Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byEthel Ramsey Modified over 8 years ago
1
Indicators of violent reoffending: the new OASys Violence Predictor Philip Howard, Senior Research Officer Jackie Seaton, Senior Probation Office Offender Assessment and Management Unit NOMS, Ministry of Justice for England and Wales
2
Overview of topics covered in this presentation About OASys –What is it? –When/how is it used? –Why do we need a new predictor of violent reoffending? Details of the OASys Violence Predictor (OVP) –How was it produced (and what does it predict)? –What items are included? –Does it work?
3
Overview of topics covered in this presentation How does OVP affect other NOMS business processes? –Risk of Serious Harm assessment –Sentence Planning –Tiering in the Offender Management framework –Parole User consultation, piloting and implementation
4
About OASys
5
What is OASys? (1) OASys is a structured clinical tool used to assess and manage over 250,000 offenders each year in England and Wales Piloted 1999-2001, rolled out 2001-2005 Used for offenders aged 18+ on custodial and community sentences Three main elements –Offending-related factors (“OASys Two”) –Risk of Serious Harm –Sentence Plan
6
What is OASys? (2): offending-related factors Sections 1-12 –1: offending information [criminal history] –2: [current] offence analysis –3: accommodation –4: education, training and employability –5: financial management and income –6: relationships –7: lifestyle and associates –8: drug misuse –9: alcohol misuse
7
What is OASys? (3): offending-related factors Sections 1-12 (continued) –10: emotional well-being –11: thinking and behaviour –12: attitudes Items in each section are scored 0/2 or 0/1/2, where 2 = significant problems Section scores are presented on a Summary Sheet, and thresholds are used to create binary “criminogenic need” indicators (e.g. there are 5 questions on Alcohol Misuse, so the maximum score is 10; a score of 4+ is a criminogenic need) A weighted total score indicates the likelihood of any reconviction, but imprecisely (the scale is 0-168) OASys also computes OGRS, an actuarial predictor based on age, sex and previous convictions (Section 1 data). OGRS 3 has just been implemented.
8
When/how is OASys used? (1) OASys is used – to inform Pre-Sentence Reports, but only for Standard Delivery (full length) reports – at the start of Community Orders at Offender Management Tier 2, 3 or 4 and release on licence from custody, then reviewed every 16 weeks and at the end of order/licence – at the start of custodial sentences of at least 12 months, then reviewed every year – to inform Parole Board hearings – other, less frequent purposes (e.g. Hostels, bail)
9
When/how is OASys used? (2) Case ID and criminal history info is completed by support staff The main body of the assessment is usually completed by probation officers. There is a countersigning process. Training is received in the standard probation or prison officer training package Completion takes a few hours, and workload pressures mean that there is little scope for a net increase in the length of the process
10
Why do we need a new predictor of violent reoffending? The current OASys score is a mediocre predictor of any reoffending, and has no predictor of future violence. Since OASys was introduced, priorities have shifted towards preventing serious reoffending Risk of harm ratings vary greatly between probation areas, and past efforts to achieve greater uniformity have failed. An objective tool to underpin ratings should help. The next slide shows the extent of variation in 2004/05 and mid-2007.
12
Details of the OASys Violence Predictor (OVP)
13
How was OVP produced? Offences were split into two groups – “violent-type” and non-violent – on the basis of patterns of criminogenic need and reoffending. After changes due to user consultation, violent-type offences now include – homicide (non-motoring) and assaults – threats and harassment – possession of offensive weapons – public order offences – criminal damage – robbery
14
How was OVP produced? (2) OASys assessments at the start of community sentences or discharge from custody were filtered for data completeness, then matched with the Police National Computer (PNC). Criminal history details from the PNC, and item and section scores from sections 2-12 of OASys, were used as predictors of violent-type reoffending (within 2 years) in a logistic regression model The original model –gave 71% of the maximum possible score to static factors and 29% to dynamic factors –was not readily understandable by OASys users, as probation officers tend not to be trained in logistic regression
