Date: April 29, 2024 Mon

Time: 10:47 pm

Results for risk assessment

235 results found

Author: Eisenberg, Mike Title: Validation of the Wisconsin Department of Corrections Risk Assessment Instrument Summary: Probation and parole agencies across the country use risk assessment instruments to predict the likelihood that individuals under supervision will reoffend. Like other departments across the nation, the Division of Community Corrections of the Wisconsin Department of Corrections requires that the "Admission to Adult Field Caseload" risk classification instrument be completed for all felony and assaultive misdemeanor cases at the time an offender is admitted to field supervision. This instrument, commonly referred to as the DOC 502, is used not only to estimate risk probabilities for supervision purposes, but also to help determine staff workload and deployment. The DOC 502 risk assessment instrument was last validated in 1984 and department officials have sought to examine the validity of their risk instrument on a more contemporaneous population. To address the need for revalidation, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections contracted with the Council of State Governments Justice Center to conduct a validation study of the DOC 502 risk assessment instrument. This report reviews general issues associated with the use of risk assessment instruments in classifying offenders and presents the results of a validation study of the DOC 502 risk assessment instrument. Validity of risk assessment instruments is the most important supportive principle behind the proper utilization of these instruments. Namely, the instruments' predictions must be supported by research showing it can identify different groups of offenders with different probabilities of reoffending. Details: New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2009. 56p. Source: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/WIRiskValidationFinalJuly2009.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/WIRiskValidationFinalJuly2009.pdf Shelf Number: 116250 Keywords: Corrections Prisoner Classification Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Brumbaugh, Susan Title: Suitability of Assessment Instruments for Delinquent Girls Summary: The purpose of this review is to determine the extent to which assessment instruments used with at-risk and justice-involved youth are equally appropriate and effective in assessing girls and boys. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Source: Girls Study Group Year: 0 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117335 Keywords: Female Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment

Author: Yang, Min Title: Applying Neural Networks and Other Statistical Models to the Classification of Serious Offenders and the Prediction of Recidivism Summary: This methodological study aims primarily to explore the applicability of data mining techniques, including Neural Networks and Classification Tree models, in predicting the risk of violent recidivism, together with their predictive validity in comparison with conventional logistic regression. Its aim is to lead to the development of better risk assessment. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2010. 31p. Source: Ministry of Justice Research Series 6/10 Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 117796 Keywords: Classification of Offenders Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Great Britain. Home Office Title: A Guide to Violent Offender Orders Summary: The U.K. Violent Offender Order (VOO) is a civil preventative order that aims to help the police manage risk more effectively. They place restrictions on offenders who continue to pose a risk of serious violent harm by restricting their access to certain places, events or people to whom they pose the highest risk. This report presents guidance on the use of VOOs, what they are and how they can be used. Details: London: Home Office, 2009. 85p. Source: Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 117393 Keywords: Risk Assessment Violent Offender Orders (U.K.) Violent Offenders

Author: Debidin, Mia, editor Title: A Compendium of Research and Analysis on the Offender Assessment System (OASys) 2006-2009 Summary: The Offender Assessment System (OASys) is a U.K. national risk/need assessment tool used by the prison and probation services in England and Wales. Th tool combines actuarial methods of prediction with structured professional judgment to provide standardized assessments of offenders' risks and needs, as well as linking these risks and needs to individualized sentence plans and risk management plans. OASys data is collated centrally within the OASys Data Eveluation and Analysis Team (O-DEAT) database, and this report presents OASys research and analysis conducted by O-DEAT from 2006 to 2009. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2009. 314p. Source: Ministry of Justice Research Series 16/09; Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 118222 Keywords: Prisons Probation Risk Assessment

Author: Miller, Allison Title: Inventory of Spousal Violence Risk Assessment Tools Used in Canada Summary: This is an inventory of which (if any) spousal violence risk assessment tools are currently being used by criminal justice personnel (e.g. police, corrections, probation officers) with the goal of preventing future risk and harm to victims of spousal violence in Canada. Details: Ottawa: Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada, 2009. 25p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: Canada URL: Shelf Number: 118362 Keywords: Family Violence (Canada) Risk Assessment Spousal Abuse (Canada) Violence Against Women

Author: Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research Title: Research and Practice in Risk Asessment and Management of Children and Young People Engaging in Offending Behaviours: A Literature Review Summary: This study provides an evaluation of the literature on research and practice in relation to the risk assessment and risk management of children and young people engaging in offending behaviors, to be used to inform the Risk Management Authority's future work in these fields. The study incorporates two aspects: a review of national and international literature on the topic, with particular reference to violent offending and sexually harmful behavior, and a review of current practice in reference to the assessment and management of these young people at risk of harm and re-offending in Scotland. Details: Glasgow: Risk Mamangement Authority, 2007. 107p. Source: Year: 2007 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 113632 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Juvenile Sex Offenders Risk Assessment Risk Management Violent Offenders Young Offenders

Author: Bichou, Khalid Title: Security and Risk-Based Models in Shipping and Ports: Review and Critical Analysis Summary: The primary aim of maritime security assessment models is to assess the level of security within and across the maritime network. When managing risk through legislation, regulatory assessment models are used to assess risk levels and examine the impact of policy options, usually in terms of the costs and benefits of a regulatory proposal. This paper reviews the development, application and adequacy of existing risk assessment and management models to maritime and port security. In particular, it examines the problematical issues of security perception, value and impact, and discusses the limitations of the current regulatory framework in providing an integrated and effective approach to risk assessment and managment, including for supply chain security. Details: Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, International Transport Forum, 2008. 38p. Source: Internet Resource; Discussion Paper No. 2008-20 Year: 2008 Country: International URL: Shelf Number: 118796 Keywords: Harbors, Security Measures Maritime Law Maritime Security Port Security Risk Assessment Shipping, Security Measures Supply Chains Transnational Crime

Author: Advance Workplace Management Inc. Title: Workplace Violence Risk Assessment for Langley Memorial Hospital Summary: This report presents a review of the workplace violence situation at Langley Memorial Hospital and makes recommendations for short and long-term actions that would improve the hospital's workplace violence prevention and management program. Details: Coquitlam, BC, Canada: Advance Workplace Management, 2001. 108p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2001 Country: Canada URL: Shelf Number: 119262 Keywords: Hospitals, Violence Risk Assessment Workplace Crime Workplace Violence

Author: Weber, Lloyd E. Title: The Illicit Methamphetamine Landscape of Franklin County, Missouri: Application and Analysis of a GIS-based Risk Assessment Model Summary: Illicit methamphetamine, a synthetic, highly addictive drug, has gained national attention because of its destructive properties. Between 2002 and 2004 close to 400 clandestine methamphetamine labs were seized in Franklin County, Missouri. This study reviews documented methamphetamine production risk factors and examines a spatial model based on the reviewed risk factors. The risk factors include populations that are rural, white, impoverished, undereducated, unmarried and aged 25 - 29. The model is advanced by adding a component representing a clandestine landscape. Model output is validated using illicit meth lab seizure data supplied by Franklin County law enforcement. The model components are tested using both ordinary least squares and geographically weighted regression. This study found that the model is successful in indicating areas that have the potential to develop methamphetamine production problems. The model also was successful in indicating areas that would not likely develop a meth production problem. Ordinary least squares regression analysis indicates that every model component, with the exception of percent white and percent unmarried, are positively correlated with meth production in this case study. The results from the geographically weighted regression analysis show percent rural, percent poverty and percent clandestine landscape vary significantly across the county and indicate which areas these components have the most effect in developing and sustaining an illicit meth landscape. Details: Columbia, MO: University of Missouri-Columbia, 2006. 79p. Source: Internet Resource; Thesis Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 118229 Keywords: Geographic Information Systems Illicit Drugs Methamphetamine (Missouri) Risk Assessment

Author: Mason, Ron Title: Analysis of the Tasmania Police Risk Assessment Screening Tool (RAST) Summary: Safe at Home involves a range of initiatives, expanded and new services that represent a significant change in the way the Tasmanian Government responds to family violence: family violence is treated as a crime rather than a private matter. Included in the Safe at Home Strategy was the implementation of a Risk Assessment Screening Tool (RAST) developed by Tasmania Police and the Department of Justice. The RAST is utilised by operational police at the attendance of family violence incidents to assist in assessing the risk of a victim experiencing future violence. In May 2008, Tasmania Police contracted the Tasmanian Institute of Law Enforcement Studies [TILES], of the University of Tasmania, to undertake a statistical analysis of the police Risk Assessment Screening Tool [RAST] to determine the validity and reliability of the RAST with respect to the Tasmanian population. The study concluded that, whilst the current scoring system employed has modest predictive utility (AUC .602), with an increased risk of misclassification in the medium and high categories, those characteristics identified through regression modelling provided a significantly greater level of accuracy (AUC .726). This reflects good predictive utility in that it is correct in predicting repeat offending in nearly 75% of cases (i.e. in approximately 3 out of 4 cases). It should be noted that this compares favourably with other risk assessment tools. With the primary purpose of the RAST being to predict the likelihood of re-offending, the Analysis found that the most useful risk factors on the RAST are those that reflect static variables. Static variables include age, gender, criminal history and education, and tend to be objective rather than subjective. Problems identified with the present RAST included structural issues whereby risk factors may have unintended deleterious and/or cumulative effects on the likelihood of re-offending. Consequent of these conclusions, it has been recommended that a new weighting system be considered with emphasis placed on those risk factors that have a cumulative effect on re-offending. The Analysis identified potential for improvements to the RAST that could increase its predictive utility from modest to good. Details: Hobart, Tasmania: Tasmanian Institute of Law Enforcement Studies, 2009. 68p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 119555 Keywords: Domestic Violence (Tasmania) Family Violence Policing Reoffending Risk Assessment

Author: VanNostrand, Marie Title: Alternatives to Pretrial Detention: Southern District of Iowa: A Case Study Summary: The pretrial detention rates for the Southern District of Iowa reached their highest levels between July 2006 and June 2007 with detention rates of 69.5% including immigration cases and 67.3% excluding immigration cases. The detention rates at that time were significantly above the national average of 61.7% and were the highest in the 8th Circuit which averaged 57.2% during the same period. It was the awareness of the increasing detention rates that led U.S. Pretrial Services in the Southern District of Iowa to commence a project with the goal of increasing the utilization of alternatives to detention when appropriate to increase pretrial release rates while assuring court appearance and community safety. The District partnered with Luminosity, Inc. to conduct an objective and research-based assessment of the project progress two years following implementation. This report contains (1) background information related to pretrial release and detention, pretrial services, the Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program, and the concept of the EBP risk principle and (2) detailed findings of the assessment. The assessment revealed that the Southern District of Iowa was able to substantially increase the utilization of alternatives to detention resulting in a pretrial release rate increase of 15% while assuring court appearance and community safety. In fact, the increased pretrial release rate was accompanied by an increase in court appearance rate by 2.6% and decreases in both new alleged criminal activity rate (1.7% decrease) and revocations due to technical violations (2.8% decrease) for defendants released pending trial. Details: St. Petersburg, FL: Luminosity, 2010. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 25, 2018 at: https://www.pretrial.org/download/risk-assessment/Alternatives%20to%20Pretrial%20Detention%20Southern%20District%20of%20Iowa%20-%20VanNostrand%202010.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: https://www.pretrial.org/download/risk-assessment/Alternatives%20to%20Pretrial%20Detention%20Southern%20District%20of%20Iowa%20-%20VanNostrand%202010.pdf Shelf Number: 119566 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Bail Pretrial Detention (Iowa) Pretrial Justice Pretrial Services Risk Assessment

Author: Latessa, Edward Title: Creation and Validation of the Ohio Risk Assessment System: Final Report Summary: "This report outlines the development and validation of the Ohio Risk Assessment System. The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections contracted with the University of Cincinnati, Center for Criminal Justice Research to create a risk assessment system that provided assessments at multiple points in the criminal justice system and that was validated on an Ohio population. A major goal of the project was to develop assessments that abided by the principles of effective classification by constructing assessments that 1) separated Ohio offenders into risk groups based on their likelihood to recidivate, 2) identified dynamic risk factors that can be used to prioritize programmatic needs, and 3) identify potential barriers to treatment. The Ohio Risk Assessment System was created using a prospective design that involved conducting in-depth structured interviews of over 1,800 offenders at the following stages in Ohio’s justice system: pretrial, community supervision, prison intake, and community reentry. After interviews were conducted, offenders were tracked for approximately one year to gather follow-up information on recidivism. Five assessment instruments were created using items that were related to recidivism: The Pretrial Assessment Tool, The Community Supervision Tool, The Community Supervision Screening Tool, The Prison Intake Tool, and the Reentry Tool. Validation involved examining the predictive power of the assessment instruments. The results reveal that all assessment instruments are able to significantly distinguish between risk levels. Further, r values are relatively large, and depending upon the assessment instrument, range from .22 to .44. Concurrent validity also was examined by comparing the predictive power of each assessment tool to the LSI-R and the Wisconsin Risk / Needs instruments. These results revealed that the instruments for the Ohio Risk Assessment System performed as well if not better than both of the other instruments." Details: Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati, School of Criminal Justice, Center for Criminal Justice Research, 2009. 65p. Source: Internet Resource; Accessed August 8, 2010 at http://www.assessments.com/assessments_documentation/ORAS/ORAS_Final_Report_and_Validation.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.assessments.com/assessments_documentation/ORAS/ORAS_Final_Report_and_Validation.pdf Shelf Number: 119579 Keywords: Classification of Prisoners (Ohio) Offenders (Ohio) Risk Assessment

Author: Bonta, James Title: The Strategic Training Initiative in Community Supervision: Risk-Need-Responsivity in the Real World Summary: Community supervision is the most prevalent form of correctional control. In Canada, there are approximately 95,000 offenders under probation or parole supervision. In the United States the number exceeds five million. Despite the prevalence of its use, little is known about the effectiveness of community supervision. The risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model of offender rehabilitation has guided the development of treatment programs but it has not been applied in situations of one-on-one supervision. In the present study, an RNR-based training program was developed and delivered to probation officers to assist in the direct supervision of offenders under a probation order. Probation officers were randomly assigned to a training or no-training condition. After training, probation officers audiotaped some of their sessions with clients in order to assess their use of the skills taught in training. The results showed that the trained probation officers evidenced more of the RNR-based skills and that their clients had a lower recidivism rate. The findings suggest that training in the evidenced-based principles of the RNR model can have an important impact on the behaviour of probation officers and their clients. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2010. 20p. Source: Internet Resource; Corrections Research: User Report 2010-01. Accessed August 16, 2010 at: http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collections/collection_2010/sp-ps/PS3-1-2010-1-eng.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Canada URL: http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collections/collection_2010/sp-ps/PS3-1-2010-1-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 119617 Keywords: Community Based Corrections (Canada) Parolees Probation Officers Probationers Risk Assessment

Author: World Health Organization Title: Preventing Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Against Women: Taking action and Generating Evidence Summary: Intimate partner and sexual violence affect a large proportion of the population – with the majority of those directly experiencing such violence being women and the majority perpetrating it being men. The harm they cause can last a lifetime and span generations, with serious adverse affects on health, education and employment. The primary prevention of these types of violence will therefore save lives and money – investments made now to stop intimate partner and sexual violence before they occur will protect the physical, mental and economic well-being and development of individuals, families, communities and whole societies. This document aims to provide sufficient information for policy-makers and planners to develop data-driven and evidence-based programmes for preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women and is divided into the following chapters: Chapter 1 outlines the nature, magnitude and consequences of intimate partner and sexual violence within the broader typology of violence. Chapter 2 identifies the risk and protective factors for such violence and the importance of addressing both risk and protective factors in prevention efforts. Chapter 3 summarizes the scientific evidence base for primary prevention strategies, and describes programmes of known effectiveness, those supported by emerging evidence and those that could potentially be effective but have yet to be sufficiently evaluated for their impact. Chapter 4 presents a six-step framework for taking action, generating evidence and sharing results. In the closing section, several future research priorities are outlined and a number of key conclusions drawn. Details: Geneva: World Health Organization, 2010. 94p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 3, 2010 at: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2010/9789241564007_eng.pdf Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2010/9789241564007_eng.pdf Shelf Number: 119737 Keywords: Battered Women Domestic Violence Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Sex Offenses Spouse Abuse Violence Against Women

Author: Welsh, Brandon C. Title: Effects of Closed Circuit Television Surveillance on Crime Summary: Closed circuit television (CCTV) surveillance cameras serve many functions and are used in both public and private settings. The prevention of personal and property crime is among the primary objectives in public space, which is the main focus of this review. CCTV is viewed as a technique of “formal surveillance” and in this regard it is seen to enhance or take the place of security personnel. Results of this review indicate that CCTV has a modest but significant desirable effect on crime, is most effective in reducing crime in car parks, is most effective when targeted at vehicle crimes (largely a function of the successful car park schemes), and is more effective in reducing crime in the United Kingdom than in other countries. These results lend support for the continued use of CCTV to prevent crime in public space, but suggest that it be more narrowly targeted than its present use would indicate. Future CCTV schemes should employ high-quality evaluation designs with long follow-up periods. Details: Oslo: Cambell Collaboration, 2008. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2008: 17: Accessed September 8, 2010 at: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/243/ Year: 2008 Country: International URL: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/243/ Shelf Number: 119767 Keywords: Closed-Circuit Television Electronic Surveillance Evidence-Based Practices Punishment Recidivism Risk Assessment Sentencing (U.S.) Situational Crime Prevention

Author: McLeod, Rosie Title: Good Practice Guidance: Commission, Administering and Producing Psychiatric Reports for Sentencing. Prepared for Her Majesty's Cout Service Summary: This document provides good practice guidance for the commissioning, administration and production of psychiatric reports for sentencing in U.K. criminal courts. The guidance is designed to help psychiatrists, the judiciary and court staff. It is not intended to be prescriptive but to enable practitioners to reflect critically on their practice to ensure that it is of the highest quality. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2010. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 16, 2010 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/good-practice-guidance-psych-reports-sentancing.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/good-practice-guidance-psych-reports-sentancing.pdf Shelf Number: 119815 Keywords: Mental Health Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: McLeod, Rosie Title: Improving the Structure and Content of Psychiatric Reports for Sentencing: Research to Develop Good Practice Guidance Summary: This research study produced good practice guidance on the structure and content of psychiatric reports for sentencing in criminal courts. It consisted of a three-stage process of fact finding, development and testing involving key stakeholders from the judiciary and magistrates, court staff and psychiatrists using an ‘action research’ methodology. Many stakeholders questioned the efficiency of the current system for commissioning reports, and a desire for good practice guidance was expressed. TNS-BMRB co-created guidance in consultation with stakeholders and a Forensic Psychiatrist which addresses the commissioning, administration and production of reports. The document was tested among stakeholders and refined using their feedback. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2010. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 16, 2010 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/improving-psychiatric-reports-0910.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/improving-psychiatric-reports-0910.pdf Shelf Number: 119816 Keywords: Mental Health Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: Barnoski, Robert Title: Washington's Offender Accountability Act: Department of Corrections' Static Risk Instrument Summary: The 1999 Offender Accountability Act (OAA) affects how the Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC) supervises convicted felony offenders in the community. The Washington State Institute for Public Policy (Institute) was directed by the Legislature to evaluate the OAA. The OAA requires DOC to supervise felony offenders according to their risk for future offending. Risk for future offending is estimated using instruments that classify offenders into groups with similar characteristics. Criminal behavior is difficult to predict; even the most accurate instruments, like this one, cannot predict with absolute certainty who will subsequently reoffend. In our 2003 report, the Institute evaluated the validity of DOC’s risk assessment tool and found that the tool could be strengthened by including more information about an offender’s prior record of convictions. Subsequently, DOC asked the Institute to develop a new “static risk” instrument based on offender demographics and criminal history because of the following advantages: Increased predictive accuracy; Prediction of three types of high risk offenders: drug, property, and violent; Increased objectivity; Decreased time to complete the assessment; and Accurate recording of criminal history for use in other DOC reporting requirements. This report describes our evaluation of the validity of the static risk instrument developed for DOC. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2007. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 23, 2010 at: http://www.asca.net/documents/07-03-1201-WSIPPStaticRisk.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.asca.net/documents/07-03-1201-WSIPPStaticRisk.pdf Shelf Number: 114887 Keywords: Classification of Offenders Felony Offenders Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Robinson, Elly Title: Family Violence: Towards a Holistic Approach to Screening and Risk Assessment in Family Support Services Summary: Since the 1960s, violence between intimate partners, between family members and towards children has been increasingly recognised as a significant problem. Seminal work on male violence towards women within families was conducted in Britain, Australia and the United States. Prior to that, Kempe, Silverman, Steele, Droeghmeuller, and Silver found convincing (and at the time shocking) evidence of the extent to which children were being physically abused by parents and carers. While knowledge about family violence and its effects has grown considerably since this time, services still grapple with the most effective ways of identifying family violence issues with which clients present and, just as importantly, of taking appropriate actions once family violence has been accurately identified. Research such as the evaluation of the 2006 family law reforms suggested that family violence is not always recognised by practitioners working in this area and that even when it is recognised, appropriate actions aimed at creating or preserving safety are not always taken. This paper reviews the current research and literature specific to family violence screening and risk assessment. It is hoped that the paper will assist service providers and practitioners to develop and evaluate tools for use within family support services. Details: Melbourne, Australi: Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2010. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: AFR Briefing, No. 17: Accessed October 25, 2010 at: http://www.aifs.gov.au/afrc/pubs/briefing/b017/b017.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aifs.gov.au/afrc/pubs/briefing/b017/b017.pdf Shelf Number: 120067 Keywords: Child Abuse Family Violence Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment

Author: Great Britain. HM Inspectorate of Probation Title: Getting There Now: A Follow-Up Inquiry into the Management of Offenders' Risk of Harm to Others by London Probation Trust. In: Croydon; Bexley & Bromley; Greenwich; Lewisham; Ealing; Harrow & Hillington; Camden & Islington; Newham Summary: In 2009 we were asked by the then Justice Secretary to inspect the Public Protection work of London Probation because of concerns that had arisen in a scrutiny of the management by London Probation of an offender, Dano Sonnex, who had committed two serious further offences whilst under supervision. Two sets of case inspections were planned, for 2009 and 2010 respectively, partly to cover as much of London as possible, and partly to look at performance over time. In the event, this second set of inspections took on an even greater significance as a follow-up exercise, since our 2009 report was critical of the quality of ROH work in London Probation. We used our Risk of Harm Area Assessment (RoHAA) inspection tool to assess the total sample of 280 cases across 8 Local Delivery Units (LDUs). The tool comprises a subset of the questions used in the OMI 2 programme and focuses principally on the assessment and management of the ROH to others in a representative sample of cases. We also received evidence from London Probation Trust and spoke to the Assistant Chief Officers in charge of each LDU. The report concludes that the organisation has improved substantially in the past year. Details: London: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2010. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 1, 2010 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/inspectorates/hmi-probation/docs/london-roh-inspection-2010-report-final-rps.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/inspectorates/hmi-probation/docs/london-roh-inspection-2010-report-final-rps.pdf Shelf Number: 120150 Keywords: Probation Probationers Risk Assessment

Author: National Research Council. Committee to Review the Department of Homeland Security's Approach to Risk Analysis Title: Review of the Department of Homeland Security's Approach to Risk Analysis Summary: The events of September 11, 2001 changed perceptions, rearranged national priorities, and produced significant new government entities, including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) created in 2003. While the principal mission of DHS is to lead efforts to secure the nation against those forces that wish to do harm, the department also has responsibilities in regard to preparation for and response to other hazards and disasters, such as floods, earthquakes, and other "natural" disasters. Whether in the context of preparedness, response or recovery from terrorism, illegal entry to the country, or natural disasters, DHS is committed to processes and methods that feature risk assessment as a critical component for making better-informed decisions. Review of the Department of Homeland Security's Approach to Risk Analysis explores how DHS is building its capabilities in risk analysis to inform decision making. The department uses risk analysis to inform decisions ranging from high-level policy choices to fine-scale protocols that guide the minute-by-minute actions of DHS employees. Although DHS is responsible for mitigating a range of threats, natural disasters, and pandemics, its risk analysis efforts are weighted heavily toward terrorism. In addition to assessing the capability of DHS risk analysis methods to support decision-making, the book evaluates the quality of the current approach to estimating risk and discusses how to improve current risk analysis procedures. Review of the Department of Homeland Security's Approach to Risk Analysis recommends that DHS continue to build its integrated risk management framework. It also suggests that the department improve the way models are developed and used and follow time-tested scientific practices, among other recommendations. Details: Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2010. 148p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 2, 2010 at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12972 Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12972 Shelf Number: 120156 Keywords: Homeland Security Risk Assessment Terrorism

Author: Dedel, Kelly Title: Multnomah County Department of Community Justice Recog Tool Validation Study Summary: The Multnomah County Department of Community Justice (DCJ) uses a structured decision-making tool, "the Recog instrument," to assist in making decisions about which defendants should be released or detained pending trial. This type of instrument, in which each defendant is evaluated using an identical set of criteria, brings greater consistency and transparency to pretrial release decisions, which have profound consequences for both public safety and defendants' liberty. Even when developed through consensus among those with great practical experience and expertise in public safety, objective decision-making instruments should be validated through research to maximize the precision of their guidance. The overall purpose of the Recog tool is to properly classify defendants into risk levels that reflect their risk of a negative outcome (i.e., failing to appear in court (FTA) or being re-arrested for a new offense). This validation study examines the statistical relationships between the risk factors on the instrument and defendants'actual rates of FTA and re-arrest. Details: Portland, OR: One in 37 Research, Inc., 2008. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 8, 2010 at: http://www.co.multnomah.or.us/dcj/FINAL_Recog_Report-90908.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.co.multnomah.or.us/dcj/FINAL_Recog_Report-90908.pdf Shelf Number: 120201 Keywords: Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Dedel, Kelly Title: Validating Multnomah County's Juvenile Detention Risk Assessment Instrument Summary: Reform efforts targeting the detention population focus on two essential processes: 1) limiting the size of the detention population by setting risk-based thresholds to ensure that only those who pose a legitimate threat to public safety are admitted to detention; and 2) developing an array of alternatives to secure detention that offer a range of supervision and programming options. As these two strategies coalesce, jurisdictions committed to reform realize significant reductions in the use of secure detention. Since 1998, Multnomah County has been a national model for jurisdictions interested in enacting detention reform. With support from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Multnomah County has implemented nearly all of the key components of a multifaceted reform effort, save for one essential task: validating its detention risk screening instrument to ensure it provides sound guidance in determining who should be admitted to detention. Although its use has led to positive changes and a drastic reduction in the number of youth who are held in secure detention, the County’s Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI) has never been validated. In other words, the strength of the relationship between the items and score on the RAI and the youth’s likelihood of failing to appear in court (FTA) or committing a new offense while in the community pending court has not been tested. By testing the relationship between the RAI items and the outcome variables, we learn which items work best, and in which combinations, to identify youth who can be safely released to the community. A validation study may show that the RAI works best as it is; alternately, it could show that the same or better results could be achieved using a constellation of fewer items. This report presents the key findings of the validation study. Details: Portland, OR: One in 37 Research, Inc., 2007. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 8, 2010 at: http://web.multco.us/sites/default/files/documents/juvenile_detention_risk_assessment_instrument.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://web.multco.us/sites/default/files/documents/juvenile_detention_risk_assessment_instrument.pdf Shelf Number: 120202 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment

Author: Austin, James Title: Reliability and Validity Study of the LSI-R Risk Assessment Instrument Summary: The Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (PBPP) selected the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) instrument as its risk classification tool because it introduces dynamic and more current factors into the risk assessment process, beyond the conventional use of static criminal history and demographic factors. The LSI was developed in the late 1970s in Canada through a collaboration of probation officers, correctional managers, practitioners and researchers. The LSI-R is comprised of 54 static and dynamic items across ten sub-scales. While the LSI-R has been researched extensively in other jurisdictions, its reliability and validity specifically for Pennsylvania’s offender population had not yet been tested. Of particular interest is Pennsylvania’s decision to use the LSI-R as a component of its parole decision making guidelines; heretofore, the LSI-R has been used to identify the appropriate level of supervision for probationers and parolees already residing in the community. In this study, the LSI-R’s relevance and usefulness as a decision making tool as applied to an incarcerated population is a key line of inquiry. The Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) contracted The Institute on Crime, Justice and Corrections (ICJC) at The George Washington University to conduct a reliability and validation study using the LSI-R scores and recidivism data. The following report summarizes the ICJC’s findings. This project consists of two segments: an assessment of the inter-rater reliability in scoring the LSI-R, and the validation of the LSI-R’s statistical association with recidivism. The reliability assessment was conducted by selecting a sample of 120 prisoners who were scored on the LSI-R on two separate occasions by two independent PBPP institutional staff. The results of the initial reliability test showed that most of the LSI-R scoring items did not meet a sufficient level of reliability. Consequently, a second reliability test was made in September 2002 on another sample of 156 prisoners to determine if the reliability rates could be improved. The validation assessment entailed examining recidivists (for the purposes of this study, arrests, detentions, absconders, and returns to prison are considered recidivists) of approximately 1,000 prisoners who were released from nine LSI-R test facilities in 2001. For each of these prisoners an LSI-R form was completed. The follow-up period was for 12 months, which allowed the researchers to determine which items were associated with recidivism within that period. Details: Washington, DC: Institute on crime, Justice and Corrections at The George Washington University, 2003. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 9, 2010 at: www.portal.state.pa.us Year: 2003 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 120273 Keywords: Parole Prediction Probation Recidivism Risk Assessment Risk Management

Author: Zhang, Sheldon Title: COMPAS Validation Study: Final Report Summary: COMPAS (Correctional Offender Management and Profiling Alternative Sanctions) is a computerized database and analysis system designed to help criminal justice practitioners determine the placement, supervision, and case-management of offenders in community and secure settings. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation contracted with the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and San Diego State University (SDSU) to validate the instrument in terms of its ability to identify treatment needs among inmates as well as predict various recidivism outcomes. A total of 91,334 parolees who had been assessed with COMPAS prior to release were included in the study sample. Of these, roughly 60,000 had been on parole for at least 12 months and the remainder had been on parole for at least 24 months. Characteristics of the study subjects closely paralleled those of the general parolee population in California. The COMPAS needs scales were evaluated in terms of their reliability over time (test-retest coefficients) and the extent to which their constituent scales correlated with relevant counterparts on the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) scale (concurrent validity). To accomplish this, the COMPAS was administered twice to 75 inmates at the California Institute for Men (CIM) located in Chino, California, over a span of approximately two weeks. To establish concurrent validity, the LSI-R was also administered at the same time points. The COMPAS scales showed extremely high test-retest reliability, ranging from .70 to 1.00. The perfect and near-perfect correlations obtained for many of the scales appear to be driven by the fact that these scales were coded directly from the inmates’ Central Files. Overall, the average test-retest correlation coefficient for the COMPAS scales was .88. Of the 18 scales making up the core of the COMPAS assessment, nine appeared to measure identical or similar constructs with scales found in the LSI-R. For six of these scales (Criminal Involvement, Criminal Associates/Peers, Substance Abuse, Financial, Vocational/Educational, and Housing), significant and positive correlations were found between the COMPAS and LSI-R. The correlations were marginally significant for two of the scales, Family Criminality (COMPAS) with Family/Marital (LSI-R) and Criminal Attitudes (COMPAS) with Attitudes/Orientation (LSI-R), and not significant for one, Leisure (COMPAS) with Leisure/Recreation (LSI-R). Validation of Risk Scales Using official records data provided by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), two major outcome measures were examined: (1) any subsequent arrest, and (2) a subsequent arrest for a violent offense. For the first measure, the overall re-arrest rate for the COMPAS sample was 56% for the first 12 months on parole and 70% for those who had been released for two years. For violent offenses, the re-arrest rates were approximately 13% and 21% in the 12- and 24-month periods following release, respectively. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were computed to assess the overall accuracy of the COMPAS risk scales for recidivism and violence. The ROC curve (measured in terms of the area under the curve or AUC) has become a primary measure of predictive accuracy in research instrumentation. A value of .70 is generally considered minimally acceptable. The recidivism and violence COMPAS risk scales were examined with regard to how well they predicted whether a parolee had been re-arrested (for any reason and for a violence offense) within two years of being released from prison. Both risk scales achieved levels of accuracy greater than chance, with the recidivism scale receiving an AUC value of .70, and the violence scale receiving an AUC value of .65. The risk prediction resulting from the COMPAS scales was comparable to our own risk prediction models using existing electronic records maintained by CDCR. We conclude that the COMPAS scales have high test-test retest reliability and moderate concordance with select LSI-R scales (with significant or marginally significant associations with eight of the nine scales that overlap with the LSI-R). With regard to the predictive validity of the recidivism and violence COMPAS risk scales, the general recidivism risk scale achieved an AUC value of .70, which is the conventional threshold for acceptability; the violence scale, however, fell short of this threshold. Details: Los Angeles: Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles, 2010. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 9, 2010 at: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/COMPAS_Final_Report_08-11-10.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/COMPAS_Final_Report_08-11-10.pdf Shelf Number: 120274 Keywords: Parole Parolees Risk Assessment Risk Management

Author: Kercher, Glen Title: Assessing the Risk of Intimate Partner Violence Summary: There has been a dramatic transformation over the past 20 years in the response to intimate partner violence (IPV). These changes are apparent in criminal justice processing, the availability of social and advocacy services, the provision of emergency medical services, and from public opinion. Agencies dealing with victims and offenders have adopted a number of mechanisms to identify high risk cases in order to respond appropriately to safeguard the victim and reduce the re-occurrence of violence. This has led to an increasing demand for accurate risk assessment. The central purpose of this report is to identify the predictors of IPV and to assess the accuracy of different approaches and models in predicting risk of future harm or lethality to victims. These findings have broad implications for law enforcement, victim services, and prosecutors. Details: Huntsville, TX: Crime Victims' Institute, Sam Houston State University, 2010. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 10, 2010 at: http://www.crimevictimsinstitute.org/documents/CVI_AssessingRiskFinal_1-21-10.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.crimevictimsinstitute.org/documents/CVI_AssessingRiskFinal_1-21-10.pdf Shelf Number: 120084 Keywords: Domestic Violence Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Victim Services

