.  In our general practice, Risk Assessment is concerned with predicting the degree of possibility of a re-offense for someone with a known history of offending.

Why Assess Risk?  Promoting public safety  Guiding routine interventions  Targeting scarce resources – Staff time – Treatment  Exceptional measures

Risk & Dangerousness BAD: BAD: “This person is dangerous.” GOOD: GOOD: “If specific risk factors are present, then there is a high/medium/low probability that the person will engage in specific behaviour within a specific period of time that may place specific persons at risk for a specific type and severity of harm.”

Static, Stable, & Acute Risk Factors Definitions  Static – Non-changeable life factors that relate to risk for sexual recidivism, generally historical in nature  Stable – Personality characteristics, skill deficits, and learned behaviours that relate to risk for recidivism that may be changed through intervention  Acute – Risk factors of short or unstable temporal duration that can change rapidly, generally as a result of environmental or intra-personal conditions

Risk Assessment Risk Assessment  It is practically and scientifically impossible to predict any future event with 100% certainty. Consequently, a risk assessment will always involve some degree of uncertainty about the “truth” of the actual prediction.  The task of risk assessment is to strike a scientific and ethical balance in the identification and management of potential offenders, while optimizing public safety.

Three Generations of Risk Assessment Bonta (1996) First Generation = “Clinical Judgment”  Unstructured, Non-replicable, Personal Discretion  Based on experience and level of knowledge of the literature  Non-standard (even within same institution)  Level of prediction little better than chance Second Generation = “Actuarial Assessment”  Static, Actuarial, Structured, Replicable, Less open to interpretation  Based on factors empirically related to recidivism  Standardized assessment, “Static” – Cannot measure change  “Moderate” levels of prediction Third Generation = “Dynamic Assessment”  Based on factors empirically related to recidivism  Standardized assessment, measures changeable  Actuarial measure with dynamic factors

Principles of Risk Management  Analysis  Communication  Collaboration  Monitoring  Intervention  Re-Analysis

Contact Information Robin J. Wilson, PhD, ABPP Wilson & Associates Clinical and Forensic Psychology