15
How was OVP produced? (3) The user-friendly version of OVP –Gives 40% rather than 29% weighting to dynamic factors This does not damage predictive validity very much Future research will examine whether changes in OASys scores upon review improve predictive validity. If so, then giving high weights to dynamic factors should enhance this ability to reflect change. –Allocates each item a weight out of 100. Offenders get an overall score out of 100, which is translated into predictions of proven reoffending within 1 and 2 years of order/discharge. Longer followups are possible. We’ve also produced OGP, the OASys General Reoffending Predictor, to cover all other offences
16
Predictive validity
17
A quick note on measuring predictive validity Measure predictiveness using the “Receiver – Operator Characteristic” (ROC) method This generates a statistic called Area Under Curve (AUC), which ranges from 0.5 to 1. A score of 0.8 is extremely good in the context of a reconviction study The AUC score can be thought of as follows Put all the reconvicted offenders in one list, and all the non-reconvicted offenders in the other list Pick one offender from each list and compare their scores on your predictor The AUC is the probability that the reconvicted offender has the higher of the two scores (so a high AUC is good) With large samples (which we had), split it into construction and validation halves. Build the model on ‘construction’ cases, report its AUC on ‘validation’ cases
18
OGP and OVP: what they predict OffenceOGPOVPNeither Homicide and assault (domestic violence: to be validated) √ Threats and harassment√ Criminal damage (not arson)√ Public order offences√ Weapon possession (not use)√ Robbery & aggr. burglary√ Sexual offences√ Arson & other rare, harmful√ All other offences√
19
OGP and OVP: how the 100-point scoring system works ItemWeight in OGP (total of all weights = 100) Weight in OVP (total of all weights = 100) STATIC FACTORS OGRS 360-- Sanctions for violent offences--25 Sanctions for non-violent offences--5 First sanction ever?--5 Age--20 Sex--5 Total from static factors60 DYNAMIC FACTORS Recognises impact of offending?--4 Accommodation54 Employability56 Regular activities encourage offending?5-- Drug misuse15-- Alcohol misuse--10 Psychiatric treatment current/pending--4 Thinking and behaviour5-- Temper control--6 Attitudes56 Total from dynamic factors40
20
Likelihood of reoffending by OVP score Offender’s weighted score (/100) 1 year violent-type reoffending rate (average for sample: 15%) 2 year violent-type reoffending rate (average for sample: 25%) % of sample 0 to 24Up to 5%Below 10%18% 25 to 355 to 11%10 to 19%28% 36 to 4311 to 17%20 to 29%23% 44 to 4918 to 24%30 to 39%13% 50 to 5425 to 31%40 to 49%8% 55 to 6031 to 41%50 to 59%6% 61 to 6642 to 51%60 to 69%2.5% 67 to 100 [only 0.1% >76]52% and over70% and over1.1%
21
Likelihood of reoffending by OGP score Offender’s weighted score (/100) 1 year general reoffending rate (average for sample: 29%) 2 year general reoffending rate (average for sample: 41%) % of sample 0 to 14Below 6%Below 10%13 15 to 286-11%10-19%17 29 to 3712-18%20-29%12 38 to 4419-24%30-39%10 45 to 5125-33%40-49%9 52 to 5834-41%50-59%11 59 to 6642-52%60-69%10 67 to 7553-63%70-79%9 76 to 8864-78%80-89%9 89 to 10079% and over90% and over1
22
OGP and OVP predict well compared with other tools ToolAUC for outcome (24 month proven reoffending rate) ‘Core’ violence (13.7%) Violent-type (25%) Homicide / wounding (0.7%) Non-violent (38.2%) OGP.66.68.66.793 OVP.71.74.68 OASys score.64.65.66.75 OGRS 3.66.68.65.777 OGRS-SV.68.69.71 HCR-20.65.66.67.69 PCL-R.65.66.71 PCL-SV.64.65.66.68 VRAG.66.68.73
23
Applying OGP and OVP: a case study Joseph Keaton, aged 32, is convicted of stealing a train. He has a short criminal record, starting age 22: one common assault, one public order offence and one motoring offence. He has no accommodation problems, scores 1 point on employment, has no drugs problems but a very serious alcohol problem He has some problems with temper control, but overall his thinking and behaviour is quite good. His attitudes are not too good, and he does not recognise the impact of his offending. He spends a lot of time performing potentially criminal activities.
