1. Offender assessment tools: A valuable source of information for the court Richard P. Stroker Denver, Colorado April 27, 2011

2. Introduction The National Center for State Courts has noted that one of the State Chief Justices’ top reform interests for state courts has been: Public safety through recidivism reduction efforts   Implementation of evidence-based practices and services   Use of empirically-based risk and needs assessment tools.   Peters and Warren, 2006

3. Reasons for considering “evidence based” approaches Offenders, in general, are failing at alarming rates Offenders, in general, are failing at alarming rates 67% rearrested within three years following release from prison 67% rearrested within three years following release from prison 30% probationers are reconvicted of a new crime 30% probationers are reconvicted of a new crime Research over the past two decades demonstrates that – through the use of evidence-based practices – recidivism can be reduced by as much as 30% Research over the past two decades demonstrates that – through the use of evidence-based practices – recidivism can be reduced by as much as 30% (Hughes & Wilson, 2003; Andrews & Bonta, 1997) (Hughes & Wilson, 2003; Andrews & Bonta, 1997)

4. Defining key terms Evidence-Based Knowledge Conclusions drawn from rigorous research studies that have been replicated numerous times with defined, measurable outcomes about the effectiveness of an intervention or process Evidence-Based Practice The application of empirical research to professional practice

5. Key terms, continued Evidence-Based Principles The three “principles” of evidence-based practice derived from the research on risk reduction: Risk – or who to target Need –or what to target Responsivity – or how to target Evidence-Based Sentencing The application of the principles of evidence-based practice to sentencing Andrews and Bonta, 2007 Andrews and Bonta, 2007

6. 1. Risk assessment There are different ways that people can attempt to assess a potential risk. We can rely on our experience and judgment to evaluate a person’s situation – in the professional world this is usually referred to as “clinical judgment.” There are different ways that people can attempt to assess a potential risk. We can rely on our experience and judgment to evaluate a person’s situation – in the professional world this is usually referred to as “clinical judgment.” We can also use statistically-based tools that inform us about the likelihood of some future risk by evaluating a variety of factors that are statistically related to previous occurrences. We can also use statistically-based tools that inform us about the likelihood of some future risk by evaluating a variety of factors that are statistically related to previous occurrences. “It’s difficult to make predictions, especially when they are in the future.” Yogi Berra “It’s difficult to make predictions, especially when they are in the future.” Yogi Berra

7. Risk of what? In considering the use of risk tools, it’s important to be clear about the risks that you want to understand. In considering the use of risk tools, it’s important to be clear about the risks that you want to understand. In the corrections field, risk instruments usually attempt to measure the risk of “recidivism.” This term can be defined in many ways – returned to prison for any reason, or for a new crime, or for a new felony, and within various time periods. In the corrections field, risk instruments usually attempt to measure the risk of “recidivism.” This term can be defined in many ways – returned to prison for any reason, or for a new crime, or for a new felony, and within various time periods.

8. Risk and Needs Assessment tools Risk tools have been a “work in progress.” Risk tools have been a “work in progress.” 1 st generation – static “risk” factors 1 st generation – static “risk” factors 2 nd generation – static risk with static need factors 2 nd generation – static risk with static need factors 3 rd generation – static and dynamic risk and needs 3 rd generation – static and dynamic risk and needs Risk and needs tools are intended to augment, not replace, professional judgment. Risk and needs tools are intended to augment, not replace, professional judgment. Risk and needs tools are the “engine” that drives evidence based decision making. Risk and needs tools are the “engine” that drives evidence based decision making. There are numerous tools available. There are numerous tools available.

9. Variations in tools Some tools (LSI, COMPAS, etc.) measure numerous items of risk and criminogenic need. Some tools (LSI, COMPAS, etc.) measure numerous items of risk and criminogenic need. Other tools may be used to measure specific issues or areas (such as substance abuse, violence, recidivism for sex offenders, etc.). Other tools may be used to measure specific issues or areas (such as substance abuse, violence, recidivism for sex offenders, etc.). As a substitute for more expansive tools, briefer “proxy” tools are also available (see Bogue, Woodward, Logan, 2006, 2008). As a substitute for more expansive tools, briefer “proxy” tools are also available (see Bogue, Woodward, Logan, 2006, 2008).