Author: Zhang, Sheldon Title: COMPAS Validation Study: Final Report Summary: COMPAS (Correctional Offender Management and Profiling Alternative Sanctions) is a computerized database and analysis system designed to help criminal justice practitioners determine the placement, supervision, and case-management of offenders in community and secure settings. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation contracted with the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and San Diego State University (SDSU) to validate the instrument in terms of its ability to identify treatment needs among inmates as well as predict various recidivism outcomes. A total of 91,334 parolees who had been assessed with COMPAS prior to release were included in the study sample. Of these, roughly 60,000 had been on parole for at least 12 months and the remainder had been on parole for at least 24 months. Characteristics of the study subjects closely paralleled those of the general parolee population in California. The COMPAS needs scales were evaluated in terms of their reliability over time (test-retest coefficients) and the extent to which their constituent scales correlated with relevant counterparts on the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) scale (concurrent validity). To accomplish this, the COMPAS was administered twice to 75 inmates at the California Institute for Men (CIM) located in Chino, California, over a span of approximately two weeks. To establish concurrent validity, the LSI-R was also administered at the same time points. The COMPAS scales showed extremely high test-retest reliability, ranging from .70 to 1.00. The perfect and near-perfect correlations obtained for many of the scales appear to be driven by the fact that these scales were coded directly from the inmates’ Central Files. Overall, the average test-retest correlation coefficient for the COMPAS scales was .88. Of the 18 scales making up the core of the COMPAS assessment, nine appeared to measure identical or similar constructs with scales found in the LSI-R. For six of these scales (Criminal Involvement, Criminal Associates/Peers, Substance Abuse, Financial, Vocational/Educational, and Housing), significant and positive correlations were found between the COMPAS and LSI-R. The correlations were marginally significant for two of the scales, Family Criminality (COMPAS) with Family/Marital (LSI-R) and Criminal Attitudes (COMPAS) with Attitudes/Orientation (LSI-R), and not significant for one, Leisure (COMPAS) with Leisure/Recreation (LSI-R). Using official records data provided by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), two major outcome measures were examined: (1) any subsequent arrest, and (2) a subsequent arrest for a violent offense. For the first measure, the overall re-arrest rate for the COMPAS sample was 56% for the first 12 months on parole and 70% for those who had been released for two years. For violent offenses, the re-arrest rates were approximately 13% and 21% in the 12- and 24-month periods following release, respectively. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were computed to assess the overall accuracy of the COMPAS risk scales for recidivism and violence. The ROC curve (measured in terms of the area under the curve or AUC) has become a primary measure of predictive accuracy in research instrumentation. A value of .70 is generally considered minimally acceptable. The recidivism and violence COMPAS risk scales were examined with regard to how well they predicted whether a parolee had been re-arrested (for any reason and for a violence offense) within two years of being released from prison. Both risk scales achieved levels of accuracy greater than chance, with the recidivism scale receiving an AUC value of .70, and the violence scale receiving an AUC value of .65. The risk prediction resulting from the COMPAS scales was comparable to our own risk prediction models using existing electronic records maintained by CDCR. We conclude that the COMPAS scales have high test-test retest reliability and moderate concordance with select LSI-R scales (with significant or marginally significant associations with eight of the nine scales that overlap with the LSI-R). With regard to the predictive validity of the recidivism and violence COMPAS risk scales, the general recidivism risk scale achieved an AUC value of .70, which is the conventional threshold for acceptability; the violence scale, however, fell short of this threshold. Details: Sacramento: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Office of Research, Adult Research Branch, 2010. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 15, 2010 at: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/adult_research_branch/Research_Documents/COMPAS_Final_Report_08-11-10.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/adult_research_branch/Research_Documents/COMPAS_Final_Report_08-11-10.pdf Shelf Number: 120517 Keywords: LSI-R Parolees Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Bonta, James Title: The National Flagging System: Identifying and Responding to High-Risk, Violence Offenders Summary: The National Flagging System (NFS) was established to track high-risk, violent offenders. In general, offenders who are judged to be suitable candidates for a Dangerous Offender (DO) and/or Long Term Offender (LTO) application should they reoffend are placed on the national CPIC system. Thus, if they do reoffend, authorities are quickly alerted to their status and steps taken to consider a DO/LTO application. The present research was aimed at empirically investigating the effectiveness of this policy initiative in identifying and responding to potentially dangerous offenders. Specifically, the profile of 256 flagged male offenders was compared with the profile of 97 known high-risk, violent offenders (i.e., Dangerous Offenders and Detention Failures). In addition, the reconviction rates of the flagged offenders were examined with an emphasis on the effect of the NFS in prompting DO and LTO applications. Results demonstrated that, with a few exceptions, although the flagged offenders showed less serious and persistent criminality characteristics than the known high-risk offenders, both groups were comprised of relatively high-risk cases, compared to general offender populations. Furthermore, the violent/sexual recidivism rates of the flagged offenders were much higher than those reported among typical Canadian male federal offender populations. Even among the violent (including sexual) recidivist offenders, however, the rates of DO and/or LTO applications and successful designations were low. Taken as a whole, despite the fact that the NFS appeared successful in appropriately identifying offenders who pose a risk to the community, this policy initiative's role in facilitating the use of DO and/or LTO provisions was less than expected. Recommendations for the development of guidelines to assist criminal justice professionals in screening, monitoring and processing dangerous offenders are made. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada, 2005. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Report No. 205-04: Accessed February 7, 2011 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/_fl/2005-04-flg-sysm-eng.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Canada URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/_fl/2005-04-flg-sysm-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 120704 Keywords: Offender Monitoring Recidivism Risk Assessment Sex Offenders Violent Offenders (Canada)

Author: Stalans, Loretta J. Title: Assessing the Risk of Sexual and Violent Recidivism and Identifying Differences in Risk Factors: Comparing Probation Supervised and Released Imprisoned Sex Offenders Summary: The management of sex offenders’ risk of committing sex crimes is of paramount importance to the criminal justice system. Criminal justice and treatment professionals assess risk of sexual recidivism using validated risk assessment tools such as the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sex Offender Recidivism (RRASOR), the Structured Anchored Clinical Judgment- Minimum Version (SACJ-min), the STATIC-99, and the STATIC-2002. However, these scales were created using data primarily from sex offenders released from prison or institutions for dangerous sexual predators. Moreover, although these scales are more accurate than clinical or professional judgment, their accuracy still is only modest and needs improvement. The aim of this research was to identify risk factors and how to combine risk factors to improve standardized risk assessment tools. The driving assumption of the current work was that sex offenders sentenced to probation and sex offenders released from prison are very different on important criminal history, offense, mental health, and social characteristics related to risk of sexual recidivism. Therefore if these two populations are different the current assessment scales used may not be appropriate for probation populations or may not predict well certain subgroups of sex offenders such as sex offenders who also commit domestic violence against adult intimate partners. Moreover, prior research has never considered how supervision may modify the behavior of sex offenders and change the risk factors that predict sexual recidivism. Are the risk factors for sexual recidivism the same if sex offenders are under probation or parole supervision or are free in the community without any supervision? Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2011. 155p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 11, 2011 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/ResearchReports/Probation_Supervised_Released_Imprisoned_Sex_Offenders_Report_1210.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/public/pdf/ResearchReports/Probation_Supervised_Released_Imprisoned_Sex_Offenders_Report_1210.pdf Shelf Number: 120750 Keywords: Parole Probation Recidivism Risk Assessment Sex Offenders Sexual Violence

Author: Steinhart, David Title: A Practice Guide to Juvenile Detention Reform: Juvenile Detention Risk Assessment Summary: Detention risk screening is a fundamental strategy used to evaluate youth and determine the need for secure, locked confinement. The risk instruments developed at Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative sites have been effective in curbing subjective or inappropriate decisions as well as controlling the total admissions to secure detention. This is a practical guide for juvenile justice decision-makers and includes specific recommendations on how to design, test, and implement detention risk-screening instruments. Details: Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2006. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 11, 2011 at: http://www.aecf.org/upload/PublicationFiles/JJ3622H5038.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.aecf.org/upload/PublicationFiles/JJ3622H5038.pdf Shelf Number: 107693 Keywords: Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment

Author: McNeill, Fergus Title: Research and Practice in Risk Assessment and Risk Management of Children and Young People Engaging in Offending Behaviours: A Literature Review Summary: This study has been undertaken with the main aim of providing an evaluation of the literature on research and practice in relation to the risk assessment and risk management of children and young people engaging in offending behaviours, to be used to inform the RMA’s future work in these fields. The study incorporates two aspects: a) a review of national and international literature on the practices and processes of risk assessment and risk management of children and young people who engage in offending behaviour, with particular reference to violent offending and sexually harmful behaviour, and b) a review of current practice in the assessment and management of children and young people at risk of harm and re-offending in Scotland, carried out by means of telephone interviews with academic researchers and practitioners working in statutory and voluntary sectors across Scotland. Details: Paisley, Scotland: Risk Management Authority Research, 2007. 107p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 17, 2011 at: http://rmascotland.org/ViewFile.aspx?id=327 Year: 2007 Country: International URL: http://rmascotland.org/ViewFile.aspx?id=327 Shelf Number: 120815 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment Risk Management

Author: Farrington, David P. Title: Assessing Violence Risk: A Framework for Practice Summary: The main aim of this report is to assess the usefulness of risk assessment instruments for violence. We assess this in two ways, first by reviewing empirical evaluations of predictive accuracy and, second by surveying practitioner opinions about usefulness. The major instruments that we can compare are the OGRS and GSIR (static, statistical predictors for offender samples), the VRAG and PCL-R/PCL:SV (mainly static predictors focusing on personality disordered offenders), the HCR-20 and RAG-F (containing both static and dynamic items) and the LSI-R/LS/CMI (a mainly dynamic predictor focusing on criminogenic needs that have implications for treatment). In this report, we try to bridge the gap between the evaluation standards of the scientific research community and those of practitioners and users of risk assessment instruments. This report is in two parts. The first presents a systematic review of research on the accuracy of risk assessment instruments in predicting violence. We conclude that a simple static instrument such as the OGRS and an instrument that incorporates both static and dynamic risk factors such as the HCR-20 seem most useful on the basis of currently available evidence. We recommend more analyses of the predictive validity of individual items, more efforts to develop a dynamic risk assessment instrument, and more evaluation research in Scotland. The second part presents the results of a survey of practitioners to ascertain their opinions about different violence risk assessment instruments. They were asked to evaluate the instruments on standards such as the existence of a user manual, the need for user qualifications and competencies, accessible training, ease of use, administration time, ease of scoring, concordance of results with other information, and confidence in risk assessment. Most instruments met most standards, but the least satisfactory instruments were the RAG-F and PCL-R. No instruments were viewed as providing satisfactory coverage of protective factors. Based on quantitative and qualitative information from practitioners, the most satisfactory instrument seems to be the HCR-20. We conclude by making recommendations about a framework for assessing the risk of violence and what the RMA might do next to develop a screening instrument. Our main recommendations are as follows: 􀂾 The purpose and function of the instrument should be clearly stated. 􀂾 The instrument should have a user manual and a training programme. 􀂾 The instrument should include static and dynamic, risk and protective factors. 􀂾 The instrument should be used in an individualised way as part of a structured clinical judgement. The instrument should be designed to identify those who do or do not require a more intensive assessment. Finally, users should always bear in mind the difficulties involved in moving from predictions about individuals, and should be extremely cautious in drawing any conclusions about a person’s risk of future violence. Details: Cambridge, UK: Institute of Criminology, Cambridge University, 2008. 101p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 18, 2011 at: http://www.cjsw.ac.uk/cjsw/files/Farrington%202008.pdf Year: 2008 Country: International URL: http://www.cjsw.ac.uk/cjsw/files/Farrington%202008.pdf Shelf Number: 120820 Keywords: Risk Assessment Violent Offenders

Author: Barry, Monica Title: Serious Violent Offenders: Developing a Risk Assessment Framework Summary: This research aimed to evaluate current and developing research, policy and practice in order to inform a possible framework for assessing risk of violence in Scotland, not only within MAPPA but also across the board within criminal justice agencies. The study utilised two main methods: a literature review and qualitative interviews with 24 key personnel in all the relevant agencies, including SPS, the Police, Social Work, victim agencies and Mental Health. These interviews explored differing definitions of risk of violence, current and potential policy and practice in assessing risk of violence, the strengths and limitations of MAPPA, organisational issues (including multi-agency working), and the key issues for agencies in assessing violence risk. The literature review explored similar themes both to complement and inform the qualitative data. Details: Paisley, Scotland: Risk Management Authority Research, 2007. 116p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 18, 2011 at: http://www.rmascotland.gov.uk/try/research-papers/ Year: 2007 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.rmascotland.gov.uk/try/research-papers/ Shelf Number: 120821 Keywords: Risk Assessment Violent Offenders (Scotland)

Author: Weber, Kasey Title: An Evaluation of the Use of the LSI-R with Colorado Inmates Summary: This evaluation is a formative evaluation of the current processes in place at the Colorado Department of Corrections specific to the utilization of the LSI-R. This evaluation seeks to examine how the LSI-R is administered in the department during an offender's assessment and classification. The second part of the study includes a survey of other U.S. state correctional agencies to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how the LSI-R is administered and utilized by these department. Details: Colorado Springs, CO: Colorado Department of Corrections, Office of Planning and Analysis, 2010. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 24, 2011 at: http://www.doc.state.co.us/sites/default/files/opa/LSI_Evaluation_2010_1.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.doc.state.co.us/sites/default/files/opa/LSI_Evaluation_2010_1.pdf Shelf Number: 120866 Keywords: Inmate Classification Inmates (Colorado) Risk Assessment

Author: Hutto, John C. Title: Risk Management in Law Enforcement: A Model Assessment Tool Summary: The purpose of this research is threefold. The first purpose is to establish a practical ideal model to assess risk management practices in law enforcement agencies. Second, using case study, current risk management practices at the Austin Police Department will be assessed. The third purpose is to provide recommendations for improving the risk management practices at the Austin Police Department. A review of the literature has identified four key components of effective risk management programs. These components are program development, risk assessment, solution analysis, and program administration. The components of an effective risk management program identified in the literature are used to construct the conceptual framework. A practical ideal type model assessment tool for law enforcement agency risk management programs is created from the framework. The assessment tool is used in a case study of the Austin Police Department to gauge for the presence of an effective risk management program. The case study uses document analysis and survey research to perform the assessment. The Austin Police Department exists in a high-risk environment. Many of the policies and procedures the Department has in place are designed to mitigate or eliminate risk. The newly formed Risk Management Bureau of the Austin Police Department has been created to formalize many of the policies and procedures into a more comprehensive policy. At this time, the major shortcomings in the program are in the areas of training and communication. There has been limited training for the managers and administrators outside the Risk Management Bureau. Likewise, even though the Department is making progress towards a professional, innovative, risk management program, the communication to those in the organization about what is being done is lacking. Details: San Marcos, TX: Applied Research Projects, Texas State University - San Marcos, 2009. 137p. Source: Internet Resource: Paper 301: Accessed March 11, 2011 at: http://ecommons.txstate.edu/arp/301/ Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://ecommons.txstate.edu/arp/301/ Shelf Number: 120969 Keywords: Police Administration Policing (Austin, TX) Risk Assessment Risk Management

Author: National Research Council. Committee on Behavioral and Social Science Research to Improve Intelligence Analysis for National Security. Title: Intelligence Analysis for Tomorrow: Advances from the Behavioral and Social Sciences Summary: The intelligence community (IC) plays an essential role in the national security of the United States. Decision makers rely on IC analyses and predictions to reduce uncertainty and to provide warnings about everything from international diplomatic relations to overseas conflicts. In today's complex and rapidly changing world, it is more important than ever that analytic products be accurate and timely. Recognizing that need, the IC has been actively seeking ways to improve its performance and expand its capabilities. In 2008, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) asked the National Research Council (NRC) to establish a committee to synthesize and assess evidence from the behavioral and social sciences relevant to analytic methods and their potential application for the U.S. intelligence community. In Intelligence Analysis for Tomorrow: Advances from the Behavioral and Social Sciences, the NRC offers the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) recommendations to address many of the IC's challenges. Intelligence Analysis for Tomorrow asserts that one of the most important things that the IC can learn from the behavioral and social sciences is how to characterize and evaluate its analytic assumptions, methods, technologies, and management practices. Behavioral and social scientific knowledge can help the IC to understand and improve all phases of the analytic cycle: how to recruit, select, train, and motivate analysts; how to master and deploy the most suitable analytic methods; how to organize the day-to-day work of analysts, as individuals and teams; and how to communicate with its customers. The report makes five broad recommendations which offer practical ways to apply the behavioral and social sciences, which will bring the IC substantial immediate and longer-term benefits with modest costs and minimal disruption. Details: Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2011. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 22, 2011 at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13040#description Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13040#description Shelf Number: 121093 Keywords: Intelligence Gathering National Security Risk Assessment

Author: Mamalian, Cynthia A. Title: State of the Science of Pretrial Risk Assessment Summary: The most important decision that is made with respect to a newly arrested defendant is whether to release that defendant into the community while awaiting trial; getting that decision right is critically important for both the defendant and the community at-large. In June 2010, the Pretrial Justice Institute (PJI) and the Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) convened a meeting of researchers and practitioners to discuss the current state of the science and practice of pretrial justice. This document summarizes the key points that came out of that discussion and what leaders in the field identified as signficant next steps in advancing the administration of pretrial justice, ensuring efficient and effective release and detention decisions for pretrial defendants, managing defendant risk through appropriate and specific conditions of release, and balancing the rights of defendants with community safety. This publication is designed for a wide-ranging audience of criminal justice stakeholders who have questions about pretrial risk assessment and its value to the pretrial justice process. The first section of this publication provides a brief review of the history and current state of pretrial justice. The second section looks at critical issues related to pretrial release, detention, and risk assessment. The third section discusses challenges to implementing evidence-based risk assessment and threats to reliable administration, including time constraints and practicality of the risk assessment instrument, money bail schedules, local capacity, subjective risk assessment, and court culture and judicial behavior. The fourth section of the document outlines methodological challenges associated with the prediction of risk. The final section provides recommendations for research and practice. We discuss high priority research activities, the potential for a universal risk assessment instrument, and the need for training and technical assistance. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Pretrial Justice Institute, 2011. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 22, 2011 at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/pdf/PJI_PretrialRiskAssessment.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/pdf/PJI_PretrialRiskAssessment.pdf Shelf Number: 121099 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Hannan, Maria Title: Deaths In or Following Police Custody: An Examination of the Cases 1998/99 - 2008/09 Summary: Deaths in or following police custody are a controversial area of policing, and they represent some of the most high profile cases handled by the IPCC. They impact on trust and confidence in the police, particularly in Black and minority ethnic communities. The number of deaths in or following police custody is relatively small, but each death represents a tragedy. Despite the high profile nature of this area relatively little research has been conducted into it, or were carried out some time ago. Forces have a statutory duty to refer all deaths following police contact, including those that occur in or following police custody, to the IPCC. The IPCC reports on these deaths as part of our annual statistics into deaths during or following police contact. This study examines deaths in or following custody over an extensive period in order to identify trends, and, most importantly, the lessons that can be learnt for policy and practice to prevent future tragedies. The research used completed investigations to gather data on all 333 deaths which occurred between 1998/99 and 2008/09. The study looks at trends in the incidents, and examines a range of themes – the use of restraint, mental health and suicide, alcohol and drugs, risk assessment and medical provision, and investigation and investigations outcomes. The final report makes a series of recommendations for police forces and the health service which aim to improve policy and practice in this area. Details: London: Independent Police Complaints Commission, 2010. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: IPCC Research Series Paper:17: Accessed March 23, 2011 at: http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/Pages/deathscustodystudy.aspx Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/Pages/deathscustodystudy.aspx Shelf Number: 121103 Keywords: Deaths in Custody (U.K.) Police Misconduct Police Use of Force Risk Assessment

Author: Caplan, Joel M. Title: Risk Terrain RTM Modeling Manual: Theoretical Framework and Technical Steps of Spatial Risk Assessment for Crime Analysis Summary: Risk Terrain Modeling (RTM) is an approach to risk assessment that standardizes risk factors to common geographic units over a continuous surface. Separate map layers representing the presence, absence, or intensity of each risk factor at every place throughout a terrain is created in a Geographic Information System (GIS), and then all risk map layers are combined to produce a composite “risk terrain” map with attribute values that account for all risk factors at every location throughout the geography. RTM aids in strategic decision-making and tactical action by showing where conditions are ripe for events to occur in the future. This manual is offered as a primer on risk in the criminal event and demonstrates effective ways to apply RTM to crime analysis and policing operations. It begins with a review of the RTM approach to spatial risk assessment and presents a short overview of the theoretical underpinnings of criminological theory that have addressed the social and environmental factors that contribute to crime patterns, hotspots, and risk terrains. The second part details the technical steps for analysts to take in using ArcGIS software to develop risk terrain maps. The third and final part presents ideas of how RTM works in strategic and tactical decision-making, particularly within the context of the ACTION model for risk-based intelligence-led policing. With this manual, analysts can produce risk terrain maps that give actionable meaning to the relationships that exist between place-based indicators and crime outcomes. Planners can use this approach to develop strategic models to forecast where crime problems are likely to emerge and to engage in steps that might reduce risks of crime occurring in the future. Details: Newark, NJ: Rutgers Center on Public Security, 2010. 122p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 4, 2011 at: http://www.rutgerscps.org/rtm/ Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.rutgerscps.org/rtm/ Shelf Number: 121245 Keywords: Crime Analysis Crime Mapping Geographic Information Systems Risk Assessment

Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Bureau of Prisons: Evaluating the Impact of Protective Equipment Could Help Enhance Officer Safety Summary: The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) manages more than 209,000 inmates, up 45 percent between fiscal years 2000 and 2010. As the prison population grows, so do concerns about correctional officer safety. As requested, GAO examined the (1) equipment that BOP and selected state departments of corrections (DOC) provide to protect officers, and the officers' and other correctional practitioners' opinions of this equipment; (2) extent to which BOP has evaluated the effectiveness of this equipment, and factors correctional equipment experts consider important to the acquisition of new equipment; and (3) institutional factors correctional accrediting experts reported as impacting officer safety, and the extent to which BOP has evaluated the effectiveness of the steps it has taken in response. GAO reviewed BOP policies and procedures; interviewed BOP officials and officers within BOP's six regions, selected based on such factors as the level of facility overcrowding; interviewed officials at 14 of the 15 largest state DOCs; and surveyed 21 individuals selected for their expertise in corrections. The results of the interviews cannot be generalized, but provide insight into issues affecting officer safety. BOP and 14 state DOCs included in GAO's review provide a variety of protective equipment to officers, but BOP officers and management have different views on equipment. BOP generally provides officers with radios, body alarms, keys, flashlights, handcuffs, gloves, and stab-resistant vests while on duty, but prohibits them from storing personal firearms on BOP property, with limited exceptions. DOC officials in 14 states GAO interviewed provided examples of equipment they allow officers to carry while on duty that BOP does not--such as pepper spray--and officials in 9 of the 14 states reported allowing officers to store personal firearms on state DOC property. BOP and states provide similar equipment to protect officers in an emergency, such as an inmate riot or attack. Most BOP officers with whom GAO spoke reported that carrying additional equipment while on duty and commuting would better protect officers, while BOP management largely reported that officers did not need to carry additional equipment to better protect them. BOP has not evaluated the effectiveness of equipment it provides in ensuring officer safety, and correctional equipment experts report that BOP needs to consider a variety of factors in acquisition decisions. Neither the officials nor the experts with whom GAO spoke reported that they were aware of or had conducted evaluations of the effectiveness of equipment in ensuring officer safety, although BOP tracks information necessary to do so in its data systems. By using information in these existing systems, BOP could analyze the effectiveness of the equipment it distributes in ensuring officer safety, thus helping it determine additional actions, if any, to further officer safety and better target limited resources. All of the correctional equipment experts GAO spoke with reported that BOP would need to consider factors such as training, replacement, maintenance, and liability, as well as whether the equipment met performance standards, if it acquired new equipment. These experts suggested that any decision must first be based upon a close examination of the benefits and risk of using certain types of equipment. For example, while state officials reported that pepper spray is inexpensive and effective, a majority of the BOP management officials we spoke with stated that it could be taken by inmates and used against officers. Correctional accrediting experts most frequently cited control over the inmate population, officer training, inmate gangs, correctional staffing and inmate overcrowding as the institutional factors--beyond equipment--most impacting officer safety. These experts suggested various strategies to address these factors, and BOP reported taking steps to do so, such as conducting annual training on BOP policies, identifying and separating gang members, and converting community space into inmate cells. BOP has assessed the effectiveness of steps it has taken in improving officer safety. For instance, a 2001 BOP study found that inmates who participated in BOP's substance abuse treatment program were less likely than a comparison group to engage in misconduct for the remainder of their sentence following program completion. BOP utilizes such studies to inform its decisions, such as eliminating programs found to be ineffective. GAO recommends that BOP's Director assess whether the equipment intended to improve officer safety has been effective. BOP concurred with this recommendation Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2011. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-11-410: Accessed April 12, 2011 at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11410.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11410.pdf Shelf Number: 121313 Keywords: Correctional Facilities Correctional Personnel Corrections Officers Prisons Risk Assessment Risk Management Weapons

Author: Petersen, Kim Title: TranSystems' Florida Seaport Security Assessment 2010 Summary: Prior to the passage of the Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) in 2002, the state of Florida was extremely proactive in securing its deepwater ports with the passage of Florida Statute [FS] 311.12 Seaport Security Standards in 2000. This research explores the history, impact, and areas of overlap that FS 311.12 and the MTSA security standards have upon Florida’s major seaports. The research includes: 1) an historical analysis of the 1999 Camber Report; 2) a federal and state statutory regulation comparison; 3) a review of the Seaport Security Standards Advisory Council 2008 recommendations & FS 311 review; 4) U.S. port security regulatory review 2000-2009; 5) a comparison of aviation and maritime security regulations; 6) state and federal regulation evaluation – Layered Security; 7) a document review to analyze Florida ports’ physical security and operations; 8) a combined Florida risk assessment update; 9) an analysis of the security costs incurred by Florida’s ports vs. comparable ports that are not required to meet a state port security standard; and 10) an overlap analysis of the Florida Uniform Port Access Credential (FUPAC) against the Transportation Workers Identification Credential (TWIC). The report contains findings and recommendations associated with each of the listed tasks. Details: Tallahassee, FL: Florida Division of Emergency Management, Florida Office of Drug Control, 2010. 173p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 14, 2011 at: http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/2902b533-5d31-4876-9ad6-1cb2a01a2c65/100409_Florida_Seaports_SecurityAssessment_Report.aspx Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/2902b533-5d31-4876-9ad6-1cb2a01a2c65/100409_Florida_Seaports_SecurityAssessment_Report.aspx Shelf Number: 121336 Keywords: Maritime Crime (Florida) Maritime Security Risk Assessment Seaports

Author: O'Neil, David Title: Non-Fatal Workplace Violence: An Epidemiological Report and Empirical Exploration of Risk Factors Summary: While a fair amount of research has explored the epidemiology of homicides resulting from workplace violence, a disproportionately low amount of empirical research has addressed non-fatal incidents. Utilizing theoretical guidelines for risk assessment research developed by Monahan and Steadman (1994), this dissertation investigates nonfatal workplace violence from a cue-criterion perspective in order to develop practically applicable information for those responsible for providing threat assessments in the workplace (i. e., mental health professionals, employment assistance programs). The investigation of a police department’s criminal records of workplace violence incidents over an eighteen month period promoted a proactive and reactive cluster model for assessing risk factors associated with varying levels of violence intensity. As a result, the findings provide three major streams of information. First, it presents epidemiological information concerning non-fatal workplace violence. Second, it addresses the different types of workplace violence and differences across those types. Lastly, it provides multivariate analyses of risk factors associated with higher and lower intensity violence before discussing a few pragmatic applications of the dissertation’s findings. Details: Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska, 2001. 140p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed April 15, 2011 at: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/199359.pdf Year: 2001 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/199359.pdf Shelf Number: 119768 Keywords: Risk Assessment Victims of Violence Violent Crime Workplace Violence

Author: MacRae, Leslie Title: A Profile of Youth Offenders in Calgary: An Interim Report Summary: The Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family (CRILF) is conducting a three-year study of youth offending in Calgary with funding from the City of Calgary Community and Neighbourhood Services (Year 1) and the Alberta Law Foundation. The objectives of this study are to: 1. identify how the implementation of the Youth Criminal Justice Act has affected the flow of cases through the youth justice system in Alberta and the workload for various components of the provincial youth justice system; 2. develop a model for predicting why some Calgary youth become serious habitual offenders (SHOs), while others do not; and 3. build a knowledge base for the City of Calgary Community and Neighbourhood Services, Calgary Police Service and other relevant provincial-based agencies for increasing their effectiveness and efficiency by conducting an environmental scan of current best practices in Canada related to: • predictors (risk and protective factors) of offending by youth; • use of decision making instruments and protocols across Canada; and • programs targeted at chronic/persistent youth offenders across Canada. The investigation of these objectives was planned over a three-year period and will result in a number of research reports. The activities for Year 1 of the study, which focussed primarily on Objective #2, are the focus of this report. Details: Calgary, Alberta: Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family, 2008. 175p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 15, 2011 at: http://people.ucalgary.ca/~crilf/publications/Final_Report_A_Profile_of_Youth_Crime_in_Calgary_March2008.pdf Year: 2008 Country: Canada URL: http://people.ucalgary.ca/~crilf/publications/Final_Report_A_Profile_of_Youth_Crime_in_Calgary_March2008.pdf Shelf Number: 121367 Keywords: Chronic Juvenile Offenders Juvenile Justice Systems Juvenile Offenders (Canada) Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Title: National Infrastructure Protection Plan: Partnering to Enhance Protection and Resiliency Summary: Protecting and ensuring the resiliency of the critical infrastructure and key resources (CIKR) of the United States is essential to the Nation’s security, public health and safety, economic vitality, and way of life. Attacks on CIKR could significantly disrupt the functioning of government and business alike and produce cascading effects far beyond the targeted sector and physical location of the incident. Direct terrorist attacks and natural, manmade, or technological hazards could produce catastrophic losses in terms of human casualties, property destruction, and economic effects, as well as profound damage to public morale and confidence. Attacks using components of the Nation’s CIKR as weapons of mass destruction could have even more devastating physical and psychological consequences. The NIPP provides the unifying structure for the integration of existing and future CIKR protection efforts and resiliency strategies into a single national program to achieve this goal. The NIPP framework supports the prioritization of protection and resiliency initiatives and investments across sectors to ensure that government and private sector resources are applied where they offer the most benefit for mitigating risk by lessening vulnerabilities, deterring threats, and minimizing the consequences of terrorist attacks and other manmade and natural disasters. The NIPP risk management framework recognizes and builds on existing public and private sector protective programs and resiliency strategies in order to be cost-effective and to minimize the burden on CIKR owners and operators. Protection includes actions to mitigate the overall risk to CIKR assets, systems, networks, functions, or their inter-connecting links. In the context of the NIPP, this includes actions to deter the threat, mitigate vulnerabilities, or minimize the consequences associated with a terrorist attack or other incident. Protection can include a wide range of activities, such as improving security protocols, hardening facilities, building resiliency and redundancy, incorporating hazard resistance into facility design, initiating active or passive countermeasures, installing security systems, leveraging “self-healing” technologies, promoting workforce surety programs, implementing cybersecurity measures, training and exercises, business continuity planning, and restoration and recovery actions, among various others. Achieving the NIPP goal requires actions to address a series of objectives, which include:• Understanding and sharing information about terrorist threats and other hazards with CIKR partners; • Building partnerships to share information and implement CIKR protection programs; • Implementing a long-term risk management program; and • Maximizing the efficient use of resources for CIKR protection, restoration, and recovery. These objectives require a collaborative partnership among CIKR partners, including: the Federal Government; State, local, tribal, and territorial governments; regional coalitions; the private sector; international entities; and nongovernmental organizations. The NIPP provides the framework that defines a set of flexible processes and mechanisms that these CIKR partners will use to develop and implement the national program to protect CIKR across all sectors over the long term. Details: Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, 2009. 188p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 16, 2011 at: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NIPP_Plan.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NIPP_Plan.pdf Shelf Number: 119210 Keywords: Risk Assessment Risk Management Security Terrorism Weapons of Mass Destruction

Author: Rosemann, Ute Title: Protect - Identifying and Protecting High Risk Victims of Gender Base Violence - An Overview Summary: The project PROTECT aims at contributing to the prevention and reduction of the most serious forms of gender-based violence against girls, young women and their children, such as grievous bodily harm, homicide and attempted homicide, including so-called honour crimes and killings. Gender-based intimate partner violence against women and girls can take very severe forms such as grievous bodily harm, deprivation of liberty by locking victims up, often over days or even years, attempted murder or murder. These crimes seem to be motivated by different factors and concepts – extreme jealousy, possessiveness, accusation of ‘dishonouring‘ the family and other reasons – however, all of these crimes seem to have the similar goal of exercising power over women and girls and controlling their lives. Any move that is seen as a challenge to such concepts of power and control, e.g., if a woman or girl tries to leave her violent partner or father, can endanger her life, health and liberty. Ultimately, the beneficiaries of this project are women, young women, and girls, who are at high risk of severe violations of their fundamental human rights: the right to life, health and liberty. Research shows that violence can be reduced by systematically identifying and comprehensively protecting victims at high risk. Such coordinated interventions are still missing in most EU countries and regions; therefore the project aims at improving the protection of high risk victims. The project’s target groups are professionals from core agencies responsible for the protection and support of victims and the prevention of violence, organisations and institutions working in the area of violence prevention, policy makers and – last but not least – victims of gender-based violence. the report is structured in three main chapters: II. A Summary of intimate partner violence and intimate partner femicide risk assessment studies, II. B. Report on research results related to mapping of eight countries concerning the protection and safety of high risk victims of gender based intimate partner violence, including a description of the functioning of the MARACs in England and Wales, and II. C. Availability of reliable, systematically collected and analysed data on gender-based intimate partner homicide / femicide in Europe. The last section of the PROTECT final research report provides conclusions based on the outcomes of the project. Details: Vienna: WAVE - Women Against Violence Europe, 2010. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 22, 2011 at: http://www.wave-network.org/start.asp?ID=23494 Year: 2010 Country: Europe URL: http://www.wave-network.org/start.asp?ID=23494 Shelf Number: 121480 Keywords: Femicide Gender Based Violence Homicide Honor Killings Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Violence Against Women (Europe)