24
Keaton’s OGP and OVP scores ItemOGP (35/100)OVP (45/100) OGRS 3 [=41*0.6]24-- Violent sanctions [2]--5 Non-violent sanctions [2, including current]--0 First sanction ever? [no]--8 Age [32]--8 Sex [male]--5 Total from STATIC factors2423 Recognises impact of offending?--4 Accommodation00 Employability11 Regular activities encourage offending?5-- Drug misuse0-- Alcohol misuse--10 Psychiatric treatment--0 Thinking and behaviour1-- Temper control--4 Attitudes43 Total from DYNAMIC factors1122
25
Keaton’s likelihood of violent-type reoffending (weighted OVP score 48/100, exact=15%/28%) Offender’s weighted score (/100) 1 year violent-type reoffending rate (average for sample: 13%) 2 year violent-type reoffending rate (average for sample: 22%) % of sample 0 to 24Up to 5%Below 10%18% 25 to 355 to 11%10 to 19%28% 36 to 4311 to 17%20 to 29%23% 44 to 4918 to 24%30 to 39%13% 50 to 5425 to 31%40 to 49%8% 55 to 6031 to 41%50 to 59%6% 61 to 6642 to 51%60 to 69%2.5% 67 to 100 [only 0.1% >76]52% and over70% and over1.1%
26
Keaton’s likelihood of non-violent reoffending (weighted OGP score 35/100, exact=16%/27%) Offender’s weighted score (/100) 1 year general reoffending rate (average for sample: 29%) 2 year general reoffending rate (average for sample: 41%) % of sample 0 to 14Below 6%Below 10%13 15 to 286-11%10-19%17 29 to 3712-18%20-29%12 38 to 4419-24%30-39%10 45 to 5125-33%40-49%9 52 to 5834-41%50-59%11 59 to 6642-52%60-69%10 67 to 7553-63%70-79%9 76 to 8864-78%80-89%9 89 to 10079% and over90% and over1
27
Using survival analysis to estimate likelihood over time Survival analysis techniques allow us to estimate the likelihood of proven reoffending at any time period – month-by-month rates are easily displayed – ‘censoring’ allows offenders who receive pseudoreimprisoments or imprisonments for other offences to be included until that imprisonment occurs, rather than either wholly rejecting them (which could bias the sample) or pretending they’re always at risk of reoffending (which certainly biases the results) The ‘hazard’ shows the likelihood in a specific time period, while the survival function is cumulative
34
Using the new predictor in practice – integrating with other business processes
35
Risk of Serious Harm assessment In OASys Risk of Serious Harm assessment, a Screening is completed for all offenders. A Full Analysis is completed where the Screening indicates it is necessary. Risk ratings are – Low (automatic if no Full Analysis) – Medium – High – Very High Ratings are produced for risk in community to children, known adults, public and staff: we usually quote the highest of these four for each offender A lot of clinical judgement is involved, and as shown earlier there is a great deal of variation between probation areas
36
Risk of Serious Harm Screening and Full Analysis by OVP and sexual offending history – possible guidance OVP score bandAny history of sexual offending? NoYes Low to average Group A Full analysis necessary if other concerns e.g. Domestic violence, risk to children Group C Full analysis always necessary Above average Group B Full analysis usually necessary Group D Full analysis always necessary, usually High / Very High RoSH High Group C Full analysis always necessary Group D Full analysis always necessary, usually High / Very High RoSH Very high Group D Full analysis always necessary, usually High / Very High RoSH Group D Full analysis always necessary, usually High / Very High RoSH
37
37 Percentage of offenders in each category Group% of OASys-assessed caseload A54% B32% C12% D2.5%
38
38 Tiering OGP will replace the old OASys score as an indicator of the risk of general reoffending and level of criminogenic need An OGP score of 75 – 100 will be indicative of high likelihood of non-violent reoffending (90%+ within 2 years) and push offenders towards Tier 4 OVP will not have a direct impact, but will affect Tiering through its impact on RoSH Detailed guidance will be developed in co- operation with the Offender Management team
39
39 Targeting to offending behaviour programmes ART/ CALM etc. should generally only be considered for offenders with ‘above average’, ‘high’ or ‘very high’ OVP scores GOBPs and standard-intensity substance misuse OBPs should only be considered for offenders with ‘Medium’ or ‘High’ OGP scores notLower intensity alcohol misuse and DID OBPs should not be considered for offenders with ‘high’ OGP scores Sex offender and domestic violence programmes are not affected by OGP/OVP as targeting should be based upon RM2000 & SARA
40
40 Use of OGP/OVP in PSRs Similar to use of OASys score now Usually only available when SDR prepared Courts could be informed of scores via description within categories: e.g. OVP score 36/100 plus OGP score 64/100 = “ low to average likelihood of violent reoffending and a high likelihood of non- violent reoffending”
41
41 Release Decisions OVP scores, as part of risk of serious harm considerations, are likely to be important in parole and other supervised licence decisions Detailed tables will be supplied to the Parole Board translating scores out of 100 into likelihoods of violent-type reoffending across a range of followup periods (as in the survival analysis graphs earlier)
42
User consultation, piloting and implementation
43
User Consultation Initial design workshop Nov 2006 Ongoing consultation with IT developers throughout 2007 Introducing the predictors to key stakeholders Establishment of National Reference Group, Dec 2007
45
OGP / OVP National Reference Group: core membership members 4 x NPS pilot areas London PA OASys specialist NOMS Public Protection Unit HMPS NOMS RDS (research) OASys NOMS Interventions Offender Management
46
OGP/OVP National Reference Group: Stakeholders Stakeholder reps HMPS IT Developers Youth Justice Board Parole Board OASys IT developers NOMIS Programme NPS Training NPS CMS IT developers NPS Inspectorate
47
PILOTING THE PREDICTORS Pre-pilot: Nottinghamshire, June 07 ‘Live’ pilot involving 3 probation areas, for 1 month each, Feb-April 08 Focus group feedback Report & sign off
48
IMPLEMENTATION OF OGRS 3/OGP/OVP OGRS 3 already implemented in e- OASys April 08 OGP/OVP planned to go into OASys version 4.3 if it can be managed Otherwise will be introduced with OASys-R
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.