10. Does it help us to use statistical models in predicting risk? Predictive Accuracy: Clinical vs. Mechanical Predictive Accuracy: Clinical vs. Mechanical Clinical outperformed mechanical 6% Mechanical outperformed clinical46% Roughly equal performance48% (Grove et al., 2000)

11. Predictive Accuracy: Approaches to Risk Assessment (sex offenders) (Hanson & Bussiere, 1998; Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004) large moderate small

12. Risk of Violence Prediction Methods Clinical judgment.06Clinical judgment.06 Static 99.32Static 99.32 VRAG.44VRAG.44 PCL-R.27PCL-R.27 LSI-R.26LSI-R.26

13. What does this research mean? It tells us that using sound, valid, reliable risk assessment tools can substantially increase our accuracy at predicting certain risks when compared to using our clinical judgment alone. It tells us that using sound, valid, reliable risk assessment tools can substantially increase our accuracy at predicting certain risks when compared to using our clinical judgment alone. Given the nature of the court’s business, and the important consequences of your decisions, it makes sense to use tools that can assist you in evaluating certain relevant elements – such as risk. Given the nature of the court’s business, and the important consequences of your decisions, it makes sense to use tools that can assist you in evaluating certain relevant elements – such as risk.

14. The value of risk tools As Roger K. Warren notes: “A fourth principle of EBP recognizes the importance of using an actuarial risk/needs assessment tool to determine the offender’s level of risk and criminogenic needs... professional judgment must be combined with an actuarial tool that accurately assesses dynamic risk and criminogenic need factors “A fourth principle of EBP recognizes the importance of using an actuarial risk/needs assessment tool to determine the offender’s level of risk and criminogenic needs... professional judgment must be combined with an actuarial tool that accurately assesses dynamic risk and criminogenic need factors Evidence-Based Practices to Reduce Recidivism: Implications for State Judiciaries, 2007 Evidence-Based Practices to Reduce Recidivism: Implications for State Judiciaries, 2007

15. How extensively are risk tools used prior to sentencing? In a 2006 survey, about one-half of the state courts responding indicated that they used an objective risk assessment tool in felony cases prior to sentencing. (LSI was the most common tool mentioned). In a 2006 survey, about one-half of the state courts responding indicated that they used an objective risk assessment tool in felony cases prior to sentencing. (LSI was the most common tool mentioned). Over one-third of the courts responding indicated that they did not use an objective risk tool – although many indicated that their probation departments used such tools. Over one-third of the courts responding indicated that they did not use an objective risk tool – although many indicated that their probation departments used such tools. Peters and Warren, 2006 Peters and Warren, 2006

16. States that use a risk assessment tool for parole release consideration Alaska Alaska Arizona Arizona Arkansas Arkansas Colorado Colorado Connecticut Connecticut Delaware Delaware Florida Florida Georgia Georgia Hawaii Hawaii Iowa Iowa Maryland Maryland Massachusetts Massachusetts Missouri New Jersey Ohio South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia

17. What does “high risk” mean A risk tool places individuals into groups depending on the presence or absence of certain risk-related characteristics that they possess. A risk tool places individuals into groups depending on the presence or absence of certain risk-related characteristics that they possess. When a person is in a group that has a “high risk” of recidivism, it means that people in that group, when compared to other groups, are more likely to demonstrate the risk being measured (such as return to prison after release). When a person is in a group that has a “high risk” of recidivism, it means that people in that group, when compared to other groups, are more likely to demonstrate the risk being measured (such as return to prison after release).

18. What “high risk” doesn’t mean But a risk instrument does not tell you whether a particular person in a group will return to prison – it only tells you what percentage of the people in his/her group will most likely be returning to prison. But a risk instrument does not tell you whether a particular person in a group will return to prison – it only tells you what percentage of the people in his/her group will most likely be returning to prison. Even in a high risk of failure group, a substantial portion of the people in that group will succeed in the community. Even in a high risk of failure group, a substantial portion of the people in that group will succeed in the community.

19. Recap: Risk assessment 1. Is an objective tool that measures the likelihood of some occurrence; 1. Is an objective tool that measures the likelihood of some occurrence; 2. Places people into categories of risk; 2. Places people into categories of risk; 3. Does not tell us who within that category will engage in the risky behavior; 3. Does not tell us who within that category will engage in the risky behavior; 4. Increases your accuracy at predicting certain outcomes for people within a group; 4. Increases your accuracy at predicting certain outcomes for people within a group; 5. Can contain “needs” information that identifies factors related to the likelihood of future criminal activity (“criminogenic” factors). 5. Can contain “needs” information that identifies factors related to the likelihood of future criminal activity (“criminogenic” factors).

20. 2. Risk Management When decisions are made by the court regarding sentencing or the imposition of conditions - based in part on risks that are believed to be present – then the court is engaging in risk management work. When decisions are made by the court regarding sentencing or the imposition of conditions - based in part on risks that are believed to be present – then the court is engaging in risk management work. Risk management notions can help us to allocate resources (such as prison beds), better determine the most appropriate candidates for programs, levels of supervision, and other matters. Risk management notions can help us to allocate resources (such as prison beds), better determine the most appropriate candidates for programs, levels of supervision, and other matters.