Author: Yapp, Jamie Richard Title: The Profiling of Robbery Offenders Summary: This thesis has investigated the offence of robbery. Specifically, the semi-systematic review analysed commercial armed robbery, grouping offenders in terms of an apparent scale of professionalism to amateurism. Within armed robbery, target hardening strategies appear to have reduced opportunities for professionals, with a corresponding increase in amateur armed robbers fuelled by drug habits. The empirical study found that levels of interaction used by an offender with a victim increased with offender age. Interaction was lower for a robbery committed in an external location and for offenders with previous convictions for offences against the person and property. The violence facet could not be labelled as a specific discriminatory predictor. The findings from the research and semi-systematic review distinguished between two types of robbery offender; a career professional and an amateur antisocial robber. A career professional is older and more experienced, more likely to offend in a commercial location, commit the crime in a planned and controlled manner, use high levels of interaction and lower levels of violence. An amateur antisocial robber is more likely to commit an offence outside, have previous convictions for offences against the person and property and/or be under the influence of an illegal substance. The offence is likely to be opportunistic and chaotic, characterised by high levels of violence and low levels of interaction. The Inventory of Offender Risk, Needs and Strengths (IORNS) psychometric measure was analysed. It has the potential to provide an assessment of a robbery offender's ongoing treatment and risk management. However, it requires further validation and reliability analysis before it is deemed appropriate in doing so. The case study highlighted the impact of cannabis misuse on a robbery offender's behaviour pattern and mental illness. Implications for offender treatment needs, future therapeutic intervention and risk management are discussed along with the need for further validation of the proposed model. Details: Birmingham, UK: The Centre for Forensic and Criminological Psychology, The University of Birmingham, 2010. 279p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed April 25, 2011 at: http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/1059/1/Yapp10ForenPsyD.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/1059/1/Yapp10ForenPsyD.pdf Shelf Number: 121489 Keywords: Armed Robbery Commercial Properties Drug Abuse and Crime Profiling Risk Assessment Robbery (U.K.) Violent Crime

Author: Alexander, Elizabeth Title: Michigan Breaks the Political Logjam: A New Model for Reducing Prison Populations Summary: The United States has adopted a set of criminal justice policies that has produced a tidal wave of imprisonment in this country. Between 1970 and 2005, the number of men, women, and children locked up in this country has grown by an historically unprecedented 700%. As a result, the United States locks up almost a quarter of the prisoners in the entire world. In fact, if all our prisoners were confined in one city, that city would be the fourth largest in the country. This tidal wave of mass incarceration has a devastating effect on those communities, mostly poor and minority, whose residents so disproportionately end up in our prisons. Of course, it is critical to prevent crime, but we need to ask if mass incarceration is really necessary to protect our public safety. Michigan’s experience offers a persuasive answer to that question. Between March 2007 and November 2009, Michigan did something remarkable. It reduced its prison population by roughly 8% during an era in which our incarcerated population continues its unprecedented growth nationally. Perhaps equally remarkable, Michigan accomplished this feat of “breaking the political logjam,” as the Deputy Director of the Department of Corrections phrased it, without provoking a backlash that public officials have been insufficiently “tough on crime.” Because these changed policies will also result in increased public safety, Michigan for the first time provides a possible model for other states seeking a smarter and more affordable criminal justice policy. This report examines the measures that Michigan took to bring about that turn-around. Most significantly, these changes did not require the legislature to change the statutory penalties for criminal offenses. Michigan’s successful reforms primarily involve the parole process, based on research that has identified practices and techniques that increase the accuracy of predicting which offenders can be safely released. The changes involve, however, far more than simply encouraging the parole board to increase its rate of approval of discretionary parole. The new policies are designed to provide offenders with individualized programing in prison, and re-entry services upon release, that are most likely to assure success on parole, based on evidence of what works to reduce crime and save money. Because Michigan’s reforms are designed to fit into the specific structure of its system, they cannot simply be replicated in states lacking discretionary parole. The Michigan reforms are nonetheless important, because the nation’s current level of incarceration is morally wrong and bad public policy, and because we can no longer afford to incarcerate 2.3 million people. Our nation’s criminal justice policy requires fundamental change, and Michigan provides one example of how that change can work. Details: New York: American Civil Liberties Union, 2009. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 28, 2011 at: http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/2009-12-18-MichiganReport.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/2009-12-18-MichiganReport.pdf Shelf Number: 121567 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Costs of Criminal Justice Incarceration (Michigan) Parole Prisoner Reentry Prisons Risk Assessment

Author: Lind, Bronwyn Title: Screening Cautioned Young People for Further Assessment and Intervention Summary: This study aimed to assess whether it is possible to screen juvenile offenders for recidivism risk from information readily available at the time of cautioning a young offender. Data on all 8,537 juveniles cautioned by police or courts in 2006 were analysed using logistic regression. The dependent variable in the logistic regression model was a binary variable measuring reoffending. The potential predictors included number of previous cautions, conferences or court appearances, jurisdiction issuing the caution (court vs. police), Indigenous status, gender, age at index caution, offence type, offence seriousness, prior violence, remoteness (ARIA) and social and economic disadvantage. The final model included prior contacts, jurisdiction issuing the index caution, Indigenous status and gender as predictors. The c-statistic (area under the ROC curve) when comparing predicted with observed values was 0.767, 95% confidence interval (0.757, 0.777). The model fit was confirmed by comparing predicted values from half the dataset with observed values from the other half. The study concluded that it is possible to screen juveniles for future risk of reoffending from data readily available at the time they are cautioned. Details: Sydney: New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2011. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice No. 149: Accessed May 5, 2011 at: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/cjb149.pdf/$file/cjb149.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/cjb149.pdf/$file/cjb149.pdf Shelf Number: 121645 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders (Australia) Recidivism Reoffending Risk Assessment

Author: Mueller, John Title: Terror, Security, and Money: Balancing the Risks, Benefits, and Costs of Homeland Security Summary: The cumulative increase in expenditures on US domestic homeland security over the decade since 9/11 exceeds one trillion dollars. It is clearly time to examine these massive expenditures applying risk assessment and cost-benefit approaches that have been standard for decades. Thus far, officials do not seem to have done so and have engaged in various forms of probability neglect by focusing on worst case scenarios; adding, rather than multiplying, the probabilities; assessing relative, rather than absolute, risk; and inflating terrorist capacities and the importance of potential terrorist targets. We find that enhanced expenditures have been excessive: to be deemed cost-effective in analyses that substantially bias the consideration toward the opposite conclusion, they would have to deter, prevent, foil, or protect against 1,667 otherwise successful Times-Square type attacks per year, or more than four per day. Although there are emotional and political pressures on the terrorism issue, this does not relieve politicians and bureaucrats of the fundamental responsibility of informing the public of the limited risk that terrorism presents and of seeking to expend funds wisely. Moreover, political concerns may be over-wrought: restrained reaction has often proved to be entirely acceptable politically. Details: Paper Prepared for presentation at the panel, "Terror and the Economy: Which Institutions Help Mitigate the Damage?” at the Annual Convention of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, April 1, 2011. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 9, 2011 at: http://polisci.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/MID11TSM.PDF Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://polisci.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/MID11TSM.PDF Shelf Number: 121664 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Homeland Security Risk Assessment Terrorism

Author: Peck, Mark Title: Patterns of Reconviction Among Offenders Eligible for Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) Summary: Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) were established in 2001 under the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 and are considered an integral part of the Criminal Justice System in dealing with serious violent and sexual offenders. The Act charged the chief officer of police and the then local probation board for each area to assess and manage the risk posed by these offenders. Home Office guidance (2001) encouraged a widening of this partnership, so that a number of statutory and voluntary agencies would assist in this process. Later, the Prison Service joined the Police and Probation Service as the ‘responsible authority’ for MAPPA under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The MAPPA process involves an assessment of risk posed by an offender, upon which a risk management plan is subsequently based. This can include, for example, setting appropriate licence conditions, applying for Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs), or identifying accommodation within local authority housing. Offenders posing the highest risk are referred to a Multi-Agency Public Protection panel meeting, a forum in which the offender’s risk and management plan can be discussed in detail with the participating agencies. MAPPA evolved from professional practice during the 1990s in dealing with dangerous offenders. The emergence of Public Protection Panels (PPPs) and multi-agency work to manage registered sexual offenders (following the Sex Offenders Act 1997) was central to this evolution and, accordingly, much of the work focused on sexual offenders. The Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 sought to standardise this existing multi-agency work and provided the opportunity to widen the scope to include non-sexual violent offenders. There have been three key process evaluations of MAPPA (Maguire et al, 2001 Kemshall et al, 2005; and Wood and Kemshall, 2007). These illustrated improving standards and greater consistency of MAPPA during its early implementation. Data on Serious Further Offences, breaches and recall are provided in the MAPPA annual reports (see Ministry of Justice 2010b) but are difficult to compare over time, and date back only to 2005/6. This piece of research aimed to address this knowledge gap. It has explored whether reconviction rates of ‘MAPPA-eligible’ offenders released from custody into the community changed in England and Wales since the introduction of MAPPA in 2001. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2011. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Research Series 6/11: Accessed July 6, 2011 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/patterns-reconviction-mappa.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/patterns-reconviction-mappa.pdf Shelf Number: 121980 Keywords: Interagency Collaboration Recidivism (U.K.) Reconviction Rehabilitation Risk Assessment Sex Offenders Violent Offenders

Author: Helmus, Leslie Title: Assessing the Risk of Older Sex Offenders: Developing the Static-99R and Static-2002R Summary: Actuarial risk assessment scales and their associated recidivism estimates are generally developed on samples of offenders whose average age is well under 50 years old. Criminal behaviour of all types declines with age; consequently, actuarial scales tend to overestimate recidivism for older offenders. The current study aimed to develop a revised scoring system for two risk assessment tools (Static-99 and Static-2002) that would more accurately describe older offenders’ risk of recidivism. Using data from 8,390 sex offenders derived from 24 separate samples, age was found to add incremental predictive validity to both Static-99 and Static-2002. After creating new age weights, the resulting instruments (Static-99R and Static-2002R) had only slightly higher relative predictive accuracy. The absolute recidivism estimates, however, provided a substantially better fit for older offenders than the recidivism estimates from the original scales. We encourage evaluators to adopt the revised scales with the new age weights. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2011. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 6, 2011 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/_fl/2011-01-aroso-eng.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Canada URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/_fl/2011-01-aroso-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 121985 Keywords: Elderly Sex Offenders Recidivism Risk Assessment Sex Offenders (Canada)

Author: Babchishin, Kelly M. Title: The RRASOR, Static-99R and Static-2002R All Add Incrementally to the Prediction of Recidivism Among Sex Offenders Summary: Empirically derived actuarial tools are increasingly being used in applied psychology, particularly for the assessment of risk for crime and violence. Although evaluators commonly use more than one scale, it is unclear how evaluators should interpret divergent findings. The current study examined the predictive accuracy and incremental validity of three risk assessment scales (RRASOR, Static-99R, and Static2002R) in twenty distinct samples of sex offenders (N = 7,491). Static-99R and Static-2002R outperformed the RRASOR in the prediction of sexual, violent, and any recidivism. No differences in predictive accuracy were found between Static-99R and Static-2002R. Nevertheless, almost all the scales provided incremental validity to the prediction of all types of recidivism. The direction of the incremental effects, however, was not consistently positive. When controlling for the other measures, high scores on the RRASOR were associated with lower risk for violent and general recidivism. Consequently, decisions concerning the interpretation of multiple risk scales must be informed by the construct validity of the measures. When scales measure the same domain of risk factors, an averaging approach can be justified. If the selected scales are not sampling the same types of risk factors, then evaluators need a defensible model concerning (1) the latent constructs measured by the scales and (2) empirical evidence concerning how the constructs should be weighted and combined. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2011. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 6, 2011 at: Year: 2011 Country: Canada URL: Shelf Number: 121986 Keywords: Recidivism Risk Assessment Sex Offenders (Canada)

Author: VanNostrand, Marie Title: State of the Science of Pretrial Release and Recommendations and Supervision Summary: Earlier this year, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the Pretrial Justice Institute published the document, State of the Science of Pretrial Risk Assessment. That document focused on what the field knows about our ability to predict the likelihood of failure to appear in court or rearrest on new charges among pretrial defendant populations. It described the great strides that the field has made in assessing risks of pretrial misconduct, as well as the challenges that researchers face in validating pretrial risk assessment instruments, and guidance on how they can face those challenges. This document, State of the Science of Pretrial Release Recommendations and Supervision, has a different focus. It picks up where the first document left off. It asks the question: now that we know so much more about predicting risks of pretrial misconduct, how can we use that information to better assure that defendants are appropriately matched to conditions of pretrial release that are designed to minimize their identified risks? In most counties across the country, pretrial release recommendations are subjective. Even when pretrial services agency staff have access to the results of a validated pretrial risk assessment, if it exists in the county, there is often no objective and consistent guidance for making pretrial release recommendations. In addition, many pretrial services agencies require the same frequency and types of contacts for all defendants during pretrial supervision while some have identified their own levels of supervision with varying frequencies and types of contacts. In both cases there is no objective and consistent policy for providing differential pretrial supervision based on the risk of pretrial failure. The appropriate matching of defendant risks with conditions of pretrial release should take place in the framework of Legal and Evidence Based Practices (LEBP). These are interventions and practices that are consistent with the legal and constitutional rights afforded to accused persons awaiting trial and methods research have proven to be effective in reducing unnecessary detention while assuring court appearance and the safety of the community during the pretrial stage. A component of this larger LEBP initiative involves the development and implementation of research-based guidelines for use by pretrial services agencies that are (1) risk-based, (2) consistent with legal and evidence-based practices, and (3) provide guidance for pretrial release recommendations and differential pretrial supervision. This document begins with a discussion of the legal issues that are relevant to persons who have been accused, but not yet adjudicated, of a crime. It describes the possible legal implications of pretrial release practices, including the setting of specific conditions of pretrial release. Following that is a discussion of research results regarding pretrial release conditions and interventions. The final section presents existing guidelines for pretrial release recommendations and differential pretrial supervision. Details: Washington, DC: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2011. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 12, 2011 at: http://www.pretrial.org/Featured%20Resources%20Documents/PJI%20State%20of%20the%20Science%20Pretrial%20Recommendations%20and%20Supervision%20%282011%29.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.pretrial.org/Featured%20Resources%20Documents/PJI%20State%20of%20the%20Science%20Pretrial%20Recommendations%20and%20Supervision%20%282011%29.pdf Shelf Number: 122039 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Release (U.S.) Pretrial Supervision Risk Assessment

Author: Bechtel, Kristin Title: Identifying the Predictors of Pretrial Failure: A Meta-Analysis Summary: The purpose of this study was to empirically examine what risk factors are statistically associated with various measures of pretrial failure. As such, a meta-analysis was conducted to identify these risk factors as well as to determine if some of the more commonly assumed factors associated with pretrial failure are actual risks. The report is divided into the following sections: a detailed description of the methodology for this meta-analysis, findings, limitations and lastly, policy implications. Details: Unpublished report, 2011. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 13, 2011 at: http://www.pretrial.org/Setting%20Bail%20Documents/Identifying%20the%20Predictors%20of%20Pretrial%20Failure%20-%20A%20Meta%20Analysis%20(June%202011).pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.pretrial.org/Setting%20Bail%20Documents/Identifying%20the%20Predictors%20of%20Pretrial%20Failure%20-%20A%20Meta%20Analysis%20(June%202011).pdf Shelf Number: 122044 Keywords: Pretrial Release (U.S.) Risk Assessment

Author: Cordis Bright Consulting Title: Research into Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs) Summary: MARACs are multi-agency meetings where statutory and voluntary agency representatives share information about high risk victims of domestic abuse in order to produce a coordinated action plan to increase victim safety. The role of the MARAC is to provide a forum for effective information sharing and partnership working amongst a diverse range of adult and child focussed services in order to enhance the safety of high risk victims and their children. There are currently around 250 MARACs in operation across England and Wales. This study was commissioned by the Home Office as part of a wider review of MARACs which aimed to improve understanding of how MARACs are working and potential areas of development, including the case for putting MARACs on a statutory basis. The full review can be accessed at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/research-statistics/publications/home-office-research-reports/ (Home Office Research Report 55 “Supporting high risk victims of domestic violence: a review of Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs)”) This report presents: Findings from the national survey of MARACs. A summary of key findings from the case study research. Details: London: Cordis Bright Limited, 2011. 109p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 15, 2011 at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr55/horr55-technical-annex?view=Binary Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr55/horr55-technical-annex?view=Binary Shelf Number: 122069 Keywords: Collaboration Domestic Violence (U.K.) Family Violence Risk Assessment Victims of Domestic Violence

Author: Nicholas, Sian Title: Supporting High-Risk Victims of Domestic Violence: A Review of Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs) Summary: Multi-agency risk assessment conferences are multi-agency meetings where statutory and voluntary agency representatives share information about high-risk victims of domestic abuse in order to produce a co-ordinated action plan to increase victim safety. The agencies that attend MARACs will vary but are likely to include, for example: the Police, Probation, Independent Domestic Violence Advisers (IDVAs), Children's Services, health and housing. There are approximately 250 MARACs currently in operation across England and Wales. This report brings together evidence from a range of sources in order to explore: existing evidence for effectiveness and cost effectiveness of MARACs; how the MARAC model currently operates within the wider response to domestic violence; variation in current practice amongst MARACs; and potential areas for future development. Details: London: Home Office, 2011. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report 55: Accessed July 15, 2011 at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr55/horr55-report?view=Binary Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/horr55/horr55-report?view=Binary Shelf Number: 122073 Keywords: Collaboration Domestic Violence (U.K.) Family Violence Risk Assessment Victims of Domestic Violence

Author: Fabelo, Tony Title: Organizational Assessment of Travis County Community Supervision and Corrections Department (CSCD) -- Facing the Challenges to Successfully Implement the Travis Community Impact Supervision (TCIS) Model Summary: On July 1, 2005 the Travis County Community Supervision and Corrections Department (CSCD) accepted a proposal by The JFA Institute to conduct an operational assessment of the department. The proposal was in response to interest from the new director of the Travis CSCD, Dr. Geraldine Nagy, to assess the department’s strengths and weaknesses and to assist her in designing management strategies for the department. Particularly, the goal is to identify the organizational challenges of implementing an Evidence Based Practices (EBP) organization and supervision model. The main goal of EBP is to operate the agency as a “learning organization” that uses strategies proven to be effective to manage the probation population. The model moves supervision strategies from a primary emphasis on enforcement to one that focuses on providing the offenders the resources and motivation to effect change by addressing their criminogenic traits using methods that have been proven to work. TCIS is a model directed at increasing the effectiveness of probation. Effective assessment practices, differentiated supervision strategies, and organizational assessments to maintain model fidelity are the critical elements of TCIS. The assessments are used to classify the population to receive different supervision strategies that have been proven to be the most effective with their particular population risks and needs. To support this model, the probation department has to be retooled to conduct more effective assessments and routinely monitor program and supervision outcomes. Personnel training and personnel evaluations need to be directed at supporting and encouraging the new supervision strategies. The information systems of the organization also have to be effectively tapped to provide data for management and policy analysis to assist in the management and policy oversight of the practices. The expected outcomes of TCIS are: (a) the more effective diversion of low risk offenders from the criminal justice system; (b) reduction in the recidivism of “social problem” offenders (offenders who are mainly pro-social people that have gotten in trouble with the law because of a substance abuse or mental health problem); and (c) the more effective surveillance and control of high risk offenders. Details: Washington, DC: JFA Institute, 2005. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2011 at: http://www.jfa-associates.com/publications/ppope/Travis83105Final.pdf Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: http://www.jfa-associates.com/publications/ppope/Travis83105Final.pdf Shelf Number: 122086 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Corrections (Texas) Probation Probation Officers Probationers Risk Assessment

Author: VanNostrand, Marie Title: In Pursuit of Legal and Evidence-Based Pretrial Release Recommendations and Supervision Summary: Pretrial services agencies in Virginia are actively engaged in implementing Pretrial Services Legal and Evidence-Based Practices (LEBP). Pretrial services LEBP are interventions and practices that are consistent with the legal and constitutional rights afforded to accused persons awaiting trial and methods research have proven to be effective in reducing unnecessary detention while assuring court appearance and the safety of the community during the pretrial stage. A component of this larger LEBP initiative involves the development and implementation of research-based guidelines for use by pretrial services agencies that are (1) risk-based, (2) consistent with legal and evidence-based practices, and (3) provide guidance for pretrial release recommendations and differential pretrial supervision. Virginia pretrial services agencies currently use an objective and research-based risk assessment to assess risk of flight and danger to the community posed by pretrial defendants. The Virginia Pretrial Risk Assessment Instrument (VPRAI), known nationally as the “Virginia Model,” was the first research-based statewide pretrial risk assessment in the country. It has been validated for use by all Virginia pretrial services agencies. Pretrial release recommendations are currently subjective and although pretrial staff consider the results of the risk assessment, there is no objective and consistent guidance for making pretrial release recommendations. In addition, many of Virginia’s pretrial services agencies require the same frequency and types of contacts for all defendants during pretrial supervision while some have identified their own levels of supervision with varying frequencies and types of contacts. In both cases there is no objective and consistent policy for providing differential pretrial supervision based on the risk of pretrial failure. Details: Richmond, VA: Virginia Pretrial Services Agencies, 2011. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed Muly 18, 2011 at: http://www.dcjs.state.va.us/corrections/documents/VirginiaLEBPResearchProjectReportMarch2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.dcjs.state.va.us/corrections/documents/VirginiaLEBPResearchProjectReportMarch2011.pdf Shelf Number: 122087 Keywords: Pretrial Release (Virginia) Risk Assessment

Author: Carter, Madeline M. Title: Twenty Strategies for Advancing Sex Offender Management in Your Jurisdiction Summary: The goal of sex offender management is to promote public safety by reducing the risk of recidivism among sex offenders. Significant advancements have been made in the field of sex offender management in recent years. These include a clearer understanding of the adults and juveniles who commit these offenses, of the interventions and strategies that have been demonstrated through research to be effective and that appear to have great potential in reducing risk, and of methods and processes for engaging partners and equipping and supporting staff to manage these cases. This document was developed for policymakers interested in advancing adult and juvenile sex offender management in their jurisdictions. Based upon both research and practice, we offer 20 strategies that hold promise for reducing risk and promoting safe communities. Each strategy is illustrated by a case study representing one jurisdiction’s efforts to thoughtfully advance practice. These policy and practice initiatives, the underlying rationale and available evidence supporting them, and the accompanying jurisdictional case studies together represent the tremendous progress that has been achieved in our nation’s continued efforts to prevent further sexual victimization. Details: Silver Spring, MD: Center for Sex Offender Management, 2008. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2011 at: http://www.csom.org/pubs/twenty_strategies.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.csom.org/pubs/twenty_strategies.pdf Shelf Number: 122094 Keywords: Recidivism Rehabilitation Risk Assessment Sex Offenders (U.S.)

Author: O'Donnell, Kate Title: Infrastructure Vulnerability and the Coordination of Government Responses Information Technology Systems – Security and Risk Summary: Technological advances often outstrip governmental capacity to regulate, creating infrastructure vulnerabilities and opportunities for criminal exploitation and wrongdoing. These emerging threats and risks are compounded by the fact that new technologies (such as cloud computing) transcend borders. This environment poses serious challenges for policy makers and practitioners alike. On 30 June 2010, the Australian Government released its Critical Infrastructure Resilience Strategy which recognised ‘the importance of engaging with the research sector to ensure policies and approaches remain responsive to change and identify and mitigate knowledge gaps identified by critical infrastructure stakeholders. The Government will foster a stronger relationship between the owners and operators of critical infrastructure and the research community to ensure the research needs of critical infrastructure stakeholders on a range of security issues are being met.” This Briefing Paper profiles the CEPS workshop on Information Technology Systems – Security and Risk held in early 2011. stimulated a rich set of ideas, as well as forging new partnerships. Bringing together the public and private sectors in a discursive forum, the workshop identifed a range of emerging issues for the purpose of the framing future research agendas within CEPS. This Briefing Paper is a tangible outcome of that forum, and an example of new levels of engagement between the government, private and research sectors that will assist in deepening our knowledge of the risks to infrastructure, and identify effective strategies of promoting resilience and risk mitigation. Details: Nathan, QLD: ARC Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security, 2011. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Briefing Paper: Accessed July 20, 2011 at: http://www.ceps.edu.au/files/file/Information%20Technology%20Systems%20.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.ceps.edu.au/files/file/Information%20Technology%20Systems%20.pdf Shelf Number: 122123 Keywords: Critical Infrastructure Risk Assessment Terrorism

Author: Hedlund, Jennifer Title: Development and Validation of an Assessment for Pretrial Conditional Release Summary: The intent of pretrial decision making is to determine if an individual who is been arrested can be released back into the community prior to his or her court date without posing a risk of failing to appear for court, of committing a new offense or harming someone. The role of pretrial staff (bail commissioners and intake, assessment and referral [IAR] specialists) is to provide an independent assessment of the client’s risk and to recommend to the court whether the client should be considered for a financial bond or a non-financial form of release. A point scale currently provides pretrial staff with guidance in determining the level of risk posed by a client and thus what type of recommendation (financial bond or non-financial release) should be made. Pretrial staff also may add certain conditions to this recommendation, which are intended to minimize the risk posed by a client who may be released on a promise to appear or on a low bond. Until now there has been no tool to assist pretrial staff in determining the type of conditional release that best addresses a client’s needs. The main objectives of the current project were to develop and pilot a decision aid to guide conditional release recommendations, and to evaluate recent modifications to the risk assessment point scale. Details: Hartford, CT: Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut, 2005. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 21, 2011 at: http://www.jud.ct.gov/CSSD/research/Dev_Val_Assess_PCR.pdf Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: http://www.jud.ct.gov/CSSD/research/Dev_Val_Assess_PCR.pdf Shelf Number: 122131 Keywords: Bail Conditional Release Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Fabelo, Tony Title: A Ten-Step Guide to Transforming Probation Departments to Reduce Recidivism Summary: A Ten-Step Guide to Transforming Probation Departments to Reduce Recidivism provides probation leaders with a roadmap to overhaul the operations of their agencies so they can increase public safety in their communities and improve rates of compliance among people they are supervising. The first section describes how officials can engage key stakeholders, evaluate agency policies, and develop a strategic plan for implementing reform; the second section provides recommendations for redesigning departmental policies and practices; and the final section includes steps for making the department transformation permanent. The report provides numerous examples of how these steps were used in one probation department in particular (Travis County, Texas). Since transforming its operations between 2005 and 2008, the Travis County probation department has seen felony probation revocations decline by 20 percent and the one-year re-arrest rate for probationers fall by 17 percent (compared with similar probationers before the departmental overhaul). Details: Washington, DC: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2011. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 10, 2011 at: http://www.nationalreentryresourcecenter.org/documents/0000/1150/A_Ten-Step_Guide_to_Transforming_Probation_Departments_to_Reduce_Recidivism.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nationalreentryresourcecenter.org/documents/0000/1150/A_Ten-Step_Guide_to_Transforming_Probation_Departments_to_Reduce_Recidivism.pdf Shelf Number: 122344 Keywords: Probation (U.S.) Probation Officers Probationers Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Meredith, Tammy Title: Enhancing Parole Decision-Making Through the Automation of Risk Assessment Summary: How do we know if a parolee will be arrested while under our supervision? We cannot know for certain. Yet by using the tools of science, we can improve upon our professional judgment by mathematically assessing risk. An officer with insight into a parolee’s likelihood of re-offending can make more informed case supervision decisions. This idea exemplifies the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles’ philosophy of “results driven supervision,” which encourages the use of research to improve our ability to address the needs of parolees in order to enhance their chances of successful integration into the community. The development of risk assessment instruments is based on the premise that certain factors (characteristics of an offender or his environment) can be used to predict an offender’s risk of future criminality. Correctional professionals have traditionally relied on clinical and professional judgment to predict the behavior of offenders. We can now add to that a sizable body of research, emerging over the past twenty years, that identifies factors statistically predictive of recidivism in order to create and validate actuarial risk instruments. Actuarial risk instruments have focused primarily on static, or unchanging predictors of recidivism, such as age and prior criminality. Today, empirically-derived assessment instruments are evolving to include both static and dynamic predictors of recidivism, or those factors that can change over time, such as offender attitudes and behavior while under correctional supervision. This trend is confirmed by the work of Gendreau and colleagues (1996) in identifying the 10 static and 7 dynamic risk factors that consistently surface across 131 recidivism studies published between 1970 and 1994 (most importantly age, prior record, antisocial personality, companions, and criminogenic needs -- which establish standards of conduct and rational for engaging in antisocial behavior). Despite the identification of 17 prime risk factors, Gendreau and his colleages note that composite risk scales, which summarize a variety of risk factors, remain the most powerful predictors of recidivism. Today, many correctional agencies are adopting existing and well-tested composite risk scales. Some are developing their own scales, based upon data analyses performed on their own population of offenders. To assess the empirical support for various risk assessment options, we identified 42 risk assessment studies published in the past twenty years (see Table 1). This body of literature guided the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles in developing an actuarial risk assessment method for the assignment of supervision level for 20,000 active parolees. Details: Atlanta, GA: Applied Research Services, Inc, 2001. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 1, 2011 at: http://www.ars-corp.com/_view/PDF_Files/EnhancingParoleDecisionMakingThroughtheAutomationofRiskAssessment2003.pdf Year: 2001 Country: United States URL: http://www.ars-corp.com/_view/PDF_Files/EnhancingParoleDecisionMakingThroughtheAutomationofRiskAssessment2003.pdf Shelf Number: 122586 Keywords: Parole (Georgia) Parolees Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Cobb, Kimberly A. Title: A Desktop Guide for Tribal Probation Personnel: The Screening and Assessment Process Summary: This guide is intended to provide tribal probation personnel with information on how the screening and assessment process can facilitate and promote offender accountability and long-term behavior change. This guidebook discusses the use of screening and assessment tools within the constructs of Risk-Need-Responsivity Model; the benefits of using screening and assessment tools; the challenges to using screening and assessment tools; and the factors to consider when choosing tools to use in your agency. Further, Appendix A of this guidebook provides tribal probation officers with an index of screening and assessment tools which were cataloged by the Reentry Policy Council. These tools are searchable by domains, or focus areas, including criminal thinking, employment & education, family relationships, financial status, housing, mental health, physical health, recidivism risk, and substance abuse. Appendix B provides screening and assessment tools for domestic violence. Details: Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association, 2011. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 3, 2011 at: http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/pubs/DGTPP.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/pubs/DGTPP.pdf Shelf Number: 122638 Keywords: Indians of North America Parolees Prisoner Reentry Probation Officers (U.S.) Risk Assessment

Author: State of Oregon Government Title: Oregon Parole/Post-Prison Revocation Study Summary: Oregonians sentenced for felony convictions and released from jail or prison in 2005 and 2006 were evaluated for revocation risk. Those released from jail, from prison, and those served through interstate compact were considered in the analysis. The revocation rate is lowest for the interstate compact population and highest for the jail population; overall, 24% were revoked in the two years after release. Revocation risk is influenced by numerous static and demographic variables. Independent variables common with the three populations include recidivism risk, number of arrests while on parole or post-prison supervision (PPS), number of prior felony convictions, age, and being a veteran. Comparing the jail and prison populations, both age and number of prior felony convictions have similar effects for both populations. The number of arrests while on parole/PPS has more of an effect with the jail population than those released from prison. The factors that are important for the prison population yet are not important risk factors for the jail population include being male, being African American, incarcerated for a violent offense, incarcerated for a public order offense, and considered high risk at release; all of these factors increase risk for the prison population yet are not important risk considerations for those released from jail. The factors that have different effects in each population (i.e. associated with increased risk in one population and decreased risk in the second population) include veteran status, prior imprisonment, and incarceration for a property crime. There are some demographic and static factors that influence revocation risk among the three populations. Despite numerous similarities, differences do exist. The predictive accuracy of the models suggests that individuals prone to revocations can be identified with some accuracy. Details: Eugene, OR: State of Oregon, 2011. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 15, 2011 at: http://www.oregon.gov/CJC/docs/Oregon_Revocation_Final.pdf?ga=t Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.oregon.gov/CJC/docs/Oregon_Revocation_Final.pdf?ga=t Shelf Number: 122748 Keywords: Parole Supervision Parole Violations Parolees (Oregon) Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Maritime Security: Coast Guard Should Conduct Required Inspections of Offshore Energy Infrastructure Summary: Congressional interest in the security of offshore energy infrastructure has increased because of the lives lost and the substantial damages that resulted from the Deepwater Horizon incident in April 2010. The U.S. Coast Guard--a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)--is the lead federal agency for maritime security, including the security of offshore energy infrastructure. The Coast Guard oversees two main types of offshore energy infrastructure--facilities on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and deepwater ports. GAO was asked to examine (1) Coast Guard actions to ensure the security of OCS facilities and what additional actions, if any, are needed; (2) Coast Guard actions to ensure the security of deepwater ports and what additional actions, if any, are needed; and (3) what limitations in oversight authority, if any, the Coast Guard faces in ensuring the security of offshore energy infrastructure. GAO reviewed Coast Guard documents, such as inspection records, and relevant laws and regulations and interviewed Coast Guard inspectors and officials, including those at Coast Guard headquarters and the two Coast Guard districts that oversee all OCS facilities and deepwater ports that are subject to security requirements. The Coast Guard has taken actions to address the security of OCS facilities (that is, facilities regulated for security pursuant to 33 C.F.R. part 106), but could improve its process for managing security inspections. For example, the Coast Guard developed a security plan for the Gulf of Mexico, in which all 57 OCS facilities are located, and it reviews security plans developed by the owners and operators of OCS facilities. It has also issued guidance, which states that Coast Guard personnel should conduct security inspections of OCS facilities annually, but has conducted about one-third of these inspections from 2008 through 2010. Further, the Coast Guard does not have procedures in place to ensure that its field units conduct these inspections. Consequently, the Coast Guard may not be meeting one of its stated goals of reducing the risk and mitigating the potential results of an act that could threaten the security of personnel, the OCS facility, the environment, and the public. The Coast Guard also faces challenges in summarizing inspection results. Specifically, its database for storing inspection data has limitations that make it difficult to determine if security inspections were conducted. For example, there is no data field to identify OCS facilities, which makes it difficult to readily analyze whether required inspections were conducted. By addressing some of these challenges, Coast Guard managers could more easily use the data as a management tool to inform decision making. The Coast Guard has also taken actions to ensure the security of the four deepwater ports, but opportunities exist for improvement. The Coast Guard's actions to ensure the security of deepwater ports are similar to actions it has taken to ensure the security of OCS facilities. For example, Coast Guard security plans address security at deepwater ports, and the Coast Guard also reviews security plans developed by the owners and operators of the deepwater ports. However, Coast Guard guidance for deepwater ports does not call for annual security inspections, and it has conducted only one security inspection at a deepwater port from 2008 through 2010. Coast Guard officials said that the Coast Guard plans to begin annual security inspections of deepwater ports in recognition of the risk of a transportation security incident. However, limitations in the Coast Guard's inspection database and lack of guidance available to database users may complicate the Coast Guard's management and oversight of inspections at deepwater ports. For example, the data field for deepwater ports has been incorrectly applied to other types of infrastructure and some deepwater ports are recorded under multiple names. Unless the Coast Guard addresses these database limitations and issues updated guidance to database users, it will be difficult for the Coast Guard to verify that the deepwater ports are complying with applicable maritime security requirements. The Coast Guard has limited authority regarding the security of mobile offshore drilling units (MODU) registered to foreign countries, such as the Deepwater Horizon. The Coast Guard is taking action, though, to gain a fuller understanding of the security risks associated with MODUs by conducting a study to help determine whether additional actions could better ensure the security of offshore energy infrastructure in the Gulf of Mexico, including MODUs. GAO recommends that the Coast Guard develop policies or guidance to ensure that (1) annual security inspections are conducted at OCS facilities and (2) information entered into its database for both OCS facilities and deepwater ports is more useful for management. DHS and the Coast Guard concurred with these recommendations. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2011. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-12-37: Accessed October 31, 2011 at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1237.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1237.pdf Shelf Number: 123185 Keywords: Critical Infrastructure Maritime Crime Maritime Security (U.S.) Risk Assessment Terrorism

Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Federal Courthouses: Improved Collaboration Needed to Meet Demands of a Complex Security Environment Summary: Safe and accessible federal courthouses are critical to the U.S. judicial process. The Federal Protective Service (FPS), within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S. Marshals Service (Marshals Service), within the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC), and the General Services Administration (GSA) are the federal stakeholders with roles related to courthouse security. As requested, this report addresses (1) attributes that influence courthouse security considerations and (2) the extent to which stakeholders have collaborated in implementing their responsibilities and using risk management. GAO analyzed laws and documents, such as security assessments; reviewed GAO's work on key practices for collaboration and facility protection; visited 11 courthouse facilities, selected based on geographic dispersion, age, size, and other criteria; and interviewed agency and judiciary officials. While the results from site visits cannot be generalized, they provided examples of courthouse security activities. Various attributes influence security considerations for the nation's 424 federal courthouses, which range from small court spaces to large buildings in major urban areas. According to DOJ data, threats against the courts have increased between fiscal years 2004 and 2010--from approximately 600 to more than 1,400. The Interagency Security Committee--an interagency group that develops standards for federal facility security--has assigned courthouses the highest security level because they are prominent symbols of U.S. power. Federal stakeholders have taken steps to strengthen their collaboration, such as establishing agency liaisons, but have faced challenges in implementing assigned responsibilities and using risk assessment tools. (1) A 1997 memorandum of agreement (MOA) outlines each stakeholder's roles and responsibilities and identifies areas requiring stakeholder coordination. However, at 5 of the 11 courthouses GAO visited, FPS and the Marshals Service were either performing duplicative efforts (e.g., both monitoring the courthouse lobby) or performing security roles that were inconsistent with their responsibilities. The judiciary and other stakeholders stated that having the Marshals Service and FPS both provide security services has resulted in two lines of authority for implementing and overseeing security services. Updating the MOA that identifies roles and responsibilities could strengthen the multiagency courthouse security framework by better incorporating accountability for federal agencies' collaborative efforts. (2) In 2008, Congress authorized a pilot program, whereby the Marshals Service would assume FPS's responsibilities to provide perimeter security at 7 courthouses. In October 2010, the judiciary recommended that the pilot be expanded. AOUSC noted general consensus among various stakeholders in support of the pilot and estimated the costs of expanding it, but AOUSC did not obtain FPS's views on assessing the pilot results or on how the expansion may affect FPS's mission. Additional analysis on the costs and benefits of this approach and the inclusion of all stakeholder perspectives could better position Congress and federal stakeholders to evaluate expansion options. (3) The Marshals Service has not always completed court security facility surveys (a type of risk assessment), as required by Marshals Service guidance. At 9 of the courthouses GAO visited, the Marshals Service had not conducted these surveys, but Marshals Service officials at some courthouses told us that they assessed security needs as part of their budget development process. However, these assessments are less comprehensive than the court security facility surveys required by Marshals Service guidance. FPS has faced difficulties completing its risk assessments, known as facility security assessments, and recently halted an effort to implement a new system for completing them. Furthermore, GAO found that the Marshals Service and FPS did not consistently share the full results of their risk assessments with each other and key stakeholders. Sharing risk assessment information could better equip federal stakeholders to assess courthouses' security needs and make informed decisions. GAO recommends DHS and DOJ update the MOA to, among other things, clarify stakeholders' roles and responsibilities and ensure the completion and sharing of risk assessments; and further assess costs and benefits of the perimeter pilot program, in terms of enhanced security, and include all stakeholders' views, should steps be taken to expand the program. DHS and DOJ concurred with GAO's recommendations. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2011. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-11-857: Accessed October 31, 2011 at: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-857 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-857 Shelf Number: 123186 Keywords: Building Security Courthouses Homeland Security Risk Assessment

Author: Hedlund, Jennifer Title: Development and Validation of an Assessment for Pretrial Conditional Release Summary: The intent of pretrial decision making is to determine if an individual who is been arrested can be released back into the community prior to his or her court date without posing a risk of failing to appear for court, of committing a new offense or harming someone. The role of pretrial staff (bail commissioners and intake, assessment and referral [IAR] specialists) is to provide an independent assessment of the client’s risk and to recommend to the court whether the client should be considered for a financial bond or a non-financial form of release. A point scale currently provides pretrial staff with guidance in determining the level of risk posed by a client and thus what type of recommendation (financial bond or non-financial release) should be made. Pretrial staff also may add certain conditions to this recommendation, which are intended to minimize the risk posed by a client who may be released on a promise to appear or on a low bond. Until now there has been no tool to assist pretrial staff in determining the type of conditional release that best addresses a client’s needs. The main objectives of the current project were to develop and pilot a decision aid to guide conditional release recommendations, and to evaluate recent modifications to the risk assessment point scale. Details: Hartford, CT: Judicial Branch, 2005. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 31, 2011 at: http://www.jud.ct.gov/CSSD/research/Dev_Val_Assess_PCR.pdf Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: http://www.jud.ct.gov/CSSD/research/Dev_Val_Assess_PCR.pdf Shelf Number: 122131 Keywords: Bail Conditional Release Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Pew Center on the States Title: Risk/Needs Assessment 101: Science Reveals New Tools to Manage Offenders Summary: Over the past few decades, experts have developed and refined risk/needs instruments to measure the likelihood of an individual returning to crime, violence or drug use. These tools can help officials to better identify offenders at a high risk of reoffending, while also pinpointing the types of supervision and services that are most likely to prevent future criminal behavior and slow the revolving door of America’s prisons. Key Findings: • Risk/needs instruments measure an individual’s risk of reoffending and identify the specific risk factors that, if addressed, can reduce the likelihood of future criminal behavior. • Risk/needs assessment tools are used at many points in the corrections process by courts, probation and parole agencies, prison and jail systems and parole boards to inform decisions about offender management. • Differentiating offenders by risk level is important—intensive programming can work well with higher-risk offenders but can actually increase recidivism rates among lower-risk offenders. • Research has shown that a comprehensive evidence-based approach—assessing risk, matching supervision and treatment to an offender’s risk level and targeting criminal risk factors with proven programs—reduces recidivism. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Center on the States, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Pew_Risk_Assessment_brief.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Pew_Risk_Assessment_brief.pdf Shelf Number: 123198 Keywords: Classification of Offenders Needs Assessment Offender Management Prisoners Risk Assessment

Author: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Title: Risk Management Fundamentals Homeland Security Risk Management Doctrine Summary: This doctrine, Risk Management Fundamentals, serves as an authoritative statement regarding the principles and process of homeland security risk management and what they mean to homeland security planning and execution. It is intended as the capstone doctrine on risk management for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Furthermore, Risk Management Fundamentals serves as a foundational document supporting DHS risk management efforts in partnership with the homeland security enterprise. Risk Management Fundamentals is intended to help homeland security leaders, supporting staffs, program managers, analysts, and operational personnel develop a framework to make risk management an integral part of planning, preparing, and executing organizational missions. The development of homeland security risk management doctrine is an essential element in promoting a risk-informed culture enabling training, capability development, and integration across DHS to strengthen and improve the Nation’s security. Risk Management Fundamentals articulates a desired end-state that DHS aspires to achieve in promoting risk management. This doctrine is not a substitute for independent thought or innovation in applying these principles and concepts. Simply reading the doctrine will not make one adept in managing risks, nor will attempting to follow the ideas herein as if they were a checklist; rather, doctrine serves to shape how one thinks about the issues that you are considering and should be applied based on the operating environment. Homeland security practitioners should compare the doctrine herein against their own experience and think about why, when, and how it applies to their situation and area of responsibility. The purpose of this document is to:  Promote a common understanding of, and approach to, risk management;  Establish organizational practices that should be followed by DHS Components;  Provide a foundation for conducting risk assessments and evaluating risk management options;  Set the doctrinal underpinning for institutionalizing a risk management culture through consistent application and training on risk management principles and practices; and  Educate and inform homeland security stakeholders in risk management applications, including the assessment of capability, program, and operational performance, and the use of such assessments for resource and policy decisions. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2011. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 5, 2011 at: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/rma-risk-management-fundamentals.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/rma-risk-management-fundamentals.pdf Shelf Number: 123245 Keywords: Homeland Security (U.S.) Risk Assessment Risk Management Terrorism

Author: Slobogin, Christopher Title: Prevention as the Primary Goal of Sentencing: The Modern Case for Indeterminate Dispositions in Criminal Cases Summary: Among modern-day legal academics determinate sentencing and limiting retributivism tend to be preferred over indeterminate sentencing, at least in part because the latter option is viewed as immoral. This Article contends to the contrary that, properly constituted, indeterminate sentencing is both a morally defensible method of preventing crime and the optimal regime for doing so. More specifically, the position defended in this Article is that, once a person is convicted of such an offense, the duration and nature of sentence should be based on a back-end decision made by experts in recidivism reduction, within very broad ranges set by the legislature. The territory covered in this Article, particularly as it addresses the debate between deontological retributivists and utilitarians, is well-trodden. But this Article seeks to provide new perspectives on the morality, legality, and practicality of indeterminate sentencing. It starts with an outline of what a properly constituted indeterminate sentencing regime would look like. It then defends this regime against numerous objections. Details: Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Law School, 2011. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Vanderbilt University Law School, Public Law & Legal Theory Working Paper Number 11-31 Law & Economics Working Paper Number 11-43: Accessed November 16, 2011 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1959489 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1959489 Shelf Number: 123368 Keywords: Indeterminate Sentences Punishment Risk Assessment Sentencing (U.S.)

Author: McGrath, Robert J. Title: A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Summary: The purpose of the present study was to test models of combining static and dynamic risk measures that might predict sexual recidivism among adult male sex offenders better than any one type of measure alone. Study participants were 759 adult male sex offenders under correctional supervision in Vermont who were enrolled in community sex offender treatment between 2001 and 2007. These offenders were assessed once using static measures (Static-99R, Static-2002R and VASOR) based on participants’ history at the date of placement in the community. A 22-item dynamic risk measure (SOTNPS) was used multiple times to assess participants, shortly after their entry into community treatment and approximately every six months thereafter. Analyses of SOTNPS scores resulted in the development of a new 16-item dynamic risk measure, the Sex Offender Treatment Intervention and Progress Scale (SOTIPS). At fixed one- and three-year follow-up periods from participants’ initial, second, and third dynamic risk assessments, the SOTIPS and Static-99R, the static risk measure selected for further analysis in the present study, each independently showed moderate ability to rank order risk for sexual, violent, and any criminal recidivism and return to prison. A logistic regression model that combined SOTIPS and Static-99R consistently predicted recidivism and outperformed either instrument alone when both instruments had similar predictive power. Participants who demonstrated treatment progress, as reflected by reductions in SOTIPS scores, showed lower rates of recidivism than those who did not. Details: Waterbury, VT: Vermont Department of Corrections, 2011. 96p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 22, 2011 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Shelf Number: 123424 Keywords: Recidivism Risk Assessment Sex Offenders (U.S.) Treatment Programs

Author: Kardam, Filiz Title: The Dynamics of Honor Killings in Turkey: Prospects for Action Summary: This report summarizes and evaluates qualitative research about so-called 'honour killings'. It focused the different perceptions of honour and the consequences faced by people engaged in 'dishonourable conduct'. It also analyzes the way the concept of dishonour is related to social structures, lifestyles and mental constructs. The information is derived from interviews and group discussions conducted in four Turkish cities with relatively high numbers of such murders. The report includes proposals for solutions to the problem and suggestions for action. Details: Ankara, Turkey: UNFPA - United Nations Population Fund, 2007. 89p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 3, 2012 at http://www.unfpa.org/webdav/site/global/shared/documents/publications/2007/honourkillings.pdf Year: 2007 Country: Turkey URL: http://www.unfpa.org/webdav/site/global/shared/documents/publications/2007/honourkillings.pdf Shelf Number: 123951 Keywords: Honor Killings (Turkey) Risk Assessment Violent Crime

Author: Garza, V. Title: Vulnerabilities of the National Border Security Strategy on the U.S. Border Patrol Summary: This report analyzes critical issues within the United States Border Patrol that have led to high attrition rates within the agency and an all-time low in morale among Border Patrol agents. A broadcast of Lou Dobbs Tonight reported, "Customs and border protection agents' hands are tied because their job no longer includes enforcement. Instead they have to man their posts 8-10 hours a day to serve as a deterrent, part of a bureaucratic decision that critics say is jeopardizing our national security.”1 The United States Border Patrol, a critical agency within the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, is responsible for defending our borders between ports of entry. But when they are told to stand down and not do their job, who will? In June 2004, the Border Patrol station in Temecula, California, formed a special Mobile Patrol Group that conducted a series of illegal alien sweeps in the communities of Norco, Corona, Escondido. The 12-man group made more than 450 arrests resulting in both approval and contempt. Latino activists were enraged, accusing the Border Patrol of violating their civil rights. Asa Hutchinson, then Undersecretary of Homeland Security, announced that while the sweeps were not illegal, they did breach policy and the chain of command. Robert Bonner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner, issued that same month an order that all future enforcement operations within the surrounding areas of checkpoints must first be approved by Border Patrol Headquarters in Washington, D.C. Morale at the Temecula border patrol station sank to its lowest level. “We don't know which way to turn – for once, we were doing our job, what the government pays us to do," said Ron Zermeno, shop steward for the National Border Patrol Council at the Temecula station.2 The purpose of this report is to raise significant problems within the National Border Patrol Strategy and how these problems affect the mission of the U.S. Border Patrol. This report is divided into three main parts. The first looks at the different risks and vulnerabilities that have shaped Border Patrol strategies at the northern and southwest borders. The second part focuses on Border Patrol operations: the history of Border Patrol, priorities pre and post 9/11, budget obligations and resources, and cooperation with land management agencies on federal borderlands. The last section analyzes the effects of problems internal to Border Patrol agents on national security. Areas focused on include inadequate staffing, insufficient technology, and attrition rates. A solution for a long-term Border Patrol strategy is beyond the scope of this report. Follow-up work should include possible assessments to determine the optimal number of personnel needed to secure the border. An evaluation of the proper technology necessary to deploy to the northern and southern border is also critical. It is essential that the Department of Homeland Security develop a long-term National Border Security Strategy based on a risk and vulnerability assessment. Details: Los Angeles, CA: CREATE - Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events, 2005. 36p. Source: Report #05-022: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2012 at http://create.usc.edu/research/50792.pdf Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: http://create.usc.edu/research/50792.pdf Shelf Number: 124023 Keywords: Border Security (U.S.) Risk Assessment Terrorism

Author: Cruz, Adrienne Title: Gender-based violence in the world of work: Overview and selected annotated bibliography Summary: Gender-based violence is described by many as the most prevalent human rights violation in the world. Of the varied ways in which sex discrimination manifests itself across the globe, such violence is exceptionally dehumanizing, pervasive and oppressive. No other form of sex discrimination violates so many fundamental human rights, as articulated in the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These are included, for example, in Article 1 which provides that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”, Article 3 which provides that “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”, and Article 5 which provides that “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”. Gender-based violence both reflects and reinforces inequalities between women and men. At least one in three women around the world is estimated to have been coerced into sex, physically beaten and/or otherwise abused in her lifetime. For women aged 15 to 44 years, such violence is a major cause of disability and death. Gender-based violence not only causes pain and suffering but also devastates families, undermines workplace productivity, diminishes national competitiveness, and stalls development. The International Labour Conference – in its June 2009 Resolution concerning gender equality at the heart of decent work – described gender-based violence as a critical and major global challenge to the goal of equality between women and men. The Conference – which annually brings together the ILO tripartite constituents comprising member States and representatives of workers’ and employers’ organizations from those countries – agreed on work-related strategies for its prevention and eradication. Based on the Conference’s recommendations, which included a call for tools about gender-based violence in the world of work, the Bureau for Gender Equality (GENDER) took the lead to track current research, investigate trends and develop this overview and annotated bibliography. Its aim is to contribute to policy development at national level, especially with entry points for responses and prevention in the world of work; enhance knowledge sharing of good practices on eliminating gender-based violence; serve as an information resource for capacity building, in particular for the tripartite constituents; and promote relevant key ILO messages, including from the 2009 ILC Conclusions. The first of three sections provides an overview of ILO’s own research and policy development on gender-based violence within its mandate, namely across the world of work, as well as good practices from operational activities. After explaining the aims and audience as well as methodology used for the bibliography, key terms are defined. This is followed by analysis of the exposure and risks for gender-based violence victims as well as perpetrators within the world of work. Reasons for tackling such violence are explained from both a rights-based and economic efficiency approach. Some particularly high-risk groups as victims are then described: child labourers, forced and bonded labourers, migrant workers, domestic workers, health services workers and sex workers. This is followed by discussion of the research on how using a men and masculinities perspective can reveal some men’s vulnerability to violence exposure, and ways to better engage males in stopping violence and promoting gender equality. The second section comprises the annotated bibliography. It is divided into two parts with entries in English, as well as some in French and Spanish as this tool is also available worldwide on the internet. The first part contains some 75 international, regional and country-based entries, and the second part contains over 50 tools, measures and guides. Each entry summary, which appears in the language of its publication, highlights key messages or research findings, lessons learned and/or good practices. A concluding section highlights some trends and challenges that emerged during the literature review, as well as opportunities identified to step up efforts for preventing and eradicating gender-based violence in the world of work. These are largely based on the above-mentioned 2009 ILC Conclusions and are summarized within the framework of the four strategic objectives of the ILO. These are employment, social protection, social dialogue and tripartism, and fundamental principles and rights including the role of international labour standards. A recurring theme throughout this section, as well as preceding ones, concerns the importance of social dialogue between the tripartite constituents in order to address and take action to prevent and stop gender-based violence in the world of work. A closing message recalls the 2009 Conference’s strong call to end gender-based violence, which it stressed was critical to achieving gender equality and decent work. Details: Geneva: ILO International Labour Office, 2011. 80p. Source: ILO Working Paper 3/2011: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2012 at Year: 2011 Country: International URL: Shelf Number: 124029 Keywords: Gender Based Violence Risk Assessment Workplace Crime

Author: Brentz, Brooks Title: Learning from Recent Threats to Cargo Security Summary: On October 29, 2010, President Barack Obama confirmed that suspicious air cargo shipments destined for the United States contained explosive materials. Although these shipments were discovered in Dubai and England, the United States federal government grounded planes at Newark and Philadelphia airports to inspect packages based on fears of a terrorist threat originating from Yemen. Intervention prompted by intelligence sharing among governments of the countries involved prevented catastrophic outcomes. As with other near misses, governments are responding by reexamining cargo transport regulations and security practices. Accenture believes that it is time for manufacturer-shippers to do the same to protect against major disruptions to their global supply chains. However, given the vast volume of goods moving around the world and the multiple modes of transportation involved, practical approaches are needed to address the risks. Details: Boston(?): Accenture, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 10, 2012 at: http://www.accenture.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Accenture_Learning_From_Recent_Threats.pdf Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.accenture.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Accenture_Learning_From_Recent_Threats.pdf Shelf Number: 124039 Keywords: Cargo Security Cargo Theft Risk Assessment Stolen Goods Supply Chains Theft of Property

Author: Bricknell, Samantha Title: Money laundering and terrorism financing risks to Australian non-profit organizations Summary: The exploitation of the non-profit sector for money laundering and, in particular, the financing of terrorism, is understood to have been a long-established practice. However, the methods and sources used by terrorist organisations to finance their activities became a key policy focal point after the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 and subsequent (predominantly government) examinations of terrorism funding substantiated the position that non-profit organisations were at an elevated risk of criminal exploitation. The vulnerability of non-profit organisations was related to their social purpose, the cash-intensive nature of their activities and the generally minimal form of regulatory oversight applied to their operations. Adding to this risk was the provision of services that relied on financial contributions and the good will of its supporters, the often regular transmission of funds between jurisdictions and less rigorous forms of administrative and financial management. This report examines the risks to the Australian non-profit sector of money laundering and terrorism financing and describes the regulatory changes that could minimise risk. The report uses information derived from government, non-government and peer-reviewed literature, case law and regulator reports, and observations made by representatives from the non-profit sector, law enforcement and key regulatory agencies, and academia that were consulted for the study. Details: Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2011. 83p. Source: AIC Reports, Research and Public Policy Series 114: Internet Resource: Accessed February 10, 2012 at http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/7/3/9/%7B73997C4D-79B3-46B1-8D09-4AFC93E675F5%7Drpp114.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/7/3/9/%7B73997C4D-79B3-46B1-8D09-4AFC93E675F5%7Drpp114.pdf Shelf Number: 124043 Keywords: Money Laundering (Australia) Risk Assessment Terrorism Financing

Author: Bradford, Siân Title: The decision-making process at parole reviews (indeterminate imprisonment for public protection sentences) Summary: Research summary giving high-level findings from Ministry of Justice and Parole Board research on the decision-making process at parole reviews of indeterminate sentences of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP). It involved analysing data collected from parole review dossiers and interviews with Parole Board members. Key findings demonstrated that: • parole decisions correlate strongly with offender manager recommendations to the panel •sentence progression is an important factor in release decisions • prisoners released had often spent time in open conditions •the importance of good quality risk management plans; and • Parole Board members were frustrated that more resources were needed in certain areas. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 10p. Source: Research Summary 1/12: Internet Resource: Accessed February 10, 2012 at Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 124077 Keywords: Parole (U.K.) Parole Boards (U.K.) Parolees Risk Assessment

Author: Kim, KiDeuk Title: A Case Study on the Practice of Pretrial Services and Risk Assessment in Three Cities Summary: This report compares three pretrial agencies—Washington, D.C., New York City, and Baltimore—and discusses their practice of pretrial services and programs, with a particular focus on risk assessment. DCPI researchers identify several unique attributes of the District of Columbia’s Pretrial Service Agency, including its focus on public safety, implementation of formal assessments of flight risk, and lack of reliance on monetary bail. They conclude that PSA’s pretrial risk assessment is more comprehensive than in the other two agencies because it is both designed to inform the use of a broad range of pretrial treatment and supervision options and is focused on helping to reduce and manage the risk to public safety posed by pretrial defendants. Details: Washington, DC: District of Columbia Crime Policy Institute, The Urban Institute, 2011. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 12, 2012 at http://www.dccrimepolicy.org/images/Pretrial-Comparative-Final-Report_1.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.dccrimepolicy.org/images/Pretrial-Comparative-Final-Report_1.pdf Shelf Number: 124103 Keywords: Case Management Case Processing Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Clark, Belinda Title: Disqualified Drivers in Victoria: Literature Review and In-Depth Focus Group Study Summary: This report outlines a two phase project into disqualified drivers in Victoria. The first phase of the project comprised a review of the literature related to license disqualification and explored the feasability of conducting an in-depth study of disqualified drivers in Victoria. The second phase of the project, which resulted from the feasability study, involved conducting an in-depth investigation into the behaviors and attitudes of disqualified drivers, including contributing family and social influences. Forty disqualified drivers participated in seven focus group discussions and 13 partners/parents of disqualified drivers participated in three separate focus group discussions. The results showed the approximate 60% of the driver participants continued to drive during disqualification. The following factors were found to have a key influence on the decision to drive during disqualification: negative attitudes towards sanction; denial of the risk of one's own driving behaviours; very low perceptions of the risk of detection; personal and vicarious experiences of punishment avoidance; and negative attitudes towards alternatives. The most common reason provided for the decision to continue driving was to maintain one's employment, although driving for family and social reasons was also commonly reported. Most participants described personal hardships caused by the sanction, with this impact being greatest for those who adhered to the sanction and stopped driving. The majority of partners/parents also reported being negatively affected, as the sanction resulted in extra burdens for them and often created relationship tensions. Many partners/parents expressed concern about their partners'/children's dangerous driving behaviours and the ineffectiveness of the sanctions in deterring illegal driving behaviours. The findings of the present study were consistent with previous research. Recommendations were made for further research into Victorian Registration and Licensing data and Victorian crash data to quantify the number of disqualified drivers and the extent of the risk they pose on the road. Recommendations were also made for publicity campaigns to raise the perceived risk of detection, improvements in enforcement (e.g., increased checking of licenses at RBT sites, possible extension of compulsory carriage of license legislation), and the design and implementation of best practice rehabilitation programs. Details: Victoria, Australia: Accident Research Centre, Monash University, 2008. 141p. Source: Report No. 274: Internet Resource: Accessed February 17, 2012 at http://www.monash.edu.au/miri/research/reports/muarc274.pdf Year: 2008 Country: Australia URL: http://www.monash.edu.au/miri/research/reports/muarc274.pdf Shelf Number: 124156 Keywords: Evaluative Studies Risk Assessment

Author: Watson, Barry Title: The Road Safety Implications of Unlicensed Driving: A Survey of Unlicensed Drivers Summary: This report documents the findings of a survey of 309 unlicensed driving offenders interviewed at the Brisbane Central Magistrates Court. A wide range of offenders participated in the study including disqualified and suspended drivers, expired licence holders, drivers without a current or appropriate licence, and those who had never been licensed. The results indicate that unlicensed drivers should not be viewed as a homogenous group. Significant differences exist between offender types in terms of their socio-demographic characteristics, whether they were aware of being unlicensed or not, their behaviour while unlicensed, and the factors contributing to their behaviour. Among some offenders, unlicensed driving appears to be indicative of a more general pattern of non-conformity and illegal behaviour. While many offenders limited their driving while unlicensed, others continued to drive frequently. Moreover, almost one-third of the sample continued to drive unlicensed after being detected by the police. One of the strongest predictors of both the frequency of unlicensed driving and continued driving after detection was whether the offenders needed to drive for work purposes when unlicensed. While there was some evidence that offenders attempted to drive more cautiously while unlicensed, this was not always reflected in their reported drink driving or speeding behaviour. The results highlight the need to enhance current policies and procedures to counter unlicensed driving. In particular, there is a need to examine current enforcement practices since over one-third of the participants reported being pulled over by the Police while driving unlicensed but not aving their licence checked. Details: Queensland, Australia: Centre for Accident Research & Road Safety, Queensland University of Technology, 2003. 142p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 17, 2012 at http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/publications/2001/pdf/surv_unlic_3.pdf Year: 2003 Country: Australia URL: http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/publications/2001/pdf/surv_unlic_3.pdf Shelf Number: 124157 Keywords: Evaluative Studies Risk Assessment

Author: Turner, Susan Title: Development of the California Static Risk Assessment Instrument (CSRA) Summary: Beginning in the mid-1990s, various public policy groups have made recommendations concerning reform of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) parole system. The Little Hoover Commission (1994-2007), the Independent Review Panel led by former Governor Deukmejian (2004), and the Expert Panel commissioned by the California Legislature through the 2006-07 Budget Act have all recommended reforms of the system. One of the central features of recommended reform models is a system of structured decision making for parole supervision and violation issues.1 Such a system would make decisions more consistent and amenable to a policy-driven approach. The panels recommended a system that utilized supervision and violation decision matrices that combined risk to re-offend with other factors to guide supervision and treatment. CDCR has incorporated risk and needs assessment in its “Logic Model” – the recently adopted conceptual framework guiding programming and decisions within the Department. Risk/needs assessment plays a key role from the time offenders enter CDCR reception centers through their release on parole in the community. The Department has adopted the Correctional Offender Management and Profiling Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS) as their primary risk/needs tool. As of this date, CDCR is in the process of vetting COMPAS through a contract with researchers from the University of California at Los Angeles. In order to expedite the development of a structured decision-making matrix for parole purposes, the Reentry Strike Team commissioned work to develop a risk prediction model based on static risk factors derived from existing data sources at CDCR and the California Department of Justice (DOJ). The UCI Center for Evidence-Based Corrections (CEBC) was asked by CDCR to collaborate with their Office of Research to develop the scale. The Washington State static risk instrument developed by Robert Barnoski (Barnoski and Drake, 2007; Barnoski and Aos, 2003) served as the model for the tool’s development. Robert Barnoski served as a consultant to the project. The project was conducted under a very tight time line. The project began in October, 2007 and produced the California Static Risk Assessment (CSRA) tool by the end of January 2008. This report describes the development and validation of the CSRA. Details: Irvine, CA: Center for Evidence-Based Corrections, The University of California, Irvine, 2009. 39p. Source: Working Paper: Internet Resource: Accessed February 29, 2012 at http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/sites/ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/CSRA%20Working%20Paper.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/sites/ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/CSRA%20Working%20Paper.pdf Shelf Number: 118604 Keywords: Corrections Reform (California) Parole Supervision (California) Parole Violations Risk Assessment

Author: Bogie, Andrea Title: Assessing Risk of Future Delinquency Among Children Receiving Child Protection Services Summary: Children who experience maltreatment are more likely than other children to be arrested and/or referred for delinquent offenses. Maltreated children are more likely to become delinquent at a younger age, and their risk of delinquency increases as their exposure to violence increases. In an effort to prevent children who are already involved with the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (LA DCFS) from becoming involved with the Los Angeles County Probation Department, county managers sought to develop a structured, actuarial assessment to help identify which children served by LA DCFS were most likely to become delinquent. The managers intend to provide additional supports to children who are at high risk of future delinquency. For example, the county may provide wraparound services to meet the specific needs of these high risk children, in an effort to prevent them from becoming delinquent. This report describes a longitudinal study conducted by the Children’s Research Center (CRC) to identify the risk factors for subsequent delinquency, and if possible, construct a screening assessment that classifies children with an open child protective services (CPS) case by the likelihood of future delinquency. The next section examines findings from peer-reviewed literature regarding the needs and characteristics of children involved with both child welfare and juvenile justice systems, and provides more detail about the objectives of the current study. Subsequent sections of the report describe the methodology followed to construct an actuarial assessment that classifies children by risk of delinquency, and review findings of the study. The summary section identifies limitations of the current research and proposes next steps for piloting use of the delinquency screening assessment. Details: Oakland, CA: Children's Research Center, National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 2011. 57p. Source: Prepared for Los Angeles County Department of Children and Families: Internet Resource: Accessed March 25, 2012 at http://www.nccd-crc.org/crc/crc/pubs/LA_Delinquency_Screening_Assessment_Report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nccd-crc.org/crc/crc/pubs/LA_Delinquency_Screening_Assessment_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 124747 Keywords: Child Maltreatment Child Protection Services Juvenile Delinquency Risk Assessment

Author: Pretrial Justice Institute Title: The Colorado Pretrial Assessment Tool (CPAT) Summary: The Colorado Improving Supervised Pretrial Release (CISPR) project is an ongoing 12-county initiative1 to develop research-based policies and practices for the criminal justice professionals who have a role in pretrial decision-making and case processing. The first phase of the project involved the development of the Colorado Pretrial Assessment Tool (CPAT), an empirically validated pretrial risk assessment instrument for use in any Colorado jurisdiction. This report describes this phase of the project and presents the new tool. The second phase will include the development of research-based protocols that match defendants’ pretrial risk profiles to bond conditions and/or supervision techniques that are most likely to reduce that risk. Details: Washington, DC: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2012. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 10, 2012 at: http://pretrial.org/Setting%20Bail%20Documents/CO%20Pretrial%20Assessment%20Tool%20Report%20(PJI%202012).pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://pretrial.org/Setting%20Bail%20Documents/CO%20Pretrial%20Assessment%20Tool%20Report%20(PJI%202012).pdf Shelf Number: 124919 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Release (Colorado) Risk Assessment

Author: Pretrial Justice Institute Title: Rational and Transparent Bail Decision Making: Moving from a Bash-Based to a Risk-Based Process Summary: Between 1990 and 2008, the jail population in the United States doubled from 400,000 inmates to 800,000. During much of this period, crime rates were steadily dropping, falling to levels not seen in decades. The number of defendants held in jail awaiting disposition of their charges drove much of the increase in the jail population. Up until 1996, jail populations were comprised evenly of about 50 percent sentenced and 50 percent pretrial inmates. Beginning in 1996, the number of pretrial inmates grew at a much faster pace than the sentenced inmates. Currently, 61 percent of inmates in local jails have not been convicted, compared to 39 percent who are serving sentences.1 This shift has resulted in a dramatic change in how jails are being used. One major policy shift corresponding with the rise in the pretrial detainee population has been the increase in the use of money bond. When a person is arrested, the court can release the defendant with non-!nancial conditions or set a money bond, which must be posted before the defendant can be released. Existing laws in most states establish a presumption for release on the least restrictive conditions necessary to reasonably assure the safety of the community and the defendant’s appearance in court. Those laws also identify non-!nancial release options as being the least restrictive and money bonds being the most restrictive. Notwithstanding the presumption for release on the least restrictive conditions, historically, money bond has been used in the majority of cases – and its use is on the rise. In 1990, money bonds were being set in 53 percent of felony cases. By 2006, that !gure had jumped to 70 percent.2 As the use of money bonds has gone up, pretrial release rates have gone down. In 1990, 65 percent of felony defendants were released while awaiting trial, compared to 58 percent in 2006.3 Rising jail populations have come at great cost to taxpayers. Between 1982 and 2006, county expenditures on criminal justice grew from $21 billion to $109 billion. County spending on jails alone rose 500 percent over that period.4 A recent analysis by the Florida Sheri"’s Association calculated that in just 30 of Florida’s county jails, taxpayers spend $983,921,079 – or nearly one billion dollars – a year to house just those inmates who are in jail awaiting trial.5 If these !gures were extrapolated nationally, they would be in the tens of billions of dollars. This White Paper takes the position that most of the money spent to house defendants who cannot post a bond is unnecessary to achieve the purposes of bond – to protect the safety of the community while the defendant’s case is pending, and to assure the appearance of the defendant in court. With local jurisdictions laying o" teachers, police o#cers and !re!ghters and cutting back on vital services because they do not have the money to pay them, this waste of money is unconscionable. Aside from the wasteful use of taxpayer dollars, the practice of using money to decide pretrial release has also played a signi!cant role in contributing to the mass incarceration phenomena that has swept the nation for the past three decades. Research dating back 50 years clearly and consistently demonstrates the relationship between being locked up pending trial and subsequent incarceration. The research shows that defendants detained in jail while awaiting trial plead guilty more often, are convicted more often, are sentenced to prison more often, and receive harsher prison sentences than those who are released during the pretrial period. These relationships hold true when controlling for other factors, such as current charge, prior criminal history, and community ties.6 As one of these studies noted, “Although no statistical study can prove causality, the !ndings of this research are fully consistent with the argument that something about detention (awaiting trial) itself leads to harsher outcomes.”7 Regardless of the reasons for the harsher outcomes for those who are detained during the pretrial period, the facts cannot be ignored. There is an enormous amount of unnecessary pretrial detention taking place in this country, and being held in jail awaiting trial in e"ect pre-selects persons for later incarceration. Moreover, the greatest impact of this falls on racial and ethnic minorities, who are the least likely to be able to post money bonds. Details: Washington, DC: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2012. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 8, 2012 at: http://www.pretrial.org/Featured%20Resources%20Documents/Rational%20and%20Transparent%20Bail%20Decision%20Making.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.pretrial.org/Featured%20Resources%20Documents/Rational%20and%20Transparent%20Bail%20Decision%20Making.pdf Shelf Number: 125168 Keywords: Bail (U.S.) Pretrial Detention Risk Assessment

Author: Willis, Henry H. Title: Terrorism Risk Modeling for Intelligence Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Summary: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has adopted a focused approach to risk reduction. DHS is moving increasingly to risk analysis and risk-based resource allocation, a process that is designed to manage the greatest risks instead of attempting to protect everything. This report applies a probabilistic terrorism model that is broadly applied in the insurance industry to assess risk across cities, to assess risks within specific cities, and to assist intelligence analysis. Among the authors' conclusions: Terrorism risk is concentrated in a small number of cities, with most cities having negligible relative risk, so terrorism estimates such as those described in the report should be incorporated into the grant allocation assessment process. DHS should consider funding the development of city profiles of major metropolitan areas receiving DHS preparedness grants. It should also develop descriptions of terrorist attack planning and operations that can be used to translate estimates from risk models of likely attack scenarios into detailed recommendations. Finally, DHS should develop tabletop exercises to test the scenarios and provide feedback. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2007. 95p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 18, 2012 at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2007/RAND_TR386.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2007/RAND_TR386.pdf Shelf Number: 125343 Keywords: Homeland Security Risk Assessment Terrorism (U.S.)