21. Risk management and resource allocation There are certain costs associated with placement decisions. If “lower risk” offenders are placed in jails or prisons, then there is a prison bed cost. Of course, the decision may be based on factors unrelated to risk. There are certain costs associated with placement decisions. If “lower risk” offenders are placed in jails or prisons, then there is a prison bed cost. Of course, the decision may be based on factors unrelated to risk. If we place “low risk” offenders on high end supervision programs, then we are choosing to allocate more staff time and resources to these offenders even though they appear likely to succeed in the community. If we place “low risk” offenders on high end supervision programs, then we are choosing to allocate more staff time and resources to these offenders even though they appear likely to succeed in the community.

22. Managing risk through incarceration For inmates that we believe to have violent and dangerous tendencies, there is a logical desire to separate them from our communities for a long time. For inmates that we believe to have violent and dangerous tendencies, there is a logical desire to separate them from our communities for a long time. But for less violent offenders, does keeping them in prison longer help to increase or decrease the likelihood of their recidivism? Some studies have shown a 3% increase in recidivism for offenders who have stayed in prison an extra 1 to 3 years. DOJ recidivism studies in 2002 show no impact by keeping offenders in prison a few months more or less. But for less violent offenders, does keeping them in prison longer help to increase or decrease the likelihood of their recidivism? Some studies have shown a 3% increase in recidivism for offenders who have stayed in prison an extra 1 to 3 years. DOJ recidivism studies in 2002 show no impact by keeping offenders in prison a few months more or less. Sources: USDOJ, Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994. BJS, June, 2002. Dr. James Austin, Dr. Tony Fabelo. “The Diminishing Returns of Increased Incarceration. JFA Institute. July, 2004. Sources: USDOJ, Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994. BJS, June, 2002. Dr. James Austin, Dr. Tony Fabelo. “The Diminishing Returns of Increased Incarceration. JFA Institute. July, 2004.

23. What are the characteristics of people who commit the most crimes? Although crimes may be committed by a person of any background, most crimes are committed by individuals who are: YoungMale Have a history of criminal actions

24. Do released offenders account for much of the crime that occurs? National studies have indicated that less than 5% of arrests for serious crimes involved persons released from prison within the past three years. National studies have indicated that less than 5% of arrests for serious crimes involved persons released from prison within the past three years. But crimes committed by offenders get more attention – from the media and others – and so these crimes can have a significant impact on public perceptions. But crimes committed by offenders get more attention – from the media and others – and so these crimes can have a significant impact on public perceptions. Source: Dr. James Austin, Dr. Tony Fabelo. “The Diminishing Returns of Increased Incarceration.” JFA Institute, July, 2004. Source: Dr. James Austin, Dr. Tony Fabelo. “The Diminishing Returns of Increased Incarceration.” JFA Institute, July, 2004.

25. 3. Risk Reduction In addition to trying to understand general offender characteristics that are associated with a higher risk of committing crimes and being re- incarcerated, we may also want to identify characteristics of individuals that – if changed – could reduce their likelihood of recidivism. In addition to trying to understand general offender characteristics that are associated with a higher risk of committing crimes and being re- incarcerated, we may also want to identify characteristics of individuals that – if changed – could reduce their likelihood of recidivism. Taking actions that attempt to reduce the likelihood of a person committing a crime after release could be called risk reduction efforts. Taking actions that attempt to reduce the likelihood of a person committing a crime after release could be called risk reduction efforts.

26. What “dynamic”characteristics seem to be related to offender failure?  Anti-social behavior history (low self-control)  Anti-social personality traits, attitudes, callousness, emotional instability  Dysfunctional family  Anti-social peers  Anti-social values Substance Abuse Employment Accommodations Recreation and leisure activities Financial

27. Targeted interventions If we identify changeable factors that are related to risk of recidivism – and we address them – can we reduce offender risk? If we identify changeable factors that are related to risk of recidivism – and we address them – can we reduce offender risk? Studies have shown that, when Evidenced Based Approaches are applied to our interventions, recidivism can be significantly impacted. Studies have shown that, when Evidenced Based Approaches are applied to our interventions, recidivism can be significantly impacted. This requires us to identify the right factors, and to address them in the right ways. This requires us to identify the right factors, and to address them in the right ways.