Author: Metaparti, Satya Prakash Title: Risk Management Initiatives for Post 9/11 Maritime Security Summary: Following the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, there has been a major worldwide focus on the threat of terrorism to trade, transportation and critical infrastructures. One area that has received particular attention is maritime trade and international shipping. The relative vulnerability of ports, ships, containers, and other maritime facilities worldwide combined with the importance of maritime trade to the global economy have resulted in several international and national measures to manage security risks in this area. Among these, the International Ship and Port Security (ISPS) Code by the United Nations, and domestic legislations of the United States such as the Container Security Initiative (CSI) have an international effect and are of particular significance. Despite the emergence of strong security responses, concerns about their adequacy and cost-effectiveness remain. Differing threat perceptions and erosion of sovereignty also impede effective implementation of these security measures. Based on these perceptions, this study questions whether the post 9/11 maritime security measures resulted from a sound application of the principles of risk management or were excessively politicized. This study also examines in detail the intrinsic factors within the shipping industry that contribute to its vulnerability or resilience, the underlying dynamics security responses, as well as their cost and effectiveness. Gaps in the effectiveness of these security measures are identified and possible remedial measures are suggested. This multidisciplinary study is based on the concepts of securitization from the political science domain and risk management principles from business studies, and is an attempt at reaching across disciplines to examine this important topic of contemporary interest. Qualitative inputs for this study were obtained through interviews with seafarers, industry experts and government/port officials and quantitatively backed by a user perception survey on the ISPS Code. Findings indicate that post 9/11 maritime security measures have enhanced the overall security of shipping. However, large gaps remain. Further, at a strategic level, there are differences among various stakeholders with regards to threat perceptions and the cost effectiveness of security. At an operational level, the study findings show excessive reliance on paper work, bureaucratization and restrictions on movement of goods and personnel. Recommendations at a strategic level include wider international cooperation and a decision making process that aims for broader consensus among all stakeholders. At a tactical/operational level, this study recommends better information sharing, reduced paperwork and integration of various shipboard sub-processes, such as those for safety, environment, quality, and security - which are currently separate - into a unified process that optimizes the available resources and reduces conflicting requirements. Details: Hong Kong: Hong Kong University, 2009. 334p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 18, 2012 at: http://hdl.handle.net/10722/56504 Year: 2009 Country: International URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10722/56504 Shelf Number: 125344 Keywords: Maritime Crime Maritime Security Risk Assessment Terrorism

Author: Wilson, Anne P. Title: Trafficking Risks for Refugees Summary: Refugees are at particular risk for human trafficking – a consequence of their vulnerable status, the devastating losses they have experienced, and their precarious life situations until durable solutions become available. According to the United National High Commissioner for Refugees, trafficking risks for refugees are at ever-increasing levels worldwide. This paper will provide an overview of both the constant and emerging facets of the refugee condition contributing to trafficking risk, and will offer policy and practice recommendations for risk reduction. The perspective offered is that of a national non-profit organization - Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service - which resettles refugees from around the world in forty-five communities across the United States, serves asylum-seekers and other at-risk migrants in detention, and works with smuggled and trafficked migrant children. LIRS is a national faith-based nonprofit organization, founded in 1939, which works to engage communities in service to and advocacy for migrants and refugees. Our primary expertise in the area of refugees and trafficking comes from two decades of experience working with migrant children, the insights we have gained in serving “women at risk”, and our knowledge of the vulnerabilities within refugee populations in the post-resettlement period. Details: Baltimore, MD: Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, 2011. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 19, 2012 at http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=humtraffconf3 Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=humtraffconf3 Shelf Number: 125353 Keywords: Crime Reduction Human Trafficking Refugees Risk Assessment

Author: DeMichele, Matthew Title: Predicting Repeat DWI: Chronic Offending, Risk Assessment, and Community Supervision Summary: Between 1981 and 2008, nearly 550,000 individuals were killed in alcohol-related traffic accidents. To put this in perspective, the state of Wyoming has approximately 540,000 residents. Several major U.S. cities, such as Tuscon, Az., Atlanta, Ga; Kansas City, Mo., and Long Beach, Calif., are home to fewer residents. While such a high number of alcohol-related traffic fatalities is staggering, there is reason to believe the policy changes emphasizing different practices to control drunk driving have, in fact, reduced the number of drunk driving deaths. Consider that between 1982 and 1988, 171,681 alcohol-related traffic fatalities occurred. In comparison, between 2002 and 2008, 113,403 alcohol-related traffic fatalities occurred – a reduction of 33.9 percent. In comparing year by year reductions, the number of drunk driving fatalities decreased by nearly 50 percent when comparing the number of fatalities in 1982 (26,173) to the number of fatalities in 2008 (13,846). The reduction in the number of alcohol-related traffic deaths can be attributed to a number of different factors, most of which center around changes in policies and practices related to the legislative control of drunk driving. In particular, increases in the minimum drinking age, lowered illegal thresholds for blood alcohol concentrations (BAC), increased use of monetary sanctions such as fines, increased use of incarceration for drunk drivers, more focused use of substance abuse treatment, expanded use of electronic monitoring, and stricter community-based supervision practices carried out by probation and parole officers have played a role in reducing the number of drunk driving deaths. Despite the reduction in the number of drunk driving deaths, additional changes in policies and practices are needed in order to further reduce the extent of drunk driving. Using principles of evidence-based practices, in this project the American Probation and Parole Association conducted a risk assessment study to develop a pilot risk assessment instrument that can be used to identify convicted offenders who are at an increased risk for future drunk driving. This process entailed reviewing prior research on drunk driving, addressing the way that criminological theory explains drunk driving, developing a methodology to study drunk driving, conducting a study on a sample of 3,884 convicted drunk drivers, statistically analyzing factors that seemed to predict levels of repeat drunk driving, and developing a pilot instrument from these findings. Six assumptions have guided this process: Risk for drunk driving can be predicted. Efforts to predict risk should be guided by research and evidence-based practices. Policies and practices developed from risk assessment research will further reduce the extent of future drunk driving. Predicting risk will not eliminate drunk driving completely, but it will help to reduce it. Community-based corrections professionals are in a prime position to reduce drunk driving. Policy makers will continue to play an important role in controlling drunk driving. The next stage of this project will entail the application of the risk assessment instrument to a sample of drunk-driving offenders convicted in various states. By identifying which offenders are most at risk for future drunk driving, policy makers and criminal justice officials will be in a position to develop control strategies that target those offenders most at risk for re-offending. This will make our highways safer and reduce the number of alcohol-related accidents. Details: Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association, 2012. 106p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 27, 2012 at: http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/PRDWI-DRAFT.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/PRDWI-DRAFT.pdf Shelf Number: 125416 Keywords: Alcohol Abuse Alcohol Law Enforcement Driving Under the Influence Driving While Intoxicated Drunk Driving (U.S.) Risk Assessment

Author: Levin, David J. Title: Validation of the Coconino County Pretrial Risk Assessment Tool Summary: The goal of this analysis was to determine whether the risk assessment instrument used by the Coconino County Pretrial Services is a valid predictor of the likelihood of a defendant on pretrial release failing to appear in court or being rearrested on a new charge while the initial charge was pending. The findings indicate that the instrument is not efficient at predicting either form of pretrial misconduct. No correlation was found between most of the variables included in the instrument and the outcomes of failure to appear or rearrest. Efforts to identify which variables were related using multivariate models proved untenable given problems with selection bias, resulting from the fact that only about half the defendants in the study sample were released during the pretrial period. When release rates are so low, it is not possible to identify the variation between low, medium, and high risk defendants. As a result of these selection bias problems, a new risk assessment instrument was constructed based upon research-­‐based findings from other jurisdictions. Simulations run on the new instrument show that it is successful in sorting out Coconino County defendants by risk level. The simulations also show that no significant additional risk would be incurred by releasing defendants currently not released who resemble defendants who currently are released. Details: Washington, DC: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2010. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 5, 2012 at: http://www.pretrial.org/Documents/PJI%20Final%20report%20to%20Coconino%20County.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.pretrial.org/Documents/PJI%20Final%20report%20to%20Coconino%20County.pdf Shelf Number: 125482 Keywords: Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Brennan, Tim Title: California Department Of Corrections And Rehabilitation (CDCR), Pilot Study Report, Female Offender Programs and Services (FOPS), Risk and Needs Assessment of Women Offenders in California Prisons: An Evaluation of COMPAS Reentry and NIC’s Gender-Respon Summary: As the number of females in prisons and jails increase in the U.S. (Hartney, 2007), correctional agencies are modifying their strategies to better meet the needs of females and also address the impacts their imprisonment is having on children and families. In July 2005, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) established the Female Offender Programs and Services (FOPS) Office to manage and provide oversight for all adult female programs, including prisons, conservation camps, and community programs. FOPS developed a gender-responsive, culturally sensitive approach to program and policy development aimed at improving recidivism outcomes for adult incarcerated and paroled female offenders under the supervision of the CDCR. In addition, the CDCR established a Gender Responsive Strategies Commission (GRSC) to assist in the development of a Master Plan for female offenders. The GRSC is comprised of representatives of the various disciplines within CDCR, including community partners, nationally recognized experts on female offenders, previously incarcerated individuals, family members of women offenders and other external stakeholders, including the California Commission for the Status of Women, the Little Hoover Commission, as well as labor and legislative representatives. Several subcommittees provide input to the CDCR on institutional operational practice and policy, treatment programs, community re-entry, medical and mental health services, and parole. Collaboratively, FOPS and GRSC have developed and will maintain a Master Plan that provides an organizational blueprint for CDCR to incorporate national standards in operational practice, program development, medical and mental health care, substance abuse treatment, family reunification and community re-entry. The organizational blueprint uses a common Case Management Logic for aligning (1) assessment, (2) interpretation, (3) case-planning, (4) intervention, and (5) evaluation efforts. This report focuses on assessment, the first of the five dimensions. Understanding the female population through an assessment of their risks and needs will guide effort in the other four dimensions of effective case management practice. Assessments are used to determine an offender‘s custody classification, supervision level, programming needs, progress in treatment, appropriateness for early release, reentry and revocation of community supervision. Traditionally, institutions have used the same assessment tools for both men and women. In most cases, the tools were developed and validated on male offender populations. This practice has been challenged by mounting evidence of the differences in female offending, their Northpointe – Evolving Practice Through Scientific Innovation 3 motivation for offending, and how to respond to them once incarcerated (Bloom, Owen, and Covington, 2003). For example, in their report on ―Gender Responsive Strategies for Women Offenders‖ Bloom et al. (2003) document that compared to male offenders females are less likely to commit violent offenses, more likely to have been convicted of a drug-related offense, likely to be survivors of physical and/or sexual abuse as children and adults, and to have multiple physical and mental health problems. Given these differences using a ―gender neutral‖ risk assessment tool on the female offender population may not be sufficiently sensitive to their unique risks and needs (Salisbury, Van Voorhis and Wright 2006; Blanchette and Brown 2006). Moreover, using an assessment tool that does not take women‘s specific risks and needs into account may result in inefficient and ineffective management and treatment of female offenders, not to mention the damaging and stigmatizing effects of over classifying women and placing them at higher levels of custody than necessary (Brennan 2008). In an effort to improve the policies and practices for female offenders, FOPS and GRSC have contracted with Pat Van Voorhis at the University of Cincinnati and Northpointe Institute for Public Management to conduct a pilot study for the development of an assessment instrument tailored to the risks and needs of women that helps case managers guide their re-entry into the community. Currently, CDCR uses COMPAS, a fourth generation assessment tool, to assess females for re-entry into the community. While COMPAS uses gender-specific calibrations of all its risk and need factors and a female-based pattern identification procedure reminiscent of the feminist ―pathways‖ model (Daly and Chesney-Lind 1988, Daly 1992) it does not explicitly include a set of gender-responsive factors. The present study examines whether an additional set of assessment questions or scales specifically developed for the female population can be integrated into the COMPAS to help guide female offenders in their transition to the community. This study thus integrates the ―Women‘s Trailer,‖ a female assessment tool developed by Van Voorhis and colleagues with COMPAS Reentry to create a joint domain space that should provide a more expansive and appropriate Gender-Responsive assessment for women. The results of this pilot study will enhance our understanding of female risks and needs and will contribute to the current debate on how to best assess and intervene with female offenders. Details: Northpoint Institute for Public Management, 2008. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 6, 2012 at: http://www.northpointeinc.com/files/research_documents/California_Department_of_Corrections_and_Rehabilitation_(CDCR)_Pilot_Study_Report.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.northpointeinc.com/files/research_documents/California_Department_of_Corrections_and_Rehabilitation_(CDCR)_Pilot_Study_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 125396 Keywords: Female Inmates Female Offenders (California) Female Prisoners Reentry Risk Assessment

Author: Kane, Michael Title: Exploring the Role of Responsivity and Assessment with Hispanic and American Indian Offenders Summary: This report presents findings from an exploration of cultural responsivity in risk and needs assessment in community corrections agencies. As risk and needs assessment becomes more popular in community corrections, more researchers have begun to study issues involving the specific characteristics of offenders and how they interact with assessment and programming to impact outcomes, a concept commonly known as responsivity. In particular, two cultural groups were selected for study: Hispanics and American Indians. Initial plans for the current project involved the development of a new tool or ‘trailer’ for use in assessing Hispanic and American Indian populations. In the early stages of the project, however, the project team and its advisors determined that the creation of a new tool would be premature. Instead, the project focused efforts on: 1) describing current practices in assessing and working with Hispanic and American Indian offenders; 2) determining how well current assessment tools and practices predict recidivism for these offender groups; and 3) suggesting ways to improve tools and practices to make them more culturally competent and responsive. The report that follows will describe assessment and cultural responsivity, describe current practices in culturally responsive assessment, and detail the findings of research activities including data analysis and focus groups. Chapter 1 provides a literature review on the topic of risk assessment and culture. This section will describe the evolution of risk assessment in community corrections, summarize research on evidence-based practices, describe the Hispanic and American Indian populations in the United States and their context in corrections systems nationwide, suggest a model for understanding cultural competency, and describe some popular risk and needs assessment tools. Chapter 2 provides information on a Roundtable of assessment and corrections experts and results from a national survey of probation and parole agencies. The chapter describes the project team’s understanding of the current state of community corrections practice in assessing and supervising American Indian and Hispanic offenders. Chapter 3 summarizes findings from discussions with experts in Hispanic and American Indian culture and focus groups conducted with community corrections staff and Hispanic and American Indian offenders in five sites. Based on this feedback, the project team provides recommendations for improving assessment practices. Focus groups addressed cultural and linguistic barriers in supervision and assessment, specific cultural factors that may impact the scoring of risk and needs assessment, cultural competency during the assessment process, cultural competency training available to officers and supervisors, and suggestions for improving supervision and assessment with Hispanic and American Indian offenders. Chapter 4 presents findings from analysis of assessment and outcome data provided by five community corrections agencies and provides recommendations for improving the effectiveness of assessment tools. Predictive validity analysis was conducted for each site, and a combined analysis examining whether Hispanic and American Indian offenders are scoring differently on risk assessments compared to other offenders, and if agency-level cultural competency practices result in reductions in recidivism. Details: Boston: Crime and Justice Institute at Community Resources for Justice, 2011. 113p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 27, 2012 at: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/CRJ_Role_of_Responsivity.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/CRJ_Role_of_Responsivity.pdf Shelf Number: 126118 Keywords: American Indian Offenders Community Corrections Hispanic Offenders Offender Supervision Parolees Probationers Risk Assessment

Author: Mortimer, Rhian Title: Risk Factors for Offending: A Developmental Approach Summary: A plethora of research has been conducted to identify the risk and protective factors for offending in low-risk samples, particularly juveniles. However, to date this research has not extended to high security adult offenders who engage in serious offending behaviour, represent the most significant risk to society and are detained in conditions of high security. This thesis utilised previously researched risk factor models to identify how risk and protective factors develop throughout an individual’s lifespan, to increase the likelihood of following an offending pathway in adulthood. This thesis includes a systematic review and review of a psychometric tool, in addition to both an individual case study and a research paper, which identify specific factors relevant to types of high security offenders. The findings demonstrated that aggression and substance misuse were among the most common risk factors, which began in adolescence and continued into adulthood. Therefore, adult high security offenders could be partially retrospectively mapped onto established juvenile risk factor models, thus suggesting that the factors identified in high risk samples are primarily developmental in nature. Further qualitative and quantitative research is recommended to develop these findings; however tentative results demonstrate that interventions with at-risk adolescents may be beneficial in reducing the risk of future high security offenders. In conclusion, the findings support previous research, which suggests that experiences of increased risk factors in conjunction with few protective factors increases the likelihood of individuals being involved in offending behaviour. Therefore, pro-active and reactive measures should be targeted towards such at-risk individuals. Details: Birmingham, UK: Centre for Forensic and Criminological Psychology, University of Birmingham, 2010. 228p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed September 10, 2012 at: http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/415/1/Mortimer10ForenPsyD.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/415/1/Mortimer10ForenPsyD.pdf Shelf Number: 126279 Keywords: Adult Offenders (U.K.) At-risk Youth Juvenile to Adult Criminal Careers Recidivism Rehabilitation Risk Assessment

Author: Hollist, Dusten Title: The Montana Pre-Adjudicatory Detention Risk Assessment Instrument: A Validation and Assessment Study Summary: The primary research objective in the current investigation is a performance assessment of the Montana Pre-Adjudicatory Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI). The RAI has been used on a pilot basis in Cascade, Hill, Missoula, and Yellowstone Counties since 2009 as part of the predispositional detention decision-making process to determine whether or not juveniles pose a public safety risk if released. The analysis focuses on two dimensions associated with the RAI. The first of these pertains to racial and cultural sensitivity in assessing offender risk. The second pertains to public safety outcomes associated with the behavior of juveniles who are released from detention. Specifically, whether a new offense occurred resulting in a misdemeanor or felony citation during the 45-day period of risk and whether the juvenile failed to appear for an initial court appearance after release from detention. To achieve these objectives, the following three research questions were examined: 1. Is the RAI being administered impartially and in a manner that it assesses juvenile offender “risk” in a culturally and racially sensitive manner? • Are there differences in the patterns of overrides that are used to make detention decisions when comparing White and minority juveniles? 2. Did the juveniles reoffend while on release status during the period of risk? • Was there a new felony or misdemeanor citation within 45 days following release from detention? 3. Did the juveniles fail to appear for the initial court appearance following release from detention? • Did the juvenile fail to appear for the next court appearance or follow-up with the probation officer after their release from detention? Details: Missoula, MT: Social Science Research Laboratory University of Montana, Missoula, 2012. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 27, 2012 at: http://mbcc.mt.gov/Data/SAC/RAI/RAI%20Technical%20Report%20_Final%20Version_.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://mbcc.mt.gov/Data/SAC/RAI/RAI%20Technical%20Report%20_Final%20Version_.pdf Shelf Number: 126467 Keywords: Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders (Montana) Risk Assessment

Author: Humphreys, Cathy Title: Prevention not Prediction? A preliminary evaluation of the Metropolitan Police Domestic Violence Risk Assessment Model (SPECSS+) Summary: The implementation of The Metropolitan Police Domestic Violence SPECSS+ Risk, Identification, Assessment and Management model (SPECSS+ model) is at an early stage. The emphasis of this report has been on a process evaluation which can shed light on how the implementation of the SPECSS+ risk assessment model is proceeding; what lessons can be learnt to inform future phases of implementation; and whether and under what circumstances it could be recommended to other forces. The evaluation team was asked to address the following questions in relation to the SPECSS+ risk assessment model: • Does it comply with the ACPO guidelines on risk assessment? • Does it address victims’ needs in terms of risk? • Does it complement safety planning? • Can the model be managed within force limitations? • Can it be applied irrespective of geography, community or policing variables? The SPECSS+ risk assessment model was developed through a series of consultations between the Met and multi-agency partners based on the evidence from the London multi-agency murder reviews and serious sexual and physical assaults (Richards, 2004; Richards, 2003). It is a three-stage model which involves an initial response, an assessment of risk and intervention to manage the risks identified. The assessment of risk is based on six prominent risk factors outlined in SPECSS+ (Separation (child contact), Pregnancy (new birth), Escalation, Culture (community isolation and barriers to reporting), Stalking and Sexual Assault). A further six additional factors are also included as prompts for front-line (FL) officers to consider (abuse of children, abuse of pets, access to weapons, either victim or perpetrator being suicidal, drug and alcohol problems, jealous and controlling behaviour, threats to kill, and mental health problems). To support the implementation of the risk assessment model the 124D form was developed for use in London, the VIVID data collection system for use in West Yorkshire, and the MPS Domestic Violence Policy and Standard Operating Procedures written. Risk assessment and risk management processes also need to comply with the ACPO Guidance on Investigating Domestic Violence (2004), which provides operational, tactical and strategic advice – the priorities of the police service in responding to domestic violence. Evaluation design To meet the evaluation brief a multi-methodological design was adopted by the evaluation team. Research was conducted in both The Met and West Yorkshire police forces. In each area, two police divisions were chosen as the evaluation sites. The following process was then undertaken: • Semi-structured interviews with 10 ‘key informants’ who were either currently or recently involved with the development of the risk assessment model. • 71 structured interviews with FL officers. • 20 face-to-face interviews with senior and specialist officers. • 7 interviews with partner agencies. • 4 interviews with victims. • Analysis of 120 case files drawn from the 4 different research sites. • Aggregate data analysis provided by West Yorkshire and the two London sites on specified variables such as: total number of incidents; total number of arrests; number of cases at each risk assessment level. • Documentary analysis of the ACPO risk assessment guidance was undertaken to assess the extent of harmony or contradiction between the guidance and the implementation of the SPECSS+ model. Details: Coventry, UK: Centre for the Study of Safety and Wellbeing, University of Warwick and Child and Woman Abuse Studies Unit, London Metropolitan University, 2005. 88 p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 29, 2012 at: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/shss/swell/research/acpo_final_report.pdf Year: 2005 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/shss/swell/research/acpo_final_report.pdf Shelf Number: 103422 Keywords: Domestic Violence (U.K.) Famiily Violence Risk Assessment Violence Against Women Violence Risk Assessment Model

Author: Klima, Tali Title: Risk Assessment Instruments to Predict Recidivism of Sex Offenders: Practices in Washington State Summary: This paper reviews policies and practices regarding assessment of sex offenders for risk of reoffense among public agencies and private treatment providers in Washington State. Specifically, we reviewed the use of risk assessment instruments, which gauge the likelihood that individual sex offenders will reoffend. We found that a diverse set of instruments are employed by public and private entities in making decisions about sex offenders. These decisions include sentencing, facility assignment, treatment, release, public notification, and community supervision. As expected, there was greater variability in risk assessment practices among private treatment providers than public agencies. Three policies related to risk assessment were identified as topics of concern. One is the lack of appropriate instruments for juvenile sex offenders. The second is the validity of the primary instrument used to determine risk levels for registration purposes, the WSSORLCT (soon to be replaced). Third, some informants discussed the static nature of risk level assignment and suggested provisions to reassess offenders’ levels during extended registration periods. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2008. 12p. Source: Document No. 08-06-1101: Internet Resource: Accessed October 1, 2012 at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/08-06-1101.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/08-06-1101.pdf Shelf Number: 126541 Keywords: Re-Offending Recidivism Recidivism, Sex Offenders (Washington) Risk Assessment Sex Offenders

Author: Puzzanchera, Charles Title: Allegheny County Detention Screening Study Summary: The National Center for Juvenile Justice (NCJJ) agreed to conduct a study working with staff from Allegheny County Juvenile Probation to gather data from the automated Detention Assessment Instrument and other individual level information from Pennsylvania’s Juvenile Court Management System (JCMS). The study’s goal was to use these data, to the extent possible, to conduct analyses recommended in A Practical Guide to Juvenile Detention Risk Assessment (Steinhart, 2006) and determine how well the Allegheny County instrument was working to reduce the amount of disproportionality in detention risk decision-making. Data Collection Allegheny County Juvenile Probation gathered data from the Detention Assessment Instrument completed by intake officers for arrested youth considered for admission to Shuman Juvenile Detention Center beginning in mid-February in 2008. For this study, NCJJ analyzed detention screening data collected from March of 2008 through February of 2010. These data included the following information: Screening outcomes. The primary analyses address the question of the impact of the Detention Assessment Instrument on the decision of whether to detain youth, place them in a detention alternative program, or release them. Accordingly, the data included basic demographic information (gender, race/ethnicity, and date of birth) for all youth considered for detention, along with the scores earned across seven factors that compose the overall risk score. In addition, information regarding mandatory detention holds, discretionary overrides, and the attendant aggravating/mitigating factors were also provided. Disproportionate minority contact. To the extent that data were available, additional analyses were conducted to consider the entire pool of youth brought to detention intake. To better understand the instrument’s impact on detention rates and disproportionate minority confinement, analyses compared detention rates and population profiles of white and black youth. Validation The goal of validation analyses is to measure the post-implementation success of the Detention Assessment Instrument in relation to the risk of committing a new offense pending court appearance and the risk of failing to appear in court. A validation sample would include youth who were released or placed on detention alternative status based on the Detention Assessment Instrument. A validation analysis would then focus on determining decision error for this population. In other words, to what degree were youth released using the instrument who, in hindsight, should not have been — either because they failed to appear or because they committed a new offense while not detained? [It should be noted that this report describes the results of a test of the Detention Alternatives Instrument implemented by Allegheny County Juvenile Probation at Shuman Detention Center. A formal validation study would require data on outcomes for juveniles who are released at detention intake based on their risk scores (Steinhart, 2008). Validation studies are normally done after the detention screening instrument has undergone a general implementation test (like the current analysis). Although it was initially hoped that data would be available to conduct such a validation study, these data were not available in time to support the needs of this report.] This report also summarizes the literature on effective detention risk assessments and presents an overview of the use of detention in Allegheny County prior to the development of detention alternatives and the implementation of the Detention Assessment Instrument, study methods and analyses, study results, study limitations, and implications for further study/action. Details: Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice, 2012. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 3, 2012 at: http://www.ncjj.org/pdf/MFC/FINAL_Allegheny%20Detention%20Assessment.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncjj.org/pdf/MFC/FINAL_Allegheny%20Detention%20Assessment.pdf Shelf Number: 126545 Keywords: Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment

Author: Christensen, Gary Title: The Role of Screening and Assessment in Jail Reentry Summary: In 2007, the National Institute of Corrections partnered with the Urban Institute to develop and test the Transition from Jail to Community (TJC) model for effective jail-to-community transition. The TJC model and initiative advance systems change and local reentry through collaborative, coordinated jail-community partnerships. This brief details the two-stage screening and assessment process to determine risk and need levels in the jail population. It describes the importance of screening and assessment in an evidence-based jail transition strategy, including: selecting screening and assessment instruments; implementing a screening and assessment process; and integrating risk and need information into comprehensive jail intervention strategies. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute; National Institute of Corrections, 2012. 11p. Source: Transition from Jail to Community Initiative Practice Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2012 at Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 126576 Keywords: Evidence-Based Practices Jails Prisoner Reentry Reentry Risk Assessment

Author: Albanese, Jay S. Title: Assessing Risk, Harm, and Threat to Target Resources against Organized Crime: A Method to Identify the Nature and Severity of the Professional Activity of Organized Crime and its Impacts (Economic, Social, Political) Summary: The risk, harms, and threat posed by organized crime are a central concern of governments and citizens around the world. Methods to identify, rank, and combat organized crime activity are drawing greater attention in recent years as both domestic and international organized crime activities threaten legitimate economies, governments, and public safety. In response to calls for proactive work to better understand, anticipate, and respond to organized crime, methods are being developed to calibrate the comparative risk of different crime groups and different types of legal and illegal markets at risk for infiltration. Many international efforts are in their early stages, and lack a transparent approach or method, so an effort is made here to develop a more precise empirical, theoretically-based approach to risk assessment which has relevance across jurisdictions. The result reported here is a proposed methodology that offers both law enforcement and prevention efforts a basis for targeting resources using an objective rationale and risk model. In this way, the precise nature of different organized crime-related risks will be identified empirically, and which can be defended to skeptics, and permit the allocation of scarce resources to those organized crime problems found to pose the greatest risk. Furthermore, periodic application of this risk assessment method can be used to gauge the success of organized crime interdiction and prevention efforts over time. This working paper will move forward existing research and practical assessment efforts on organized crime both within (domestic) and also among countries (international) by offering a transparent approach not confined to any particular location. But first it is necessary to be clear about the precise issues to be assessed: what is organized crime, risk, harm, and threat - the four central elements to this effort. Details: Santiago, Chile: Global Consortium on Security Transformation (GCST), 2012. 20p. Source: GCST Working Paper Series No. 12: Library Resource: Don M. Gottfredson Library of Criminal Justice, Rutgers Newark Law Library, Acc. # 126642 Year: 2012 Country: International URL: Shelf Number: 126642 Keywords: Costs of Crime Crime Prevention Criminal Organizations Organized Crime Risk Assessment

Author: Debbonaire, Thangam Title: The Pilot of the Respect/Relate/CAFCASS Domestic Violence Risk Identification Tool: Evaluation Report Summary: Domestic violence risk identification, assessment and management are all developing in various ways and for various purposes in different organisations in the US, Australia, UK and elsewhere. Police, probation, social work and specialist domestic violence services are using various forms of risk assessment and identification tools and systems to guide their work with perpetrators and victims of domestic violence and their children. These tools and systems have developed over the years, gradually bringing more specific factors identified as affecting risk to the attention of professionals working with either perpetrators or victims or both in order to assist them to carry out various different activities. In 2006/07 staff from Respect, CAFCASS and Relate came together to consider a risk assessment tool that: 1. Can be used within practitioners’ current workload; 2. Can convey information from a range of sources – even and especially where the alleged perpetrator may be one source of information and where there may be huge contradictions in versions of events; 3. Takes into account the key risk factors – assuming information not only from criminal justice sources or about recent incidents; 4. Does not simply add to the dizzying range of different assessment tools already out there. The CAADA risk checklist was developed in Cardiff to support multiagency information sharing around 2000. It has since become the checklist used by Independent Domestic Violence Advisors and within MARACs (Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conferences) which are spreading rapidly across the UK. MARACs aim to pool available information on victims who have been identified by key agencies as at medium or high risk, to plan interventions and monitoring in order to reduce the risk of continued domestic violence. Evaluations of MARACS identify the benefits for victims of this approach to protection, which include most significantly reductions in rates of recidivism. There is an implication here that this form of risk management may also be contributing to the prevention of serious injury and death – future research will be in a better position to explore this. During 2007, specialist staff in all three agencies worked together to produce an amended version of the tool, with support from CAADA. Relate, CAFCASS and Respect organisations all piloted the tool. Details: London: Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS), 2008. 28p Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 11, 2012 at: http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/PDF/7195_Review%20of%20the%20risk%20id%20tool%20pilot%2018th%20August%2008%20FOR%20PUBLICATION.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/PDF/7195_Review%20of%20the%20risk%20id%20tool%20pilot%2018th%20August%2008%20FOR%20PUBLICATION.pdf Shelf Number: 126669 Keywords: Domestic Violence Family Violence Risk Assessment Violence Against Women

Author: Aungst, Sharon, ed. Title: Pretrial Detention & Community Supervision: Best Practices and Resources for California Counties Summary: California Forward launched the Partnership for Community Excellence (Partnership) in December 2011 to assist counties to envision, design and implement their own strategies to effectively implement new responsibilities related to the adult criminal justice Realignment under Assembly Bill 109 and related legislation. The Partnership’s goal is to provide actionable information to local leaders and agencies so they can make smart decisions in building capacity, choosing evidence-based programs, and measuring and improving results. Realignment also creates an opportunity for counties to examine new governance models that will help them achieve better outcomes in other areas of local government. Good governance is centered on collaborative planning, using models and services shown to work, and measuring and improving results. Given the diversity of California, these good governance practices can be expected to result in different strategies. There is no “one right way,” yet government must be accountable to Californians for results. Adopting effective governance models will assist counties to improve transparency, accountability and results. Public leaders need accurate and up-to-date information in order to make good decisions and drive system change. Effective pretrial practices are important to the success of Realignment and improving public safety, given that 71 percent of jail beds currently are occupied by pretrial detainees. Making pretrial release decisions based on a detainee’s risk and needs, versus their ability to post bail, is key to improving public safety and offender outcomes. The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of best practices and practical information to assist county leaders in determining how pretrial programs could assist their local jurisdiction. The report includes the following: • Summary of national pretrial best practices; • Summary of five California counties’ experiences in effectively implementing pretrial programs; • Suggestions related to offender tracking and data collection and analysis; • Issues for consideration in implementing a pretrial program; and, • Resources including technical assistance available to counties. Details: Sacramento: Partnership for Community Excellence, 2012. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 11, 2012 at: http://caforward.3cdn.net/7a60c47c7329a4abd7_2am6iyh9s.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://caforward.3cdn.net/7a60c47c7329a4abd7_2am6iyh9s.pdf Shelf Number: 126675 Keywords: Bail Community Supervision Pretrial Detention (California) Risk Assessment

Author: Minnesota Sex Offender Program Title: Options for Managing the Growth and Cost of the Minnesota Sex Offender Program: Facility Study Summary: Throughout Minnesota, managing sexual offenders and combating sexual violence is a complex issue with a wide scope and multi-agency approach. For years, Minnesota has been a leader on many fronts in this area from specialized caseloads for supervision agents, to the development of one of the first actuarial risk tools in the field (MNSOST-R). The Minnesota Legislature has requested several studies related to sexual violence and sexual offenders in the past 15 years which is indicative of its commitment to continue to evaluate and strengthen current practice and to develop strategies consistent with advancements in the field. Many recommendations from these reports have been implemented and have resulted in an improved system. Minnesota is one of 20 states that enacted civil commitment statutes to indeterminately detain individuals for treatment to address their sexual dangerousness and as part of a broader strategy to manage the risks presented across the continuum of sexual offenders. The civil commitment program is expensive to maintain and the program continues to expand because more sexual offenders are entering than are being released. The cost and growth of the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP) continues to be an area of concern particularly given the current economic issues facing the state. Public safety cannot be compromised yet the growth of this program creates a strain on the state budget as the per diem for MSOP clients is $328 and projections indicate an expected annual growth of at least 50 additional clients. To address future growth and cost, the 2010 Legislature included a subdivision in the capital investment bonding bill requiring the commissioner of the Department of Human Services (DHS) to submit a report to the Legislature by January 15, 2011. The commissioner tasked MSOP with the completion of this study. MSOP then convened four topical teams to provide analysis and recommendations for sex offender treatment, the civil commitment process, sexual abuse perpetration prevention, and bed space options for MSOP clients. These other facets of this issue were incorporated in this study to paint a complete picture of the growth of Minnesota’s civil commitment program for sexual offenders and its subsequent need for expansion. Developing options to manage the growth and decrease the cost of MSOP was the charge for each topical team as they researched and provided analysis of their topic. The treatment topical team found treatment systems in Minnesota have the potential to further reduce the need for civil commitments and to help support the release of some civilly committed individuals if they have made sufficient progress to warrant any court ordered release to society from MSOP. This results in an increased reliance on community-based treatment to manage higher risk sexual offenders. To make this shift responsibly, Minnesota should work to strengthen its community-based treatment options in several ways. These changes will require additional resources but it is likely that these additional costs will be more than offset through reductions in expected future MSOP operating costs and capital costs associated with program expansions. The team that reviewed the current civil commitment process concluded these programs for sexual offenders are an expensive yet necessary tool in an effective, comprehensive statewide management strategy. The challenge for the State of Minnesota is to utilize MSOP efficiently while maintaining public safety in a fiscally responsible manner. Opportunities exist to impact the future cost and growth of MSOP by making modifications and revisions in the current process of civil commitment. Evaluating the application of commitment criteria in the referral process and considering options to indeterminate commitment would impact the number of new clients admitted to MSOP. Enhancing coordinated community-based resources would increase the ability to manage this challenging population at a decreased cost. Once modifications and new policies are in place, an ongoing evaluation of the statewide management system for sex offenders would assist in maintaining efficiency and better ensure public safety. Managing the growth and decreasing the cost of MSOP could be most effectively achieved if sexual abuse was prevented before someone perpetrated sexual harm. Prevention of sexual abuse perpetration was included in this study and report to illuminate the importance of preventing the creation of civilly committed sex offenders as well as preventing recidivism once MSOP clients are reintegrated into the community. By investing in a population-based public health approach to sexual violence prevention, Minnesota will be investing in long-term cost-savings for the state. A complex web of social norms, environmental factors, peer influence and individual decision-making that precedes an act of sexual violence. Ample opportunities for intervention and prevention exist. After reviewing several options for renovation and expansion, the bed space options topical team concluded that both a short-term and a long-term solution are needed to address the projected growth of MSOP. In the short-term, MSOP should work with the Minnesota Security Hospital to move clients out of the Shantz building on the St. Peter campus. This allows MSOP to request asset preservation funds from the Legislature to complete the infrastructure renovations of the Shantz building. This will increase the capacity of MSOP by 55 additional beds, which will accommodate MSOP’s bed space needs for one more year. This timing allows MSOP to review next year’s projections and develop a bonding request for the 2012-2013 legislative sessions. The low operating costs of this recommendation will assist MSOP in lowering the overall per diem. The long-term solution is the lowest on-going operating cost per client in adding a 400 bed living unit within the original design of the MSOP Moose Lake facility. This allows MSOP to take advantage of existing support infrastructure, security perimeter and administrative staff. The MSOP Moose Lake facility expansion also allows for building only 200 or 100 beds. The 200 bed addition would include adding only two of the five housing wings. The 100 bed option only builds one of the wings. These options will still require building the additional support infrastructure, but require less bonding dollars in the near term and still allow for the additional expansion of the other wings. Minnesota would do well to continue to strengthen its multi-faceted, multi-agency approach to the issue of sex offender management and also, in preventing sexual violence. In moving forward, Minnesota should create and fund an on-going entity to coordinate, assess and improve statewide responses to sex offender management as well as to identify new and emerging issues. As this report demonstrates, the issue of sexual violence is exceedingly complex and thus requires an approach equal in its complexity including prevention, intervention and response. It should be noted that the Office of Legislative Auditor (OLA) is in the process of conducting a program evaluation of MSOP. The OLA report to the Legislature will likely address some of these areas in further detail as well as provide suggestions and or recommendations for future direction. Details: St. Paul: Minnesota Department of Human Services, 2011. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 7, 2012 at: http://archive.leg.state.mn.us/docs/2011/mandated/110064.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://archive.leg.state.mn.us/docs/2011/mandated/110064.pdf Shelf Number: 127187 Keywords: Civil Commitment of Sex Offenders Correctional Supervision Costs of Criminal Justice Prisoners Risk Assessment Sex Offenders (Minnesota, U.S.) Sexual Violence

Author: Vincent, Gina M. Title: Using Risk Assessment to Meet Needs and Reduce Recidivism Summary: A growing number of juvenile justice experts are suggesting that an effective approach to reducing recidivism is to evaluate a youth’s risk of reoffending, then match services to his or her specific risk factors. With support from the Models for Change initiative, most of the county-based juvenile probation offices in Pennsylvania have adopted the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS) for this purpose. The near-statewide adoption was a significant accomplishment in a state without a centralized juvenile probation system. A study of the impact of YLS in the probation offices of three counties showed it improved their ability to assign appropriate community-based services and levels of monitoring to individual offenders, and significantly decreased reoffense rates in one county. The study also showed that success requires buy-in from key stakeholders. Pennsylvania’s experience provides a model for how states with decentralized juvenile justice systems can implement statewide innovations. Details: Philadelphia, PA: Models for Change, 2012. 4p. Source: Innovation Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed January 13, 2013 at http://www.modelsforchange.net/publications/356/Innovation_Brief_Using_Risk_Assessment_to_Meet_Needs_and_Reduce_Recidivism.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.modelsforchange.net/publications/356/Innovation_Brief_Using_Risk_Assessment_to_Meet_Needs_and_Reduce_Recidivism.pdf Shelf Number: 127273 Keywords: Case Management Juvenile Justice Juvenile Probation Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Tewksbury, Richard Title: Final Report on Sex Offenders: Recidivism and Collateral Consequences Summary: This report examines the efficacy of sex offender registration and notification (SORN) through its influence on sex offender recidivism and collateral consequences. The first study examines the recidivism rates of two samples of sex offenders, those released prior to SORN and a sample released under SORN in New Jersey. It asks whether or not there are distinct risk profiles among sex offenders with regard to their recidivism trajectories, and if these profiles are similar or different for sex offenders pre- and post-SORN. Additional analyses also include an examination of the influence of demographics, substance abuse, mental health issues, treatment history, sex offense incident characteristics, and criminal history on recidivism trajectories. The second study looks at whether the recidivism trajectories post-prison release for post-SORN sex offenders are similar to or different from the recidivism trajectories post-prison release for post- SORN non-sex offenders who are released from prison via parole. It also specifically focuses on whether or not a series of collateral consequences are experienced similarly or differently among these post-SORN sex and post-SORN non-sex offender parolees. Recidivism data for both studies in this report were obtained through the New Jersey State Police Computerized Criminal History System and the National Crime Information Center’s Interstate Identification Unit. The first study utilizes two samples of sex offenders, and each was provided by the New Jersey Department of Corrections (NJDOC). The pre-SORN group included a random sample of 250 male sex offenders released from prison by the NJDOC during the years 1990-1994, while the post-implementation group utilized the same sampling procedure and size and matched according to relevant demographics (age, race, and criminal history), with the exception that they were released during the years 1995-1999. For the second study, random samples of 247 post-SORN sex offenders and 250 post-SORN non-sex offenders released from prison in New Jersey via parole during 1995-1999 were drawn from the New Jersey Department of Corrections’ databases. The samples in both studies were followed for approximately eight years post-release for assessing recidivism. For both studies, official records of re-arrest for new offenses were employed as the measure of recidivism. Semi-parametric trajectory modeling was also used in both studies to estimate the recidivism trajectories of the pre- and post-SORN releasees, and the recidivism trajectories of the post-SORN sex offender and the non-sex offender releasees. The first study finds that there are limited observable benefits of SORN regarding sex offender recidivism and general recidivism. With an overall low rate of sex offense recidivism, SORN status (e.g. whether an offender is or is not subject to SORN) failed to predict whether sex offenders would reoffend sexually. The results are consistent with previous research which has argued that sex offenders have relatively low rates of recidivism, typically significantly lower than non-sex offenders. SORN status was also not a significant predictor of which sex offenders would reoffend in general, including non-sexual recidivism. Although sex offenders and non-sex offenders share the experience of collateral consequences, results from the second study reveal that several collateral consequences including not living with friends, living in group facilities, and residential relocation appear to differentially impact sex offenders. Policy makers and treatment providers should focus their efforts on those sex offenders identified as belonging to the high-risk trajectory with a particular interest in targeting the risk factors related to a high-risk trajectory. A targeted rather than universal application of SORN seems a viable alternative. Ultimately, the two studies in this report suggest that SORN is not likely to be an effective deterrent for sex offender recidivism and may produce an environment with specific collateral consequences that inhibit reintegration efforts post-prison release for sex offenders. Details: Final Report to the U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2011. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 4, 2013 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238060.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238060.pdf Shelf Number: 127476 Keywords: Recidivism Risk Assessment Sex Offender Notification Sex Offender Registration Sex Offenders (U.S.)

Author: Vincent, Gina M. Title: Risk Assessment in Juvenile Justice: A Guidebook for Implementation Summary: The primary purpose of this Guide is to provide a structure for jurisdictions, juvenile probation or centralized statewide agencies striving to implement risk assessment or to improve their current risk assessment practices. Risk assessment in this Guide refers to the practice of using a structured tool that combines information about youth to classify them as being low, moderate or high risk for reoffending or continued delinquent activity, as well as identifying factors that might reduce that risk on an individual basis. The purpose of such risk assessment tools is to help in making decisions about youths' placement and supervision, and creating intervention plans that will reduce their level of risk. Details: Models for Change, 2012. 104p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 15, 2013 at: http://www.modelsforchange.net/publications/346 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.modelsforchange.net/publications/346 Shelf Number: 127625 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment

Author: Zgoba, Kristen M. Title: A Multi-State Recidivism Study Using Static-99R and Static-2002 Risk Scores and Tier Guidelines from the Adam Walsh Act Summary: This study seeks to examine important components of our nation’s sex offender tracking and monitoring systems, with a focus on risk assessment and sexual recidivism (measured by re-arrest). The principal aims of this study were fourfold: (1) to compare the nationally recommended Adam Walsh Act (AWA) classification tiers with actuarial risk assessment instruments in their respective abilities to identify high risk individuals and recidivists; (2) to evaluate the predictive accuracy of existing state risk assessment classification schemes; (3) to examine the distribution of risk assessment scores within and across tier categories as defined by the AWA; and (4) to examine the role of offender age in recidivism risk across the adult lifespan. Data were collected from 1,789 adult sex offenders in four states (Minnesota, New Jersey, Florida and South Carolina) to inform these analyses. Variables including offender demographics and criminal history information, coded from state criminal justice records, were used to score actuarial risk assessment instruments and sex offender registry information. On average, we found that the recidivism rate was approximately 5% at five years and 10% at 10 years. AWA tier was unrelated to sexual recidivism, except in Florida, where it was inversely associated with recidivism. Actuarial measures and existing state tiering systems both showed better predictive validity than AWA tiers. Finally, offender age was found to have a significant protective effect for sexual reoffending, with older offenders showing a decreased risk for sexual recidivism. The findings indicate that the current AWA classification scheme is likely to result in a system that is less effective in protecting the public than the classification systems currently implemented in the states studied. Policy makers should strongly consider substantial revisions of the AWA classification system to better incorporate evidence-based models of sex offender risk assessment and management. Details: Final Report submitted to the U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2012. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 16, 2013 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/240099.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/240099.pdf Shelf Number: 127640 Keywords: Adam Walsh Act Recidivism Risk Assessment Risk Management Sex Offenders (U.S.)

Author: Brennan, Tim Title: A Need/Risk Explanatory Classification of Female Prisoners Incorporating Gender-Neutral and Gender-Responsive Factors Summary: Correctional institutions must understand the women who enter their care if they are to achieve their key correctional goals. Assessment and classification are the main techniques used by correctional agencies to describe, understand, “name” and guide inmate management and treatment. Criminal justice institutions – like most people-processing bureaucracies –must first transform the unique “person” into a policy based category (e.g. minimum security) before any formal processing can begin (Prottas 1979; Litsky 1980). A major danger is that inadequate or oversimplified classification may produce systematic misunderstandings of women offenders that may lead to inappropriate processing and treatment of women offenders. Thus, there is much at stake in these classifications and the consequences of errors are damaging to both the detainee and the institution (Clear 1988; Blanchette and Brown 2006, Hardyman and VanVoorhis 2004; Brennan 1987b). Many aspects of the woman detainee’s life quality, e.g. housing placement, privileges, program eligibility, access to services and visitation arrangements all depend on classification decisions. It is thus disquieting that several recent reviews argue current classification procedures for women offenders lack adequate validity and are substantially misaligned with women’s needs and risks (Blanchette and Brown 2006, Hardyman and Van Voorhis 2004, Bloom 2000, Bloom et al., 2003; Reisig et al. 2006, Brennan 2008). The main criticisms include over-simplified and irrelevant risk and need factors, weak clinical guidance and poor predictive validity. Each of these deficiencies may produce systematic misclassification. Several research groups at both the State and National levels have called for more appropriate classifications for women offenders. The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) has mounted a multifaceted initiative on the classification of women offenders (Hardyman and Van Voorhis 2004, Wright et al 2007; Salisbury et al 2008). The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has established a Gender Responsive Strategies Commission (GRSC) to assist in developing a master plan for female offenders. One of their first tasks was to implement a gender-responsive classification for female offenders. In Canada substantial efforts have also focused on re-designing classification procedures for female offenders (e.g. Blanchette and Brown 2006; Hannah-Moffatt and Shaw 2001). At the core of these issues is the problem of misalignment of classification design with organizational purposes. Any confusion over the purposes of classification can result in classification systems being designed and implemented that are “misaligned” with correctional goals of an agency and thus incapable of achieving these goals (Hardyman and Van Voorhis 2004; Brennan 1987). Appropriate alignment means that the design features of the classification are well matched to, and can achieve the policy purposes of an agency (Walton 1980). Misalignment occurs when a correctional agency implements a poorly designed classification that has little chance of achieving the agencies purposes e.g. when an agency implements a predictive risk classification but then uses this for treatment decisions; or when the agency omits female relevant factors from it’s classification but uses this system to classify women detainees. In the present project we will design two separate classifications matched to two different purposes. One aims to optimize risk prediction for women inmates, the other aims to optimize explanatory power and treatment relevance for women prisoners. This paper focuses on the latter classification. Details: Golden, CO: Northpointe Institute for Public Management, 2008. 96p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 27, 2013 at: http://www.northpointeinc.com/files/research_documents/A_Need-Risk_Explanatory_Classification_of_Females.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.northpointeinc.com/files/research_documents/A_Need-Risk_Explanatory_Classification_of_Females.pdf Shelf Number: 127729 Keywords: Female Offenders (U.S.) Female Prisoners Inmate Classification Risk Assessment

Author: Murphy, Amy Title: Parole Violation Decision-Making Instrument (PVDMI) Process Evaluation Summary: California currently has the nation’s largest prison population (about 167,000 prisoners) (CDCR, 2009), and while some other state prison populations have declined in recent years, California’s continues to increase (Petersilia, 2008). Its prison expenditures are among the highest in the nation—per inmate, per staff, and as a share of the overall state budget. In spite of vast expenditures, California prisons remain dangerously overcrowded (now at 200 percent of inmate capacity), and a federal court has issued an Opinion and Order to reduce the number of inmates by over 40,000 (Grattet, et. al., 2008). Rehabilitation has also been scaled back, as classrooms have been converted to living space. California’s Expert Panel on Rehabilitation recently reported that nearly 50 percent of all prisoners released in 2006 sat idle—meaning they did not participate in any work assignment or rehabilitation program for their entire time in prison (California Expert Panel on Adult Offender Recidivism Reduction Programming, 2007). Two-thirds (66 percent) of all parolees return to prison within three years, nearly twice the average rate nationally (Grattet, et. al., 2008). Because of this high rate of failure, parolees comprise much of the prison admissions in California, accounting for nearly two-thirds (66 percent) of all persons admitted to California prisons in 2007 (Grattet, et. al., 2008). Over the last 20 years, the number of parole revocations has increased 30-fold in California, compared with a six-fold increase nationally (Travis, 2003). As an effort to address parolees’ high rates of recidivism and returns to custody, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) introduced and piloted the Parole Violations Decision-Making Instrument (PVDMI) in 2008-9, two years after the initial planning for the tool began. The PVDMI is a tool that uses parolee risk level and violation severity to make recommendations on addressing parole violations. This type of reform, using structured decision-making tools in parole practice, had been recommended by several public policy forums in California. The pilot took place over 90 days in four parole units, and the PVDMI was then implemented across the state. Details: Irvine, CA: Center for Evidence-Based Corrections The University of California, Irvine, 2009 (Revised February 2010). 82p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper: Accessed March 15, 2013 at: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/sites/ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/PVDMI.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/sites/ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/PVDMI.pdf Shelf Number: 118614 Keywords: Decision-Making Parole Revocations Parole Violations Parolees (California) Risk Assessment

Author: Northcott, Melissa Title: Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Tools: A Review Summary: Intimate partner violence touches the lives of thousands of Canadians. The criminal justice system is faced with the task of protecting victims of intimate partner violence, while at the same time ensuring that the rights of the accused are not violated. This tension is evident at different stages in the criminal justice system process such as at bail, sentencing and parole. One approach that has been adopted to manage the above noted issues is assessing the risk that offenders pose for re-offending and how to best manage these offenders (Hoyle 2008; Roehl et al. 2005). Specialized risk assessment tools have been created for these purposes and are being used in many jurisdictions across Canada (Millar 2009). The purpose of this report is to provide an understanding of intimate partner violence risk assessment tools and of the issues that assessors should consider when choosing an assessment instrument. This report begins with a discussion of the general use of risk assessment tools, their use in the criminal justice system in general and in cases of intimate partner violence specifically. The different approaches of risk assessment are then discussed, as are factors to consider when choosing a tool. The strengths and limitations of the various approaches and of risk assessment tools in general are also explored. This report was created to contribute to a better understanding of the range of risk assessment tools that are used by the various professionals working in the area of intimate partner violence. Details: Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada, 2008. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 18, 2013 at: http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/rs/rep-rap/2012/rr12_8/rr12_8.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/rs/rep-rap/2012/rr12_8/rr12_8.pdf Shelf Number: 127968 Keywords: Family Violence Intimate Partner Violence (Canada) Risk Assessment Violence Against Women

Author: Bronk, Christopher Title: Risk-Intelligent Governance in the Age of Cyberthreats Summary: Cybersecurity is an issue of foremost interest for policymakers in the world's government, corporations, nongovermental organizations, academic institutions, and other associations. However, remedy for the myriad cyberthreats and vulnerabilities continues to elude technologists and policymakers alike. In this paper, we consider the concept of cyberrisk intelligence, a general concept of understanding the varied phenomena that impact an organization's capacity to secure its digital communitions and resources from eavesdropping, theft, or attack. We also consider the deeper economics of information held and transmitted in digital form and how those economics may alter thinking on risk modeling. Finally, we offer guidance on how organizations and entire sectors of business activity may want to alter their thinking on cybersecurity issues beyond a technological framing to include an informational perspective aligned with business activities. Details: Houston, TX: Rice University, James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, 2013. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Risk Intelligence Series Issue No. 23: Accessed May 2, 2013 at: http://bakerinstitute.org/publications/ITP-pub-RiskIntelligentGovernance-042613.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://bakerinstitute.org/publications/ITP-pub-RiskIntelligentGovernance-042613.pdf Shelf Number: 128600 Keywords: Cybercrime Cybersecurity Risk Assessment

Author: Turnbull, Sarah Louise Title: Reconfiguring Canadian Penality: Gender, Diversity, and Parole Summary: This research provides a local case study of responses to ‘gender’ and ‘diversity’ within Canada’s federal parole system. I examine the following questions: How are certain ‘differences’ and categories of offenders constituted as targets for ‘accommodation’ or as having ‘special needs’? How do penal institutions frame ‘culturally relevant’ or ‘gender responsive’ policy and, in doing so, use normative ideals and selective knowledge of gender, race, culture, ethnicity, and other social relations to constitute the identities of particular groups of offenders? I explore these questions by tracing the history of policy discussions about gender and facets of diversity within legislation and penal and parole policies and practices, as well as the current approaches to managing difference used by the National Parole Board (NPB). Specific focus is given to the organizational responses and approaches developed for Aboriginal, female, and ‘ethnocultural’ offenders. In this study, I show that the incorporation of diversity into the federal parole system works to address a variety of organizational objectives and interests, including fulfilling the legislative mandate to recognize and respond to diversity; appealing to human rights ideals and notions of fairness; managing reputational risk and conforming to managerial logics; instituting ‘effective’ correctional practice; and addressing issues of representation. At the same time, the recognition of gender and diversity produces new penal subjectivities, discourses, and sites upon which to govern. I argue that the accommodation of gender and diversity provides a narrative of conditional release and an institutional framework that positions the NPB as responsive to the diverse needs and/or experiences of non-white and non-male offenders. In the Canadian context, the penal system strives to deliver ‘fair’ punishment through the selective inclusion of difference, and without altering or reconsidering fundamental structures, practices, and power arrangements. Diversity and difference are instead added onto and/or incorporated into preexisting penal policy and logics, including risk management and managerialism. Details: Toronto: Centre of Criminology and Sociolegal Studies, University of Toronto, 2012. 304p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed May 4, 2013 at: https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/34950/1/Turnbull_Sarah_L_201211_PhD_thesis.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Canada URL: https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/34950/1/Turnbull_Sarah_L_201211_PhD_thesis.pdf Shelf Number: 128660 Keywords: Diversity Federal Parole System Gender Punishment (Canada) Risk Assessment

Author: Robertson, Robyn D. Title: Impaired Driving Risk Assessment: A Primer for Policymakers. Summary: The primer is the result of a partnership between principals from the Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF), the Addiction Research Program of the Douglas Mental Health University (McGill) Institute, Université de Montréal and Université de Sherbrooke under funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) in Transdisciplinary Studies in Driving While Impaired Onset, Persistence, Prevention and Treatment. As part of the project, researchers ran focus groups with remedial impaired driver program practitioners and surveyed justice professionals from across Canada. The report provides an overview of risk assessment practices in Canada for impaired drivers and provides a snapshot of the practices used by driver licensing and criminal justice practitioners. It summarizes current risk assessment practices and describes the different ways that impaired drivers are assessed for risk in both systems. In addition, the primer highlights the strengths and limitations of practices in Canadian driver licensing and criminal justice systems and includes recommendations to inform and/or guide future efforts to develop or improve best practices related to risk assessment in both systems. Details: Ottawa: Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 2013. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 9, 2013 at: http://www.tirf.ca/publications/publications_show.php?pub_id=291 Year: 2013 Country: Canada URL: http://www.tirf.ca/publications/publications_show.php?pub_id=291 Shelf Number: 128694 Keywords: Driving Under the Influence (Canada) Drunk Driving Risk Assessment

Author: Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Title: National Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment Summary: This document is intended to provide guidance on the conduct of risk assessment at the country or national level, and it relates especially to key requirements set out in Recommendation 1 and paragraphs 3-6 of INR 1. In particular, it outlines general principles that may serve as a useful framework in assessing ML/TF risks at the national level. The guidance contained in this document takes into consideration previous FATF work, which is still valid reference material. The general principles contained in this paper are also relevant when conducting risk assessments of a more focussed scope, such as in assessments of a particular financial or DNFBP sector (for example, the securities sector) or of thematic issues (for example, the proceeds of corruption related ML). All of these types of assessments (comprehensive, sectoral or thematic) carried out at the national level may also form the basis for determining whether to apply enhanced or specific measures, simplified measures, or exemptions from AML/CFT requirements. Furthermore, while FATF Recommendation 1 does not create specific risk assessment obligations regarding the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the general principles laid out in this guidance could also be used in conducting a risk assessment for this area. The guidance in this document is not intended to explain how supervisors should assess risks in the context of risk-based supervision, although risk-based supervision will likely be informed by a national-level risk assessment. Also, this guidance does not provide further explanation of RBA obligations and decisions for financial institutions and DNFBPs. The FATF has issued separate guidance on implementing the RBA for specific sectors and professions, and that material will be reviewed and, as necessary, modified in light of the revised FATF Recommendations. This guidance document is not a standard and is therefore not intended to designate specific actions necessary to meet obligations under Recommendation 1 and INR 1 or any other Recommendations dealing with the RBA. Criteria for technical compliance and for assessing effectiveness relevant to this and all other FATF Recommendations may be found in the FATF assessment methodology. The practices described in this guidance are intended to serve as examples that may facilitate implementation of these obligations in a manner compatible with the FATF standards. This guidance is structured as follows:  This section (1) lays out the purpose, scope and status of this guidance, along with an outline of the core FATF obligations relevant to ML/TF risk assessments at any level.  Section 2 lays out general principles that should be taken into account when conducting ML/TF risk assessments at the country or national level.  Section 3 discusses how to organise a national-level ML/TF risk assessment, its frequency, and the data and information that could be used while undertaking such an assessment.  Section 4 presents a high-level view of the three main stages involved in the ML/TF risk assessment process (identification, analysis and evaluation).  Section 5 considers the outcome and dissemination of the risk assessment product.  Annexes to this document contain additional information relating to ML/TF risk assessment including summaries of selected national-level assessments. Details: Paris: FATF, 2013. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: FATF Guidance: Accessed May 28, 2013 at: http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/content/images/National_ML_TF_Risk_Assessment.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/content/images/National_ML_TF_Risk_Assessment.pdf Shelf Number: 128840 Keywords: Financial Crimes Money Laundering Risk Assessment Terrorist Financing

Author: Poyry Forest Industry Pty Ltd Title: Legal Forest Products Assurance - A Risk Assessment Framework for Assessing the Legality of Timber and Wood Projects Imported into Australia Summary: Poyry Forest Industry Ltd (Pöyry) has been engaged by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) to review existing methodologies for assessing illegality of imported timber and wood products. Based on this review, Poyry was to develop a more accurate and reliable methodology for quantifying the volume and value of illegally-sourced wood products imported into Australia. This project supports the Australian Government’s commitment to combat illegal logging and associated trade. The methodology review concluded that the current methods lacked reliable data on which to base policy. Problems were found at each stage in the wood supply chain from accurate knowledge of the operating and regulatory environments covering sustainability and “legality” of forest management and timber harvesting, to data tracking the often complex log and subsequent product flows from the forests to primary and secondary manufacturing. Further complicating the situation is that much wood crosses borders via transhipment of logs and timber products from producer countries to secondary manufacturing countries and from there to consumer countries. When coupled with the imprecision in current trade statistics the review concluded that current methods to estimate volumes or values of timber and wood product imports from illegal sources are very unreliable. These findings led Poyry to develop an alternative approach that is based on developing a risk assessment framework based on transparent assessments of governance arrangements within wood supplying countries. Details: Canberra: Australian Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), 2010. 83p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 1, 2013 at: http://www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/1871733/Poyry_Report_-_Risk_assessment_framework_for_assessing_legality_of_timber_and_wood_products_imported_into_Australia.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/1871733/Poyry_Report_-_Risk_assessment_framework_for_assessing_legality_of_timber_and_wood_products_imported_into_Australia.pdf Shelf Number: 128914 Keywords: Illegal Imports Illegal Logging Risk Assessment Timber

Author: Veen, Violaine Title: Risk Profiles of Youth in Pre-Trial Detention: A comparative study of Moroccan and Dutch male adolescents in the Netherlands Summary: Moroccan male adolescents in the Netherlands are highly overrepresented in youth crime, compared to both native Dutch and other ethnic minority groups. The current thesis has been the first to examine the characteristics of Moroccan adolescent offenders in the Netherlands in relation to various environmental and individual risk factors, using quantitative data from both an offender population and from the general population. The objective of the present study was a) to identify the risk profile of Moroccan youth offenders in pre-trail detention, b) to compare this risk profile with that of native Dutch adolescents in pre-trail detention, and c) to draw intra-ethnic comparisons of various risk factors by using comparison samples from the respective general populations. Participants in this study were 299 boys aged 12-18 years, placed in pre-trial detention in 10 juvenile justice institutions in the Netherlands. From all incarcerated boys, 141 were of Moroccan origin and 158 were native Dutch. Of the participants, 168 parents participated in the study. Overall, a less problematic profile was found for Moroccan adolescents in pre-trial detention than for native Dutch adolescents in pre-trial detention. First, analysis of police record data showed that the offending behavior of Moroccan adolescents in pre-trial detention was characterized by relatively less serious delinquent acts (i.e., property-based offences) compared to native Dutch. Second, individual risk factors such as mental health problems and psychopathic traits, were found to be less prevalent among Moroccan adolescents in pre-trial detention than among native Dutch. Third, less control and less affection expression characterized the mother-son relationship in Moroccan families in general. Finally, the level of orientation towards Dutch society was higher for Moroccan adolescents in pre-trial detention than for Moroccan adolescents from the general population. In sum, the risk profile of Moroccan youths in pre-trial detention was found to be less problematic compared to the risk profile of incarcerated native Dutch, and incarcerated Moroccans were found to be more orientated towards the Dutch society than their Moroccan peers in the general population. The characteristics of Moroccan boys are indicative of various theoretical explanations for their overrepresentation in crime. First, being strongly oriented towards the Dutch society may make Moroccan youths more likely to use natives as a basis of social comparison, and therefore may make them more prone to experience frustration regarding their unfavorable socio-economic and socio-cultural position in the Netherlands. As a consequence, Moroccan immigrant youths may be more likely to engage in criminal activities. Second, a lack of social control exerted by for instance school and mothers in Moroccan families, is thought to contribute to problem behavior in Moroccan boys. Third, there are indications that discriminatory processes in the juvenile justice system may to some extent account for their overrepresentation in youth crime, and our findings on the relatively less problematic risk profiles of Moroccan boys are in line with these indications. Support is warranted for Moroccan boys, for example by creating more educational opportunities and better chances on the labor market and by helping Moroccan families accessing mental health services. Details: Utrecht: Utrecht University, 2011. 170p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed June 26, 2013 at: http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2011-0819-200943/UUindex.html Year: 2011 Country: Netherlands URL: http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2011-0819-200943/UUindex.html Shelf Number: 129187 Keywords: Adolescents Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders (Netherlands) Minority Groups Pre-Trial Detention Risk Assessment Socioeconomic Status