28. Recidivism Reductions as a Function of Targeting Multiple Criminogenic vs. Non-Criminogenic Needs (see Dowden, 1998, in Andrews & Bonta, 2007)

29. National - Intervention Effects for Adult Offenders: Education/Vocational Programs and Services Better outcomes Poorer outcomes (Aos et al., 2001)

30. Targeting Criminogenic Need: Results from Meta-Analyses Reduction in Recidivism Source: Gendreau P., French S.A., and A. Taylor (2002). What Works (What Doesn’t Work) Revised 2002 Invited Submission to the International Community Corrections Association Monograph Series Project

31. Risk reduction – risk, needs, responsivity In addition to identifying higher risk offenders, and the factors that fuel these risks and that can be addressed through programs, we must also place offenders in the most appropriate types of interventions. In addition to identifying higher risk offenders, and the factors that fuel these risks and that can be addressed through programs, we must also place offenders in the most appropriate types of interventions. These program interventions should be related to the reasons or need for placement, be appropriately designed for particular offenders, and should be applied in the right “dose.” These program interventions should be related to the reasons or need for placement, be appropriately designed for particular offenders, and should be applied in the right “dose.”

32. Matching offenders, programs and dosage What does the research tells us will happen if we place high risk offenders in the right types of interventions? We can reduce the likelihood of their recidivism. What does the research tells us will happen if we place high risk offenders in the right types of interventions? We can reduce the likelihood of their recidivism. What does the research tell us will happen if we place low risk offenders in high-end intervention programs? We will increase the likelihood of their recidivism. What does the research tell us will happen if we place low risk offenders in high-end intervention programs? We will increase the likelihood of their recidivism. Aos, et al., 2006 Aos, et al., 2006

33. Risk Level and Treatment (% Recidivism)

34. Criminogenic needs and condition setting Risk/need assessment tools that provide insights into the “drivers” of criminal behavior also help us to understand the issues that can be the focus of risk-reduction efforts. Risk/need assessment tools that provide insights into the “drivers” of criminal behavior also help us to understand the issues that can be the focus of risk-reduction efforts. However, when we “over-prescribe” and impose conditions that are not required (based on need) or not necessary (based on risk) we can increase the likelihood of offender failure. However, when we “over-prescribe” and impose conditions that are not required (based on need) or not necessary (based on risk) we can increase the likelihood of offender failure. Lowencamp and Latessa, 2005; Lowencamp and Latessa, 2005;

35. Halfway Houses to Promote Reentry: Efficacy as a Function of Offender Risk Approx. 3,500 offenders placed in halfway houses, compared to 3,500 not placed in a halfway house (Lowenkamp & Latessa, 2005) Better outcomes

36. Evidence Based Sentencing The use by the court of an appropriate risk and needs assessment tool can aid in the development of evidence based sentencing. The use by the court of an appropriate risk and needs assessment tool can aid in the development of evidence based sentencing.

37. Why evidence based sentencing? 1. reduces crime 2. more cost-effective; 3. avoids future victimizations; 4. reduces prison populations & costs; 5. reduces social, economic, & family costs; 6. frees prison beds for more serious offenders; and 7. allows states to re-focus spending on other priorities. Source: National Judicial College, NCSC, CJI Source: National Judicial College, NCSC, CJI

38. Use of Risk/Needs Assessment Information at Sentencing Aids in the identification of offenders who should be targeted for interventions. Aids in the identification of offenders who should be targeted for interventions. Identifies dynamic risk factors to target with the conditions of probation. Identifies dynamic risk factors to target with the conditions of probation. Risk scores are not intended to determine the severity of the penalty or whether an offender is incarcerated. Risk scores are not intended to determine the severity of the penalty or whether an offender is incarcerated. Source, National Judicial College, NCSC, CJI Source, National Judicial College, NCSC, CJI

39. Effective use of risk and needs information in setting conditions Targeting high and moderate-high risk offenders for higher level sanctions. Targeting high and moderate-high risk offenders for higher level sanctions. Focusing conditions on factors that are related to criminal conduct (criminogenic factors). Focusing conditions on factors that are related to criminal conduct (criminogenic factors). Imposing fewer conditions on offenders who appear to pose lower risk of failure. Imposing fewer conditions on offenders who appear to pose lower risk of failure.

40. Conclusions Risk and needs assessment information considered prior to sentencing can aid the court to: Risk and needs assessment information considered prior to sentencing can aid the court to: Engage in evidence based decision making Engage in evidence based decision making Focus greater resources on higher risk offenders Focus greater resources on higher risk offenders Pursue risk reduction strategies by targeting appropriate criminogenic factors Pursue risk reduction strategies by targeting appropriate criminogenic factors Improve the use of available resources Improve the use of available resources Promote public safety Promote public safety