Author: Hickert, Audrey O. Title: Pretrial Release Risk Study, Validation, & Scoring: Final Report Summary: The objective of this study was to validate the PRI being piloted by Salt Lake County to determine which items are significantly related to pretrial risk (as measured by FTA and recidivism). The study measures construct validity, whether the tool measures the concept it was intended to measure, new arrests during the pretrial period and failures to appear (FTA), and identifies cut-points for low, medium, and high risk offenders. These findings will be used to create a tool that will be used at the Salt Lake County jail to help inform release decisions. Details: Salt Lake City, UT: Utah Criminal Justice Center, University of Utah, 2013. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2013 at: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/PretrialRisk_UpdatedFinalReport_v052013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/PretrialRisk_UpdatedFinalReport_v052013.pdf Shelf Number: 129526 Keywords: Bail Jail Inmates Pretrial Release (Utah) Risk Assessment

Author: Spohn, Ryan Title: Nebraska Sex Offender Registry Study – Final Report July 31, 2013 Summary: The Consortium for Crime and Justice Research at the University of Nebraska Omaha was charged by the Nebraska Legislature’s Judiciary Committee to undertake a study of the Nebraska Sex Offender Registry. The primary goal of the study was to compare sex offender recidivism under the pre-LB 285 classification system that utilized risk levels derived from a psychological risk assessment instrument to sex offender recidivism under the post-LB 285 classification system utilizing Adam Walsh Act Tier Levels derived from offense severity. Additional goals include an overall examination of offender characteristics, victim characteristics, and offense characteristics among all individuals on the registry, as well as the relationship of these offender, victim, and offense characteristics with recidivism. Methods: Data for the project was collected from three sources: 1) Nebraska’s Sex Offender Registry database, 2) the Nebraska State Patrol Criminal History Database (PCH), and 3) an FBI nationwide criminal records search. Graduate research assistants from UNO’s School of Criminology and Criminal Justice extracted relevant data from the Sex Offender Registry database and linked it to recidivism data from Nebraska’s PCH database and the FBI criminal records search. The resulting dataset was analyzed by Dr. Ryan Spohn using SPSS version 20. Major Results: Characteristics of offenders, victims, and offenses. The typical registered sex offender in Nebraska is a white male over the age of 26. The typical victim is a female acquaintance, age 12 to 17. By far, the most common type of offense was fondling. For both the pre-LB 285 risk-based classification system and the post-LB 285 tier system based on offense severity, the most common tier classification is Risk Level 3 or Tier 3, the most serious classification for each system. Although violence and/or a weapon were present in almost a quarter of the offenses, serious bodily injury was a rare event. Sex offense recidivism. In comparing the old risk-based system of classification to the new offense-based system of classification, the former risk-based system resulted in less overall recidivism. Specifically, the pre-LB 285 classification system resulted in a 2-year recidivism rate of 1.7% and a 1-year recidivism rate of 0.6%. In comparison, the post-LB 285 classification system resulted in a 2-year recidivism rate of 2.6% and a 1-year recidivism rate of 1.7%. We also examined the effectiveness of each classification system in identifying offenders at the highest risk to reoffend. In general, the former system that utilized a psychological risk assessment tool consistently distinguished offenders who were at a high, medium, and low risk to reoffend. In comparison, the AWA system was very effective in distinguishing those at a high risk to reoffend from medium and low risk offenders. However, the AWA classification system consistently failed to distinguish offenders at medium risk to recidivate from those at low risk to recidivate. Our findings suggest that, as an overall tool for identifying a nuanced risk to reoffend, the old risk-based system appears more effective. However, if the goal is simply to distinguish the highest risk offenders from everyone else, the Adam Walsh Act Tier system appears most effective. One caveat, however, is that this latter finding is in sharp contrast to published research on sex offenders in other states (Zgoba et al. 2012). Factors related to sex offender recidivism in Nebraska. Our analysis focused on characteristics of the offenders, victims, and offenses that were significantly related to reoffending. Regarding offender characteristics, male offenders were more likely to reoffend as compared to female offenders and offenders diagnosed with a personality disorder were more likely to reoffend. Regarding victim characteristics, rates of recidivism were significantly elevated if the victim was a family member or an acquaintance, with the latter more than doubling the likelihood of a new sex offense. Recidivism is also more likely if the victim was age 11 or under. The most salient characteristic of victims, however, is the sex of the victim, as rates of recidivism were substantially higher if the offense leading to registry involved both male and female victims. Finally, regarding characteristics of the offense, rates of recidivism were elevated if the offense included explicit material or fondling, with the latter displaying the strongest relationship to subsequent offending. Offenses that involved the use of violence and/or a weapon were also related to recidivism. Multivariate analyses of factors predicting recidivism. These analyses allow a simultaneous consideration of multiple factors while predicting the effect of each factor on recidivism, holding constant the effect of the other variables in the model. This analysis indicated that the most important factors for predicting recidivism were characteristics of the victims, suggesting that we must take into account victim characteristics if we want to adequately predict recidivism amongst sexual offenders. We also applied models to assess the ability of the old classification system versus the new classification system to predict recidivism while controlling for, or holding constant, the effect of offender characteristics. For the old system, being assigned a high or medium risk level significantly predicted recidivism as compared to being assigned a low risk level to reoffend. Regarding the AWA classification system, the model predicts that the highest tier (Tier 3) offenders in Nebraska were nearly 14 times more likely to recidivate as compared to the lowest tier (Tier 1) offenders. Details: Omaha, NE: Consortium for Crime and Justice Research, 2013. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2013 at: Nebraska Sex Offender Registry Study – Final Report July 31, 2013 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 129643 Keywords: Recidivism Risk Assessment Sex Offender Registries Sex Offenders (Nebraska, U.S.)

Author: Oregon. Audits Division Title: Department of Corrections: Treatment of the Highest-risk Offenders Can Avoid Costs Summary: The effects of substance abuse on Oregon’s economy and communities are substantial. According to a report by the consulting firm ECONorthwest, the direct economic costs from substance abuse in Oregon totaled approximately $5.9 billion in 2006. Alcohol and drug enforcement costs alone were about $656 million. As of December 2012, 70% of incarcerated offenders had some level of substance abuse problem. Research indicates that addressing the treatment needs of offenders is critical to reducing overall crime and other societal issues related to substance abuse. Studies also show the importance of treating those offenders with the highest-risk of committing new crimes. Previous evaluations have determined that Department of Corrections (DOC) and county community corrections agencies’ practices are effective and align with best practices. Offenders are systematically assessed for factors known to influence future criminal behavior and these assessments are used in determining offender programming and treatment. Our analysis of offenders released during 2008-2011, found that most were assessed in the community and in prison, and most treatment resources were directed at the highest risk offenders. However, about half of all the highest-risk offenders did not receive treatment. Highest-risk offenders are those who have been assessed by DOC and community corrections agencies as having a medium-to-high risk to reoffend and a moderate-to-high substance abuse challenge. While these offenders are costly to supervise and treat in the community, about $16 a day, the cost is substantially less than the approximate $84 a day cost in prison. We found 4,525 of the offenders assessed as highest-risk who were released from 2008-2011 did not receive treatment. We estimate Oregon taxpayers and victims could have avoided about $21.6 million in costs if substance abuse treatment had been provided to all of the highest-risk offenders. We found variations in funding and treatment efforts among counties. These variations are often due to funding shortfalls and differences in available community corrections services. The expansion of Medicaid eligibility under the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), which becomes effective in January 2014, offers an opportunity for the State and local community corrections agencies to provide substance abuse treatment to untreated highest-risk offenders, despite current funding limitations. Once the expansion becomes effective, additional released offenders may qualify for coverage. Under the ACA, the federal government will cover almost the entire cost of the expansion population, starting at 100 % funding from 2014-2016 and gradually decreasing to a minimum of 90 % in 2020. This expansion of health care coverage has the potential to relieve financially-stressed counties of nearly all costs of providing substance abuse treatment to offenders in the community and to make treatment seamless following their release. We recommend that DOC management work with county community corrections agencies and the Legislature to coordinate funding and track resources to provide substance abuse treatment for the highest-risk offenders wherever possible. We also recommend that DOC management explore utilizing expanded Medicaid funding for substance abuse treatment for released offenders and consider integrating Medicaid eligibility review into release planning. Details: Salem, OR: Audits Division, 2013. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Report Number 2013-20: Accessed August 19, 2013 at: http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/pages/state_audits/full/2013/2013-20.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/pages/state_audits/full/2013/2013-20.pdf Shelf Number: 129644 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Costs of Crime Costs of Criminal Justice Drug Abuse and Crime Drug Abuse Treatment Risk Assessment Substance Abuse (Oregon, U.S.)

Author: McAleenan, Dawn Title: Is There a Difference in the Perception of Risk: Between IPP prisoners and members of the parole board' Summary: Background -- The IPP sentence is the fastest growing sentence in the UK. This growth in the population is due to large numbers of offenders being sentenced to IPP sentences and then becoming stagnant in the prison population, as they are unable to reduce their risk sufficiently and progress through the penal system. Despite this, few studies have explored risk in relation female IPPs and how this relates to public protection. Aim -- The aim of the research is to explore perception of risk as it applies to female prisoners sentenced to imprisonment for public protection (IPP). Method -- This research was conducted using semi-­structured interview with ten female prisoners serving a sentence to imprisonment for Public Protection, two Legal Advisors and one Senior Member of the Parole Board. Conclusion -- The research found that there was a clear difference in the perception of risk from the female IPP prisoners and the Parole Board. These differences potentially have a profound effect upon the identification of risk factors and the way in which they are reduced. Details: London: The Griffins Society, 2012. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Paper 2012/01: Accessed August 22, at: http://www.thegriffinssociety.org/Research%20Paper%202012-01.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.thegriffinssociety.org/Research%20Paper%202012-01.pdf Shelf Number: 129676 Keywords: Female Inmates Parole Board Prisoners (U.K.) Risk Assessment

Author: Nicholls, Carol McNaughton Title: Sex Offender Management and Dynamic Risk: Pilot Evaluation of the Active Risk Management System (ARMS) Summary: This report presents findings from the Active Risk Management System (ARMS) pilot, undertaken by the National Offender Management Service in 2012. Evaluation1 of an earlier pilot of the Stable and Acute 07 (S & A) dynamic risk assessment suggested that tool was promising, but had several limitations. ARMS aimed to replicate the positive aspects of S & A (such as providing a consistent, informed approach to assessing offenders) and address some of the disadvantages (such as the complex and clinical nature of the S & A assessment process). ARMS is a structured assessment process to assess dynamic risk factors known to be associated with sexual re-offending, and protective factors known to be associated with reduced offending. It is intended to provide Police and Probation with information to plan management of convicted sex offenders in the community. With regard to how ARMS would fit within future plans for a National Probation Service, it is envisaged that it would build on existing risk management tools by providing offender managers with a consistent process to assess and monitor current factors and behaviours that are relevant to sex offender management. The pilot took place in 2012, with 20 officers from three Probation Trusts and two Police Forces using the tool as part of their routine supervision of 37 sexual offenders. Details: London: National Offender Management Service, 2014. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed May 3, 2014 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/308159/sex-offender-management-and-dynamic-risk.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/308159/sex-offender-management-and-dynamic-risk.pdf Shelf Number: 132229 Keywords: Offender Supervision Probation (U.K.) Probationers Risk Assessment Sex Offenders

Author: Flowers, Shawn M. Title: Baltimore City Jail Reentry Strategies Project: Final Report Summary: Choice Research Associates (CRA) was engaged by the Office of Human Services, Office of the Mayor, Baltimore MD to develop strategies to meet the needs of three primary offender populations at the Baltimore City Detention Center (BCDC) and Baltimore City Central Booking and Intake Center (BCBIC): 1) Individuals detained in Central Booking for short periods (e.g., 24 to 48 hours); 2) Detainees housed for longer periods (e.g., up to 1 month); and 3) Populations who remain in the facility for several months (31 days or more). The objective of the Baltimore City Jail Reentry Strategies project was to work collaboratively with the Mayor's Office, representatives from the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS), and to review the extant literature to incorporate evidence based strategies in the proposed reentry model. Multiple sources of data were utilized to inform this project including Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) official criminal history data, arrestee self-report of the Proxy Risk Assessment Tool, Offender Case Management System (OCMS) data providing release time and dates and release status, survey data from the Window Replication Project, and LSI-R assessment data of BCDC inmates and detainees. One of the challenges in jail reentry is to target those most in need of services. The key to overcoming this challenge in formulating this reentry strategy was to gain a better understanding of the population that flows in and out of the BCBIC and BCDC by conducting a pilot of the proxy risk assessment tool. The proxy is a screening tool currently used by a number of jails involved in National Institutes of Corrections/Urban Institute Transitions from Jail to the Community study. The proxy provides a rough proximate of risk level for designation of an arrestee for provision of information, additional assessment, and reentry services. The proxy risk assessment tool consists of 3 questions: 1) what is your current age?; 2) how old were you the first time you were arrested?; and 3) how many prior arrests do you have? (both questions including juvenile arrests). A total score is developed from that information which ranges from 2 to 8, with higher scores indicating an individual is a greater risk for recidivism. Over the week of October 21 to October 28, 2012, 1,028 individuals were arrested and booked in Baltimore City. Of those, 577 completed the proxy, of which 37% scored from 2 to 4 points and were categorized as low risk; 45% scored 5 to 6 points so were medium risk, and 18% scored 7 or 8, and labeled high risk. The State Identification (SID) numbers of the 1,028 individuals arrested that week were then submitted to be matched to CJIS records and 956 (93%) had records in CJIS. The criminal history data were combined with demographic data to provide a descriptive portrait. Arrestees were on average 33.56 years old, 79% were male, 83% were African American and 16% were Caucasian. The most common type of offender is a person offender (56%), followed by drug (34%), sex offender (5%), and property (4%), based on most serious conviction. On average, arrestees had been criminally involved over 10 years, with an average of 9 arrests (ranging from 1 to 74), 3.7 prior convictions and an average conviction rate of 33% overall. Data from CJIS were also used to compare the population by risk level. In general, those in the low and medium risk groups were older (which is expected given that older offenders score lower on the proxy than younger offenders). There were also more women in the low risk group compared to the medium or high risk groups. Further, as it takes time to accrue a criminal career, the low and medium risk populations had longer criminal careers than the high risk group. However, the high risk group as a whole consisted of more serious offenders with a higher average incarceration rate and more felony charges and convictions than the low risk group. The low risk group also had fewer weapons charges than the other groups and was more likely to be convicted of crimes classified as "other" - principally nuisance or quality of life type offenses such as rogue and vagabond, pandering, urination in public, trespassing, and consuming alcohol in public. It is also important to note that among the high risk group are low-level habitual misdemeanor offenders (HMOs). HMOs fall into the high risk group due to their repeated cycling in and out of the jail. The inability of the proxy tool to distinguish between the HMO and other high risk individuals supports the contention that those who are classified as high risk should be triggered to complete a more comprehensive assessment tool because HMOs likely need different and/or additional services to address the causes of their repeated offending than others in the high risk group. The next step was to incorporate CJIS data with release data from the Offender Case Management System (OCMS) to calculate the length of stay in the facility and to further inform the reentry plan based on the flow of individuals out of the facility (e.g., when and what time released; whether released on bond, from court, etc) and further define the population. Not surprisingly, the population and criminal history characteristics of those detained for up to 48 hours were significantly different than those in the facility for longer periods of time on a number of factors. For example, those held more than 31 days in the facility had significantly more serious criminal careers overall. They had longer criminal careers (averaging 12 vs. 10 years); a higher total number of prior arrests (12.06 compared to 8.29 for those released within 48 hours); higher career conviction rates (42% vs. 30%); incarceration rates (72% vs. 49%); and the number of times incarcerated for more than 1 day (5.3 vs. 2.9). In addition, there were significantly fewer women detained in the facility for 3 or more days. Specifically, in the first 48 hours after arrest, the population was 77% male and 23% female; beyond 48 hours, 92% of the population was male and 8% of the population was female. Further, by incorporating both the risk level assignment and release data, the length of stay is consistent with what one would expect -- more low risk individuals are released, and released at an earlier time, than those who are medium and/or high risk. Another concern with providing reentry services in a jail setting is that individuals may be released at any time of the day or night, particularly within the first 48 hours. This is a barrier for service providers who wish to connect with individuals as they are leaving the facility. Using OCMS data, the day and time of release were examined for those leaving the facility in the first 48 hours. Those results indicate that if service providers wish to staff an information booth at the Eager Street lobby, they should have staff present from 6 PM to Midnight on Sunday, Monday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday, when the highest percentage of those released within 48 hours will leave the facility. Over half (54%) of those released on Sunday leave in this time frame 38% leave during these hours on Saturday, as do approximately 33% of those on Monday, Thursday and Friday. Providers might also consider keeping staff available at the jail until 3 AM as the majority of individuals (94%) released after 31 days are released between 9 PM and 3 AM. OCMS data was then explored by length of stay and by risk level to specifically observe release patterns for medium and high risk individuals. These individuals may be of the most interest to service providers, particularly for those who have begun to establish a relationship through in-reach, and wish to engage the individual immediately into services. The data show that the best times to staff the jail are between 9 PM and 3 AM, when 60% of medium and high risk individuals are released. Further, the best days to staff the Eager Street Lobby would be Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Saturday evenings. Self-report data from the Window Replication Study and LSI-R assessments provided specific information on self-defined needs and criminogenic risks of those in BCDC. Data from the Window Replication Study included two populations - 142 individuals surveyed within hours of release from the Eager Street Lobby and Jail Industries Building, and among 200 male detainees housed in the Jail Industries Building in 2009. The 142 individuals in the release sample were on average 35 years old (ranging in age from 16 to 71), 86% were male, 82% were Black, and 16% White. The average length of stay for the release sample (from date of arrest to date of the survey) was 32 days, ranging from 1 to 325 days, with the majority (71%) released either on bond or own recognizance; 27% left time served; and 2% had charges dropped. The release population self-defined needs were then examined by length of stay. Among the 76 individuals pending release after 48 hours in the facility, transportation was ranked as the most useful service (42%). This was followed by employment (33%), job training (30%) and education/GED (24%). Housing was the next useful service (18%), then food (16%), drug treatment (16%), legal services (12%), mental health care (11%), and basic health care (9%). The 200 male detainee respondents were on average 39 years old (ranging in age from 18 to 62), 84% were Black, 11% White and 5% identified as other. The majority of detainees (59%) were single, never married; and 75% were fathers. The average length of stay for the detainee sample (from date of arrest to date of the survey) was 67 days, ranging from 1 to 1,024 days. The Window Replication detainee survey also contained the 3 proxy risk assessment questions, allowing categorization of self-defined needs by risk level. While the suggested reentry strategy is to focus resources on medium and high risk individuals, the data helps to inform which services and/or service providers should be targeted for kiosk and/or resource wall materials provided to all those processed and released in Baltimore City. For example, among the 62 individuals classified as low risk, 38 (61%) wanted housing, 34 (55%) employment and 29 (47%) cited dental care. Community organizations providing these and other services such as transportation, food banks, basic health care, and clothing should be the primary target for obtaining and disseminating resource information. For the medium to high risk individuals, community organizations that provide employment and job training services, housing, dental and basic health care, applying for TANF, food stamps, and health care benefits, food, and transportation should be engaged to conduct in-reach sessions. Details: Greenbelt, MD: Choice Research Associates, 2013. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2014 at: http://www.choiceresearchassoc.com/documents/final_jail_reentry_strategies_report_09_01_2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.choiceresearchassoc.com/documents/final_jail_reentry_strategies_report_09_01_2013.pdf Shelf Number: 132249 Keywords: Jail Inmates Prisoner Reentry Risk Assessment

Author: Montolio, Daniel Title: When Police Patrols Matter. The Effect of Police Proximity on Citizens' Crime Risk Perception Summary: Crime risk perception is known to be an important determinant of individual well-being. It is therefore crucial that we understand the factors affecting this perception so that governments can identify the (public) policies that might reduce it. Among such policies, public resources devoted to policing emerge as a key instrument not only for tackling criminal activity but also for impacting on citizens' crime risk perception. In this framework, the aim of this study is to analyze both the individual and neighbourhood determinants of citizens' crime risk perception in the City of Barcelona (Spain) focusing on the effect of police proximity and taking into account the spatial aspects of neighbourhood characteristics. After controlling for the possible problems of the endogeneity of police forces and crime risk perception and the potential sorting of individuals across neighbourhoods, the results indicate that crime risk perception is reduced when non-victims exogenously interact with police forces. Moreover, neighbourhood variables, such as proxies of social capital and the level of incivilities, together with individual characteristics have an impact on citizens' crime risk perception. Details: Barcelona: University of Barcelona, 2014. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: IEB Working Paper N. 2014/1: Accessed May 8, 2014 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2410365 Year: 2014 Country: Spain URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2410365 Shelf Number: 132302 Keywords: Community Policing Neighborhoods and Crime (Spain) Police Patrol Risk Assessment

Author: Bonta, James Title: The Prediction of Risk for Mentally Disordered Offenders: A Quantitative Synthesis Summary: Mentally disordered offenders (MDOs) pose a significant challenge for forensic and correctional staff charged with managing them in a safe and humane manner. As with non-disordered offenders, it is important to recognize that not all MDOs are of equal risk and efforts must be made to differentiate the lower risk MDO from the higher risk MDO. The General Personality and Cognitive Social Learning (GPCSL) perspective of criminal behaviour (Andrews & Bonta, 1994, 2010) has had an important impact on the development of risk/need assessments for general offenders. GPCSL posits eight risk/need domains that are central to the prediction of criminal behaviour: Criminal History, Procriminal Companions, Procriminal Attitudes and Cognitions, Antisocial Personality Pattern, Education/Employment, Family/Marital, Substance Abuse, and Leisure/Recreation. Notably missing in GPCSL are mental health variables which are prominent in clinical models of MDOs. The present meta-analysis evaluated the relative predictive validities of the risk/need domains from GPCSL and variables taken from the clinical perspective. Our general conclusion is that the theoretically informed risk/need factors from GPCSL are more predictive of general and violent recidivism than the clinical factors (the one exception being antisocial personality/psychopathy). Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2013. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: User Report: 2013-01: Accessed May 15, 2014 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/prdctn-rsk-mntlly-dsrdrd/prdctn-rsk-mntlly-dsrdrd-eng.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Canada URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/prdctn-rsk-mntlly-dsrdrd/prdctn-rsk-mntlly-dsrdrd-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 132376 Keywords: Mentally Ill Offenders (Canada) Risk Assessment

Author: Meredith, Tammy Title: Ramsey County Proxy Tool Norming & Validation Results Summary: A Ramsey County (St. Paul, Minnesota) work team consisting of the Sheriff, City District Attorney, local pretrial services and the Center for Effective Public Policy in collaboration with Applied Research Services (ARS) conducted a Proxy assessment norming and validation study with support from the National Institute of Corrections (NIC). The Proxy is three-question screening instrument used to triage community corrections populations for the purpose of moving those at low risk to minimum supervision without further assessment. The Ramsey County team identified a random sample of 200 misdemeanor cases processed through the city court in 2008 and determined who was subsequently re-arrested in a three-year follow up period. A data collection form was completed on each case by the City District Attorney staff and warrants clerks at the Sheriff's Office (see appendix). That data collection effort relied upon a file review followed by an official criminal history inquiry to answer demographic, offense and criminal history questions, to include the three Proxy assessment questions. The Proxy norming and validation followed the recommended steps of Bogue, Woodward and Joplin (2006). Results indicate that the Proxy as currently scored identifies half of the sample as low risk and does not perform better than chance at predicting re-arrest for those low risk offenders. The normed reclassification allows for more efficient distribution of resources and improved prediction of re-arrest. Details: Atlanta, GA: Applied Research Services, Inc., 2014. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 9, 2014 at https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/028095.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/028095.pdf Shelf Number: 132424 Keywords: Community Corrections Recidivism Risk Assessment Risk Assessment Instruments

Author: Whittington, R. Title: A Systematic Review of Risk Assessment Strategies for Populations at High Risk of Engaging in Violent Behaviour: Update 2002-8 Summary: This review systematically examines the research literature published in the period 2002-8 on structured violence risk assessment instruments designed for use in mental health services or the criminal justice system. Violence is a major social problem and improved assessment of those who present an above-average risk is an important goal in the overall strategy for addressing the issue. Techniques for formally assessing individual and social risk factors have developed rapidly over the past two decades from a process of unstructured clinical judgement to one of structured assessment based on empirically tested instruments. A vast number of structured risk assessment instruments relating to violence in different populations have been developed over this period and attempts have been made elsewhere to summarise aspects of the literature relating to various instruments. This review adopted much broader inclusion criteria than previously used in order to capture and summarise data on the widest possible range of available instruments. Objectives The objectives of the review were to address two questions: (1) what features (i.e. population, instrument, outcome measure and design aspects) are associated with a risk assessment instrument score being significantly associated with a violent outcome? and (2) which risk assessment instruments have the highest level of predictive validity for a violent outcome? Details: London: National Institute for Health Research, 2013. 146p. Source: Internet Resource: Health Technology Assessment, Vol. 17, Issue 50: Accessed June 14, 2014 at: http://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/87108/FullReport-hta17500.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/87108/FullReport-hta17500.pdf Shelf Number: 132459 Keywords: Crime Prevention Risk Assessment Violence Violent Crime

Author: Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services Title: Review of Lethality Assessment Programs (LAP) Summary: Lethality assessments are risk assessment tools that were developed to provide law enforcement and other first responders with a simple and consistent method to measure the level of danger that a victim of intimate partner domestic violence is in given their current situation. The tool consists of a standard set of questions that are asked of the victim in a specific order; the responses that the victim provides to those questions help indicate the level of danger. It is important to note that these assessments are only one of many tools used in domestic violence (DV) intervention and that a �lower risk� score on the assessment questions does not necessarily mean that the victim is not in serious danger. This report describes what comprises a lethality assessment program (LAP), the goals of the program and how it works. It discusses the experiences of states and localities that have lethality assessment programs in operation, and in particular, what it takes to prepare for implementation of such a program. The report also lists some of the ways that implementation of a lethality assessment program would benefit Virginia as well as some of the costs that such an effort would incur. Finally, it discusses the recommended first steps to implementing a lethality assessment program within existing or with minimal resources. Details: Richmond, VA: Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, 2013. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 16, 2014 at: http://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/research/documents/Lethality_Assess_Report_FINAL.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/research/documents/Lethality_Assess_Report_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 132470 Keywords: Domestic Violence Police Response Police Use of Force Risk Assessment

Author: Davis, Paul K. Title: Using Behavioral Indicators to Help Detect Potential Violent Acts : A Review of the Science Summary: Government organizations have put substantial effort into detecting and thwarting terrorist and insurgent attacks by observing suspicious behaviors of individuals at transportation checkpoints and elsewhere. Related technologies and methodologies abound, but their volume and diversity has sometimes been overwhelming. Also, effectiveness claims sometimes lack a clear basis in science and technology. The RAND Corporation was asked to review the literature to characterize the base in behavioral sciences relevant to threat detection, in part to help set priorities for special attention and investment. Our study focused on the science base for using new or nontraditional technologies and methods to observe behaviors and how the data gathered from doing so might-especially when used with other information-help detect potential violent attacks, such as by suicide bombers or, as a very different example, insurgents laying improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Behavioral indicators may help identify individuals meriting additional observation in an operational context. For that context, security personnel at a checkpoint are assessing whether an individual poses some risk in the limited sense of meriting more extensive and perhaps aggressive screening, follow-up monitoring, or intercept. They obtain information directly, query databases and future versions of information-fusion centers ("pull"), and are automatically provided alerts and other data ("push"). They report information that can be used subsequently. In some cases, behaviors of a number of individuals over time might suggest a potential ongoing attack, even if the individuals are only pawns performing such narrow tasks as obtaining information. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2013. 306p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 17, 2014 at: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR200/RR215/RAND_RR215.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR200/RR215/RAND_RR215.pdf Shelf Number: 132701 Keywords: Behavioral Analysis Crime Prevention Risk Assessment Suicide Bombing Terrorism Prevention Terrorists Violence

Author: New Jersey. Joint Committee on Criminal Justice Title: Report of the Joint Committee on Criminal Justice Summary: The Supreme Court today released the report of the Joint Committee on Criminal Justice. The report calls for significant changes in the way bail is administered and for the enactment of a speedy trial law. The committee, established in June 2013 by Chief Justice Stuart Rabner, includes judges, prosecutors, public defenders, private counsel, court administrators, and staff from the Legislature and the governor's office. The committee was chaired by the chief justice and developed 27 recommendations to improve New Jersey's criminal justice system. The committee confronted some very difficult problems relating to the current bail system and delays in bringing criminal cases to trial,- said Chief Justice Rabner. It is telling that nearly all of the committee's recommendations - which include far-reaching proposals-have the unanimous support of judges, prosecutors, and defense counsel. The report's Executive Summary (pages 1 to 7) highlights the key issues and reasoning behind the committee's recommendations. A complete Table of Recommendations follows the summary (pages 8 to 10). Supervised pretrial release - New Jersey's current system of pretrial release is largely dependent upon a defendant's financial resources. Defendants who are unable to post bail are incarcerated before trial, which can have significant consequences. Poor and minority defendants are more likely to be affected. - The New Jersey Constitution guarantees all defendants the right to bail. Judges have no authority to detain even the most violent and dangerous defendants if they can afford to post the amount of bail set. - The current resource-based system presents problems at both ends of the system: some people are held on less serious crimes, with little risk of flight, only because they cannot pay relatively minor amounts of bail; others who pose a significant threat to the community and a substantial risk of flight must be released if they can afford to post bail. - The committee recommends a statutory change from the present "resource-based" system to a "risk-based" system. Under a risk-based approach, judges rely on objective factors to assess the level of risk an individual defendant poses and then impose appropriate conditions of pretrial release. - Pretrial service officers are needed to monitor compliance with nonmonetary conditions of release and supervise defendants who are released pretrial. Preventive Detention - For certain defendants, no combination of release conditions can reasonably ensure either the safety of the community or their appearance in court. A system of preventive detention would permit judges to consider those questions and decide whether to detain or release a defendant pretrial. - The recommendations for a risk-based system of bail and pretrial detention, Recommendations 1 through 9, are interdependent and should not be considered individually. The recommendations call for both constitutional and statutory amendments. Speedy Trial - The New Jersey and the U.S. Constitutions provide the right to a speedy trial. Under New Jersey law, there are no specific timeframes to determine when that right has been violated. - Defendants sometimes wait years between arrest and trial. Particularly for defendants who are incarcerated pretrial, those delays can cause serious, practical problems and affect how their cases proceed. - Incarcerated defendants are more likely to receive less attractive plea offers, to plead guilty if they have already served a significant amount of time in jail, and to receive longer sentences. - The committee recommends that the Legislature adopt a speedy trial act that sets forth specific timeframes in which defendants must be indicted and brought to trial. Recommendations 10 through 15 provide detailed proposals for incarcerated defendants and defendants who are released. Details: Trenton, NJ: Joint Committee on Criminal Justice, 2014. 120p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 11, 2014 at: http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/pressrel/2014/FinalReport_3_20_2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/pressrel/2014/FinalReport_3_20_2014.pdf Shelf Number: 132975 Keywords: Bail Reform Criminal Justice Reform Criminal Justice System Pretrial Release (New Jersey) Risk Assessment Speedy Trial

Author: Drake, Elizabeth K. Title: Predicting Criminal Recidivism: A Systematic Review of Offender Risk Assessments in Washington State Summary: Under Washington State's sentencing laws, an adult convicted of a felony in superior court receives a sentence as prescribed within the ranges of the state's sentencing guidelines. Depending on the seriousness of the crime and a person's criminal history, some sentences may result in confinement in prison, community supervision, or both. The Department of Corrections (DOC) has jurisdiction over offenders sentenced to more than one year of confinement as well as those who receive a sentence of supervision in the community. In 1999, the Legislature enacted the Offender Accountability Act (OAA) that set state policy regarding the intensity of community supervision. The law requires DOC to classify offenders according to their future risk for re-offense and the harm they have caused society in the past. DOC must deploy more staff and rehabilitative resources to higher-risk offenders. Since the passage of the OAA, DOC has implemented two different risk assessments to assist with the classification of offenders. The 2009 Legislature required DOC to use a risk assessment "recommended to the department by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy as having the highest degree of predictive accuracy for assessing an offender's risk of re-offense." We focus our systematic review on assessments that have been tested on offender populations in Washington State. The Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) was approached in 2012 by DOC to determine if a new risk assessment under consideration by DOC has the highest degree of predictive accuracy of future recidivism. To fulfill this legislative requirement, WSIPP systematically reviewed the literature on risk assessments that have been statistically "validated." That is, we examined tools developed and tested on offenders in Washington to determine the degree of accuracy of predicting recidivism. Details: Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2014. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 11, 2014 at: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1554/Wsipp_Predicting-Criminal-Recidivism-A-Systematic-Review-of-Offender-Risk-Assessments-in-Washington-State_Final-Report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1554/Wsipp_Predicting-Criminal-Recidivism-A-Systematic-Review-of-Offender-Risk-Assessments-in-Washington-State_Final-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 132995 Keywords: Prediction Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Early, Kristin Parsons Title: Validity and Reliability of the Florida PACT Risk and Needs Assessment Instrument: A Three-Phase Evaluation Summary: The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (Department) began efforts in 2005 to develop a comprehensive, evidence-based system of assessing the risks and needs of youth referred to the juvenile justice system. A system change of this magnitude was not easily accomplished and required strong collaboration within the Department, as well as with juvenile justice stakeholders and community partners. The Department followed a long-range plan for developing and implementing its new risk and needs assessment instrument referred to as the Positive Achievement Change Tool (PACT). This process included pilot testing of the assessment and a Pre-Validation Study to norm the instrument to Florida's delinquency population and examine its initial validity in predicting offender risk to re-offend. The current evaluation examined the validity and reliability of the PACT in three phases: Phase I assessed the validity of the PACT risk and needs assessment in accurately predicting recidivism; Phase II involved confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses of all PACT assessment data to assess the utility and parsimony of PACT scoring; and Phase III examined consistency in PACT scoring through assessment of inter-rater reliability. The Justice Research Center (JRC) performed the analyses reported here under contract (Contract P2085) with the Department following a competitive procurement process. Details: Tallahassee: Justice Research Center, 2012. 125p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 13, 2014 at: http://www.djj.state.fl.us/docs/probation-policy-memos/jrc-comprehensive-pact-validity-and-reliability-study-report-2012.pdf?Status=Master&sfvrsn=2 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.djj.state.fl.us/docs/probation-policy-memos/jrc-comprehensive-pact-validity-and-reliability-study-report-2012.pdf?Status=Master&sfvrsn=2 Shelf Number: 133042 Keywords: Evidence-Based Practices Juvenile Offenders (Florida) Prediction Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Cobb, Kimberly Title: Going Beyond Compliance Monitoring of Drug/Alcohol-Involved Tribal Probationers Summary: It is no secret that alcohol and substance abuse are common problems in Indian Country. While official data on crime in Indian Country is hard to come by, anecdotal data alludes to the fact that many tribal communities face overwhelming numbers of crimes either directly related to or associated with drugs/alcohol. Alcohol abuse has been associated with numerous negative consequences including crime, domestic violence, sexual assault and rape, suicide, morbidity, and ultimately mortality (Aguirre & Watts, 2010; Kovas, McFarland, Landen, Lopez, & May, 2008). However, alcohol is far from the only substance abused on tribal land. Marijuana, methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, and various pharmaceutical drugs are also regularly abused (NDIC, 2008). Although there has been great emphasis lately on the building or renovation of detention facilities in Indian Country, many tribal communities hold fast to the belief that they do not want to imprison their members. In fact, alternatives to incarceration, which includes probation and community supervision programs, are professed as a more "culturally compatible approach to punishment for crime" in Indian Country (Luna-Firebaugh, 2003, p. 63). Therefore, unless something tragic has occurred, those charged with drug/alcohol-related offenses will more than likely be placed on community supervision. That is where you come in as the tribal probation officer. Working with probationers is more than just identifying and controlling their risk to re-offend. As a tribal probation officer, you are "charged with ensuring public safety; holding offenders accountable for their actions; and, facilitating behavioral change in offenders" (The Century Council, 2010, pg. 8). In order to fulfill this charge, you often have to take on many roles associated with law enforcement, social work, counselor and court servant - which, at times, can have conflicting goals (Cobb, Mowatt, Matz, & Mullins, 2011). To be effective, you have to blend your duties of being an officer of the court (focused on compliance) and a probationer motivator (focused on facilitating behavior change) - both of which are necessary to fulfill the mandate of protecting public safety. In order to be effective and protect public safety over the long-term, as a tribal probation officer, you must move beyond compliance monitoring of the probation conditions ordered by the court to working with individuals on your caseload to identifying the root cause of the issues behind their drug/alcohol-related problems and intervene as necessary to put them on a better path. Details: Lexington, KY: American Probation & Parole Association, 2014. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 25, 2014 at: http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/pubs/GBAITP.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/pubs/GBCMDAITP.pdf Shelf Number: 133133 Keywords: Alcohol Abuse Alternatives To Incarceration Community Based Corrections Community Supervision Drug Abuse and Addiction Drug Offenders Indians of North America Probation Officers (U.S.) Probationers Risk Assessment Substance Abuse

Author: Weatherburn, Don Title: Re-offending on Parole Summary: Aim: To measure the rate of re-offending on parole and identify the predictors of both general and violent offending on parole. To describe the types of offences committed on parole. Method: The analysis was based on 9,604 offenders released on parole in 2010 or 2011. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify demographic and criminal history characteristics independently associated with re-offending or re-imprisonment while on parole. Results: Just under 61 per cent (60.8%) of parolees neither re-offended nor were re-imprisoned during their parole period. About twenty-eight per cent (28.4%) of the sample re-offended on parole. A further 10.8 per cent were re-imprisoned on parole without having first re-offended. Approximately 7 per cent (7.1%) of the sample committed a violent offence on parole. Parolees were more likely to offend on parole if they were male; Indigenous; young; had spent less than 180 days in prison (during the current episode); had a higher Level of Service Inventory - Revised score had a non drug offence as their principal offence; had six or more prior court appearances, had been imprisoned before; or had a prior conviction for drug use and/or possession. The correlates of violent re-offending on parole were very similar but also included prior conviction for a serious violent offence. Those who re-offended on parole committed a broad spectrum of offences, including: break and enter, assault, possess illicit drugs, receive/handle proceeds of crime, drive while licence disqualified, breach apprehended violence order and property damage. Conclusion: Offending on parole is less common than previous studies have suggested. Future research should focus on three issues: whether it is possible to improve the accuracy of the parole risk assessment process; whether post release supervision/support reduces the risk of re-offending following release from prison; and whether offenders released to parole are less likely to re-offend if released to parole by the State Parole Authority than if released on parole by a court. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2014. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 178: Accessed September 17, 2014 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l2/cjb178.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l2/cjb178.pdf Shelf Number: 133330 Keywords: Parole Revocation Parolees (Australia) Recidivism Reoffending Risk Assessment

Author: Schnacke, Timothy R. Title: Money as a Criminal Justice Stakeholder: The Judge's Decision to Release or Detain a Defendant Pretrial Summary: Our best understanding of how to make meaningful improvements to criminal justice systems points to justice stakeholders cultivating a shared vision, using a collaborative policy process, and enhancing individual decision making with evidence-based practices. Unfortunately, however, using secured money to determine release at bail threatens to erode each of these ingredients. Money cares not for systemwide improvement, and those who buy their stakeholder status from money have little interest in coming together to work on evidence-based solutions to systemwide issues. Like virtually no other area of the law, when judges set secured financial conditions at bail, they are essentially abdicating their decision-making authority to the money itself, which in many ways then becomes a criminal justice stakeholder, with influence and control over such pressing issues as jail populations, court dockets, county budgets, and community safety. Money takes this decision-making authority and sells it to whoever will pay for the transfer, ultimately resulting in "decisions" that run counter to justice system goals as well as the intentions of bail-setting judges. The solution to this dilemma - a dilemma created and blossoming in only the last century in America - is for judges to fully understand the essence of their decision-making duty at bail, and in their adhering to a process in which they reclaim their roles as decision makers fully responsible for the pretrial release or detention of any particular defendant. Judges can achieve this understanding through a thorough knowledge of history, which illustrates that bail has always been a process in which bail-setting officials were expected to make "bail/no bail," or in-or-out decisions, immediately effectuated so that bailable defendants were released and unbailable defendants were detained. The history of bail shows that when bailable defendants (or those whom we feel should be bailable defendants) are detained or unbailable defendants (or those whom we feel should be unbailable defendants) are released, some correction is necessary to right the balance. Moreover, the history shows that America's switch from a personal surety system using primarily unsecured bonds to a commercial surety system using primarily secured bonds (along with other factors) has led to abuses to both the "bail" and "no bail" sides of our current dichotomies, thus leading to three generations of bail reform in America in the last 100 years. Judges can also achieve this understanding through a thorough knowledge of the pretrial legal foundations. These foundations follow the history in equating "bail" with release, and "no bail" with detention, suggesting, if not demanding an in-or-out decision by judicial officials who are tasked with embracing the risk associated with release and then mitigating that risk only to reasonable levels. Indeed, the history of bail, the legal foundations underlying bail, the pretrial research, the national standards on pretrial release, and the model federal and District of Columbia statutes are all premised on a "release/detain" decision-making process that is unobstructed by secured money at bail. Understanding the nuances of each of these bail fundamentals can help judges also to avoid that obstruction. Nevertheless, it is knowledge of the current pretrial research that perhaps provides judges with the necessary tools to avoid the obstruction of money and to make effective pretrial decisions. First, current pretrial research illustrates that not making an immediately effectuated release decision for low and moderate risk defendants can have both short- and long-term harmful effects for both defendants and society. It is important for judges to make effective bail decisions, but it is especially important that those decisions not frustrate the very purposes underlying the bail process, such as to avoid threats to public safety. Therefore, judges should be guided by recent research demonstrating that a decision to release that is immediately effectuated (and not delayed through the use of secured financial conditions) can increase release rates while not increasing the risk of failure to appear or the danger to the community to intolerable levels. Second, the use of pretrial risk assessment instruments can help judges determine which defendants should be kept in or let out of jail. Those instruments, coupled with research illustrating that using unsecured rather than secured bonds can facilitate the release of bailable defendants without increasing either the risk of failure to appear or the danger to the public, can be crucial in giving judges who still insist on using money at bail the comfort of knowing that their in-or-out decisions will cause the least possible harm. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2014. 77p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 10, 2014 at: http://www.clebp.org/images/2014-11-05_final_nic_money_as_a_stakeholder_september_8,_2014_ii.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.clebp.org/images/2014-11-05_final_nic_money_as_a_stakeholder_september_8,_2014_ii.pdf Shelf Number: 134015 Keywords: Bail (U.S.) Decision Making Judges Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Schnacke, Timothy R. Title: Fundamentals of Bail: A Resource Guide for Pretrial Practitioners and a Framework for American Pretrial Reform Summary: Pretrial justice in America requires a common understanding and agreement on all of the component parts of bail. Those parts include the need for pretrial justice, the history of bail, the fundamental legal principles underlying bail, the pretrial research, the national standards on pretrial release and detention, and how we define our basic terms and phrases. Why Do We Need Pretrial Improvements? If we can agree on why we need pretrial improvements in America, we are halfway toward implementing those improvements. As recently as 2007, one of the most frequently heard objections to bail reform was the ubiquitous utterance, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.' That has changed. While various documents over the last 90 years have consistently pointed toward the need to improve the administration of bail, literature from this current generation of pretrial reform gives us powerful new information from which we can articulate exactly why we need to make changes, which, in turn, frames our vision of pretrial justice designed to fix what is most certainly broken. Knowing that our understanding of pretrial risk is flawed, we can begin to educate judges and others on how to embrace risk first and mitigate risk second so that our foundational American precept of equal justice remains strong. Knowing that the traditional money-based bail system leads both to unnecessary pretrial detention of lower risk persons and the unwise release of many higher risk persons, we can begin to craft processes that are designed to correct this illogical imbalance. Knowing and agreeing on each issue of pretrial justice, from infusing risk into police officer stops and first advisements to the need for risk-based bail statutes and constitutional right-to-bail language, allows us as a field to look at each state (or even at all states) with a discerning eye to begin crafting solutions to seemingly insoluble problems. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2014. 128p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 10, 2014 at: http://www.clebp.org/images/2014-11-05_final_bail_fundamentals_september_8,_2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.clebp.org/images/2014-11-05_final_bail_fundamentals_september_8,_2014.pdf Shelf Number: 134016 Keywords: Bail (U.S.) Criminal Justice Reform Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Hamilton, Melissa Title: Back to the Future: The Influence of Criminal History on Risk Assessment Summary: Evidence-based practices providing an empirical basis for predicting recidivism risk have become a primary focus across criminal justice decision points. Criminal history measures are the most common and heavily weighted factors in risk assessment tools, yet is such substantial reliance fully justified? The empirical and normative values placed on criminal history enjoy such commendation by criminal justice officials, practitioners, and the public that these practices are rarely questioned. This paper fills the gap by introducing and exploring various issues from legal, scientific, and pragmatic perspectives. As a general rule, a common assumption is that past behavior dictates an individual's likely future conduct. This axiom is often applied to criminal behavior, more specifically, in that prior offending is considered a primary driver to predict future recidivism. Criminal justice officials have a long history of formally and informally incorporating risk judgments into a variety of criminal justice decisions, ranging from bail, sentencing, parole, supervisory conditions, and programming. A more contemporary addendum represents empirically informed risk assessment practices that integrate actuarial tools and/or structured professional judgments. Various criminal history measures pervade these newer evidence-based practices as well. Instead of presuming the value and significance of prior crimes in judging future recidivism risk, this Article raises and critically analyzes certain unexpected consequences resulting from the significant reliance upon criminal history in risk assessment judgments. Among the more novel issues addressed include: (1) creating a ratchet effect whereby the same criminal history event can be counted numerous times; (2) resulting in informal, three-strikes types of penalties; (3) counting nonadjudicated criminal behaviors and acquitted conduct; (4) proportionality of punishment; (5) disciplining hypothetical future crime; (6) punishing status; and (7) inadequately accounting for the age-crime curve. In the end, criminal history has a role to play in future risk judgments, but these issues represent unanticipated outcomes that deserve attention. Details: Unpublished Paper, 2015. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Houston Law Center No. 2015-A-1 : Accessed January 28, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2555878 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2555878 Shelf Number: 134484 Keywords: Criminal History Records Evidence-Based Practices (U.S.) Juvenile Records Preventive Detention Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Maryland. Commission to Reform Maryland's Pretrial System Title: Commission to Reform Maryland's Pretrial System: Final Report Summary: The Governor's Commission to Reform Maryland's Pretrial System ("the Commission") was established by Executive Order on May 27, 2014 to gather experts and interested parties, with the goal of developing recommendations to ensure that Maryland operates the best possible statewide pretrial system. The Commission was preceded by the Task Force to Study the Laws and Policies Relating to Representation of Indigent Criminal Defendants by the Public Defender. The work of the Commission was also informed by legislative deliberations during the 2014 Session of the Maryland General Assembly. On July 1, 2014, the State of Maryland began to implement a Court of Appeals decision that requires state-furnished counsel for indigent defendants at initial appearances before a District Court Commissioner. The Commission studied characteristics of the current pretrial system, including outcomes associated with the provision of counsel at the initial appearance phase. The Commission met five times and also formed three subcommittees related to Managing Public Safety through Risk-Based Decision Making, Pretrial System Improvement, and Individual Rights and Collateral Consequences. These three subcommittees held five additional meetings. The Commission ultimately voted to approve the following 14 recommendations: - Recommendation One: Create a uniform pretrial services agency which mandates a process that will ensure continuity and consistency across all 24 jurisdictions. Pretrial services will be responsible for gathering criminal records, administering a statewide risk assessment tool and other relevant information that will be beneficial in determining the initial appearance and to avoid the redundancy of various agencies pulling the same information. Pretrial services will also be responsible for supervision of those released under pretrial supervision and provide referrals for treatment, counseling and other services, particularly for those individuals with limited means, to address the underlying needs that may have caused the criminal behavior. - Recommendation Two: Provide adequate funding and/or personnel to implement a validated risk assessment tool modeled after best practices to pilot in jurisdictions to be utilized by the Court Commissioners after the data has been analyzed. - Recommendation Three: The Judiciary should evaluate the current pretrial system to determine whether it has the capacity to implement best practices in pretrial justice. This evaluation should consider the re-purposing of District Court Commissioners from their current duties to conducting risk assessments on defendants and supervising defendants pretrial. - Recommendation Four: The use of secured, financial conditions of pretrial release (cash, property, or surety bond) that require a low-risk defendant to pay some amount of money in order to obtain release, while permitting high-risk defendants with the resources to pay their bonds to leave jail unsupervised, be completely eliminated. - Recommendation Five: Cash bail, and its associated impact, should be monitored by the Maryland Insurance Administration to determine if changes need to be developed and implemented including a comparison between secured and unsecured bond. - Recommendation Six: The Commission recommends that under no circumstances should we institutionalize the Judicial Branch of Government as the line manager of what amounts to the Lawyer-Referral Service Program for Attorneys to represent indigent criminally accused in their First Appearance before a Commissioner. The Office of the Public Defender was created by statute to represent indigent criminally accused. It is an Executive Branch Agency of State Government and should have that responsibility from the initial appearance through appeals. - Recommendation Seven: The Commission recommends earlier and enhanced prosecutorial screening, particularly of citizens' complaints, by way of Maryland rule, prior to the issuance of a summons or warrant, except for domestically related crimes. - Recommendation Eight: Maximize and expand the use of the criminal citation process by law enforcement. - Recommendation Nine: Create a system so that only one entity in the pretrial process has to pull and summarize the arrestee's record, consistent with and in accordance with state and federal law and the independent needs of the system in order to operate efficiently. - Recommendation Ten: Provide state funding to create a shared jail management system, possibly through the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services' Offender Case Management System (OCMS), to allow for data collection on the pretrial population statewide. - Recommendation Eleven: It is recommended that funding be provided for court and public safety-designated facilities to be outfitted with audio/visual equipment to optimize court hearing efficiencies. - Recommendation Twelve: That whatever pretrial system is contemplated, the critical principle of prompt presentment no later than 24 hours of arrest remain. - Recommendation Thirteen: Data are needed in order to effectively determine impact of process and procedures on various demographics (race, gender, non-English speaking, and indigence defined as eligibility for representation by the Office of the Public Defender or appointed attorney). Additionally, timeliness factors such as rates of waiver to arrests and time between arrest and presentment, by jurisdiction, should be compared and measured. - Recommendation Fourteen: A Commission to Study the Maryland Criminal Justice System shall be created. The purpose of the Commission shall be to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of state and local criminal justice systems by providing a centralized and impartial forum for statewide policy development and planning with a focus on evidence-based decision making. The primary duty of the Commission shall be to develop and maintain a state criminal justice policy and comprehensive, long-range plan for a coordinated and cost-effective state criminal justice system that encompasses public safety, defendant and offender accountability, crime reduction and prevention, and defendant and offender treatment and rehabilitation. Details: Baltimore: The Commission, 2014. 77p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 16, 2015 at: http://www.goccp.maryland.gov/pretrial/documents/2014-pretrial-commission-final-report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.goccp.maryland.gov/pretrial/documents/2014-pretrial-commission-final-report.pdf Shelf Number: 134944 Keywords: Bail Criminal Justice Policy Pretrial Detention (Maryland) Pretrial Release Pretrial Services Risk Assessment

Author: Illinois. Supreme Court. Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts Title: Circuit Court of Cook County Pretrial Operational Review Summary: For decades, the highly publicized issue of jail over-crowding has plagued Cook County. Through the years, experts have examined Cook County's pretrial and bond court operations, studied crime statistical data, and recorded remedies, some of which resulted in operational, environmental, programmatic, and policy changes with varying effects. From the point of arrest through the pretrial and bond court process, there is a critical dilemma that persists: whether to allow the defendant to remain in the community and continue to work and attend school, or to detain the defendant and alleviate any risk of failing to appear or committing another crime while awaiting trial. Ultimately, judicial discretion determines such decisions based upon the facts presented to the judge during bond court. The Illinois Pretrial Services Act provides the legal framework for this process. In practice, it has become largely aspirational, rather than a model for everyday procedure. Under the Act, pretrial services would provide a pivotal function in collecting and verifying information to be used by the judge to determine bond and release conditions, and in providing post-release supervision as a means to respond to non-compliance with court conditions while awaiting trial. In 2013, Cook County pretrial services staff conducted 24,977 interviews/assessments and conducted 7,164 intakes on defendants ordered to pretrial supervision as reported through monthly statistical reports submitted to the Administrative Office. Unfortunately, however, the reliance upon the work of pretrial services is generally dismissed or minimized because of a lack of confidence in the credibility of the risk assessment and community living information. During this operational review, it was evident that much of the information obtained by pretrial services officers was not verified, so the response from stakeholders and judges was understandable. Though a series of technological, managerial, interpersonal, and operational factors were substantiated during the review process and described in this document, there is no single group, program or "fix" that accounts for the fracture of the process. Notwithstanding, while there was non-reliance upon the risk assessment and other information and a limited number of cases placed under pretrial supervision, this was juxtaposed by judges overwhelmingly voicing support for pretrial services personnel and the need for the program. Further, collection of statistical reports and other data has been cumbersome and inconsistent due to antiquated technology, unfamiliarity with the scope of data collected by respective stakeholder groups, absence of a coordinated data sharing process, and to a degree, data request protocols. Therefore, the data presented in this report is limited to that reported to the Administrative Office through the Adult Probation Department monthly statistical pretrial reports, data reported by the Cook County Circuit Court Clerk as contained in the Annual Statistical Reports to the Supreme Court, and publications prepared by Loyola University professor/researcher on the jail population for the Cook County Sheriff's Reentry Council Research Bulletin. Data requests submitted to the Circuit Clerk's office, Pretrial Services and the Sheriff's department have been submitted by the Administrative Office and are pending. While the impetus to conduct this review was a request by Chief Judge Evans for the funding of additional pretrial positions, such consideration must also be accompanied by systemic change. The two must not be separate. Unless there is a commitment amongst stakeholders to delve into these issues, reach consensus of resolutions and act to implement collaborative organizational and operational policies and practices in the pretrial and the bond court process, strictly adding positions will be minimally effective. While challenges exist, this is also a time of great opportunity. Many positive partnerships and activities are underway in Cook County that foster institutionalizing change and favorable outcomes. These include the Cook County Integrated Criminal Justice Information Systems Committee (CCICJIS) and the plan to move from a paper-based to electronic systems of data exchange and sharing among stakeholders; the joint meetings of Cook County elected officials that are fleshing out issues and solutions to the process; the planned evaluation of the bond court process that will provide baseline performance data in Central Bond Court (CBC); and the Administrative Office's initiative, in conjunction with a notable national research team, to validate a statewide pretrial risk assessment tool. Details: Chicago, IL: Illinois Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts, 2014. 138p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 18, 2015 at: https://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Reports/Pretrial/Pretrial_Operational_Review_Report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Reports/Pretrial/Pretrial_Operational_Review_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 134952 Keywords: Bail Bonds Courts (U.S.) Judicial Discretion Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release Pretrial Services (Illinois) Risk Assessment

Author: Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Title: Report on Cybersecurity Practices Summary: Like many organizations in the financial services and other sectors, broker-dealers (firms) are the target of cyberattacks. The frequency and sophistication of these attacks is increasing and individual broker-dealers, and the industry as a whole, must make responding to these threats a high priority. This report is intended to assist firms in that effort. Based on FINRA's 2014 targeted examination of firms and other related initiatives, the report presents FINRA's latest work in this critical area. Given the rapidly evolving nature and pervasiveness of cyberattacks, it is unlikely to be our last. A variety of factors are driving firms' exposure to cybersecurity threats. The interplay between advances in technology, changes in firms' business models, and changes in how firms and their customers use technology create vulnerabilities in firms' information technology systems. For example, firms' Web-based activities can create opportunities for attackers to disrupt or gain access to firm and customer information. Similarly, employees and customers are using mobile devices to access information at broker-dealers that create a variety of new avenues for attack. The landscape of threat actors includes cybercriminals whose objective may be to steal money or information for commercial gain, nation states that may acquire information to advance national objectives, and hacktivists whose objectives may be to disrupt and embarrass an entity. Attackers, and the tools available to them, are increasingly sophisticated. Insiders, too, can pose significant threats. This report presents an approach to cybersecurity grounded in risk management to address these threats. It identifies principles and effective practices for firms to consider, while recognizing that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to cybersecurity. Key points in the report include: 00 A sound governance framework with strong leadership is essential. Numerous firms made the point that board- and senior-level engagement on cybersecurity issues is critical to the success of firms' cybersecurity programs. 00 Risk assessments serve as foundational tools for firms to understand the cybersecurity risks they face acrosacross the range of the firm's activities and assets-no matter the firm's size or business model. 00 Technical controls, a central component in a firm's cybersecurity program, are highly contingent on firms' individual situations. Because the number of potential control measures is large and situation dependent, FINRA discusses only a few representative controls here. Nonetheless, at a more general level, a defense-in-depth strategy can provide an effective approach to conceptualize control implementation. 00 Firms should develop, implement and test incident response plans. Key elements of such plans include containment and mitigation, eradication and recovery, investigation, notification and making customers whole. 00 Broker-dealers typically use vendors for services that provide the vendor with access to sensitive firm or client information or access to firm systems. Firms should manage cybersecurity risk exposures that arise from these relationships by exercising strong due diligence across the lifecycle of their vendor relationships. 00 A well-trained staff is an important defense against cyberattacks. Even well-intentioned staff can become inadvertent vectors for successful cyberattacks through, for example, the unintentional downloading of malware. Effective training helps reduce the likelihood that such attacks will be successful. 00 Firms should take advantage of intelligence-sharing opportunities to protect themselves from cyber threats. FINRA believes there are significant opportunities for broker-dealers to engage in collaborative self defense through such sharing. Details: Washington, DC: FINRA, 2015. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 18, 2015 at: https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/p602363%20Report%20on%20Cybersecurity%20Practices_0.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/p602363%20Report%20on%20Cybersecurity%20Practices_0.pdf Shelf Number: 134961 Keywords: Computer Security Cybercrime Cybersecurity Financial Crimes Internet Crime Risk Assessment

Author: Kenyon, Will Title: Diagnosing Bribery Risk: Guidance for the conduct of effective bribery risk assessment Summary: Transparency International's guidance provides specific, practical advice based on real-life experience on how to conduct an effective bribery risk assessment. Identifying and evaluating bribery risk is essential to the design and implementation of an effective anti-bribery programme. It's fundamentally a management responsibility, supported by compliance, internal audit and other functions as appropriate. Law enforcement agencies and regulators around the world have made it clear that bribery risk assessment is the foundation of an anti-bribery programme. In the UK, risk assessment is one of the six principles enshrined in the Ministry of Justice Guidance and is also a focus of the thematic reviews carried out by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) (now the Financial Conduct Authority or FCA). Furthermore, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC) in the US have recently published their resource guide The Transparency International guide includes: - 10 good practice principles for bribery risk assessment - A risk assessment template - with an illustrated documented example - Bribery risk assessment process check list Details: London: Transparency International UK, 2013. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 2, 2015 at: http://www.transparency.org.uk/publications/15-publications/678-diagnosing-bribery-risk Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://www.transparency.org.uk/publications/15-publications/678-diagnosing-bribery-risk Shelf Number: 135138 Keywords: Bribes (U.K.) Corruption Financial Crimes Risk assessment

Author: Widgery, Amber Title: Trends in Pretrial Release: State Legislation Summary: Six of every 10 people in local jails have not been convicted of a crime, but instead are held awaiting trial. About three-fourths of pretrial detainees are accused of property, drug or other nonviolent crimes, and many are not considered to be a flight risk or a danger to the public. However, many pretrial defendants remain in jail because they are unable to meet monetary or other conditions of release. At the same time, many higher-risk defendants often are quickly released. State laws provide a framework for judges and other local officials to determine who is eligible for release and under what conditions. In recent years, state legislation has concentrated largely on individualizing the pretrial process by focusing on specific defendants or offense categories. From 2012 to 2014, 261 new laws in 47 states addressed pretrial policy. Notable enactments have covered risk assessments, victim-specific pretrial procedures, victim-specific conditions, pretrial services and diversion programs. These actions of state legislatures contribute to efforts underway nationally to improve pretrial justice. Details: Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislatures, 2015. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 7, 2015 at: http://www.ncsl.org/Portals/1/Documents/cj/pretrialTrends_v05.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncsl.org/Portals/1/Documents/cj/pretrialTrends_v05.pdf Shelf Number: 135172 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release (U.S.) Risk Assessment

Author: Hastings, Allison Title: Screening for Risk of Sexual Victimization and for Abusiveness: Guidelines for Administering Screening Instruments and Using the Information to Inform Housing Decisions Summary: The National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape (Standards) under the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) require corrections agencies, as part of their prevention efforts, to screen individuals for their risk of sexual victimization or sexual abusiveness and to use the information to inform housing, bed, work, education, and program assignments. To help agencies achieve compliance with the Standards, Vera's Center for Sentencing and Corrections, in conjunction with the National PREA Resource Center has developed guidelines to screen for risk of sexual victimization and for abusiveness, including questions to be asked of inmates, residents, and detainees, and the best use of the information from the screening to inform housing decisions. These guidelines are based on reviews of screening tools and consultations with national classification experts, corrections practitioners, technical assistance providers, and researchers. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2013. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 21, 2015 at: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/prea-screening-guidelines.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/prea-screening-guidelines.pdf Shelf Number: 135324 Keywords: Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) Prison Violence Risk Assessment Sex Offenders (U.S.)

Author: Messick, Richard E. Title: Corruption risks in the criminal justice chain and tools for assessment Summary: This U4 issue paper provides policymakers in developing nations, their citizens, and U4's partners in the donor community with an overview of where corruption is most likely to arise in the investigation, prosecution, trial, and incarceration stages of the criminal justice process. Each chapter focuses on a specific stage, providing a summary of the principal decision makers involved, the tasks they perform, the most common types of corruption risk, the tools available to assess the risks, and, where sufficient experience exists, an evaluation of the usefulness of these assessment tools. While some basic risk management approaches are noted, the emphasis is on analysis and assessment of problems. Much of what is known about corruption at the different stages of the criminal justice system comes from developed country experiences. In many cases, however, the drivers of corruption are the same across all countries. In using the available set of tools to assess corruption risks in criminal trials and appeals, the greatest challenge for practitioners is finding the relevant parts of general assessment tools that assess the particular corruption risks. The paper concludes with an appeal for integrated corruption risk assessment tools and accessible reporting. Only a sector-wide lens will allow identification of the linkages and dependencies within the criminal justice chain, providing a basis for targeted reform efforts and a comprehensive anti-corruption strategy. Details: Bergen, Norway: CHR. Michelsen Institute, Anti-corruption Resource Centre, 2014. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 29, 2015 at: http://www.u4.no/publications/corruption-risks-in-the-criminal-justice-chain-and-tools-for-assessment/ Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://www.u4.no/publications/corruption-risks-in-the-criminal-justice-chain-and-tools-for-assessment/ Shelf Number: 135402 Keywords: Corruption Criminal Investigation Risk Assessment

Author: Passas, Nikos Title: Financial intermediaries - Anti-money laundering allies in cash-based societies? Summary: Many informal cash-based economies run parallel financial systems that are very different to the Western banking concept. Such countries are perceived to have a high risk of money laundering. Looking at Afghanistan, Somalia, and India - where anti-money laundering efforts have yielded mixed results - this paper draws lessons from the operations of financial intermediaries. These countries are considered high risk not only for money laundering and terrorism financing, but also for corruption and political and legal concerns. The issues at hand - risk assessments for remittances, strategies of engaging on the ground, resource management, and alternatives to the existing financial networks - are also valid for other cash-based, low-income societies. In fact, informal remittance channels may provide opportunities to strengthen regulatory and governance capacities. Details: Bergen, Norway: Chr. Michelsen Institute. U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, 2015. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: U4 Issue, April 2015, no. 10: Accessed April 29, 2015 at: http://www.u4.no/publications/financial-intermediaries-anti-money-laundering-allies-in-cash-based-societies/ Year: 2015 Country: Afghanistan URL: http://www.u4.no/publications/financial-intermediaries-anti-money-laundering-allies-in-cash-based-societies/ Shelf Number: 135403 Keywords: Corruption Financial Crimes Money Laundering Risk Assessment Terrorist Financing

Author: McKay, Patrick Title: Montana Pre-Adjudicatory Detention Risk Assessment Instrument Summary: The primary research objective in the current investigation is a performance assessment of the Montana Pre-Adjudicatory Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI). The RAI has been used on a pilot basis in Cascade, Hill, Missoula, and Yellowstone Counties since 2009 as part of the pre-dispositional detention decision-making process to determine whether or not juveniles pose a public safety risk if released. The analysis focuses on two dimensions associated with the RAI. The first of these pertains to racial and cultural sensitivity in assessing offender risk. The second pertains to public safety outcomes associated with the behavior of juveniles who are released from detention. Specifically, whether a new offense occurred resulting in a misdemeanor or felony citation during the 45-day period of risk and whether the juvenile failed to appear for an initial court appearance after release from detention. To achieve these objectives, the following three research questions were examined: 1. Is the RAI being administered impartially and in a manner that it assesses juvenile offender �risk� in a culturally and racially sensitive manner? � Are there differences in the patterns of overrides that are used to make detention decisions when comparing White and minority juveniles? 2. Did the juveniles reoffend while on release status during the period of risk? � Was there a new felony or misdemeanor citation within 45 days following release from detention? 3. Did the juveniles fail to appear for the initial court appearance following release from detention? � Did the juvenile fail to appear for the next court appearance or follow-up with the probation officer after their release from detention? Details: Missoula, MT: Criminology Research Group, Social Science Research Laboratory. The University of Montana, Missoula, 2014. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 30, 2015 at: http://mbcc.mt.gov/Data/SAC/RAI/2014RAI_DRAI_Com.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://mbcc.mt.gov/Data/SAC/RAI/2014RAI_DRAI_Com.pdf Shelf Number: 135424 Keywords: Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders (Montana) Risk Assessment

Author: James, Nathan Title: Risk and Needs Assessment in the Criminal Justice System Summary: The number of people incarcerated in the United States has increased significantly over the past three decades from approximately 419,000 inmates in 1983 to approximately 1.5 million inmates in 2013. Concerns about both the economic and social consequences of the country's growing reliance on incarceration have led to calls for reforms to the nation's criminal justice system. There have been legislative proposals to implement a risk and needs assessment system in federal prisons. The system would be used to place inmates in rehabilitative programs. Under the proposed system some inmates would be eligible to earn additional time credits for participating in rehabilitative programs that reduce their risk of recidivism. Such credits would allow inmates to be placed on prerelease custody earlier. The proposed system would exclude inmates convicted of certain offenses from being eligible to earn additional time credits. Risk and needs assessment instruments typically consist of a series of items used to collect data on behaviors and attitudes that research indicates are related to the risk of recidivism. Generally, inmates are classified as being high, moderate, or low risk. Assessment instruments are comprised of static and dynamic risk factors. Static risk factors do not change, while dynamic risk factors can either change on their own or be changed through an intervention. In general, research suggests that the most commonly used assessment instruments can, with a moderate level of accuracy, predict who is at risk for violent recidivism. It also suggests that no single instrument is superior to any other when it comes to predictive validity. The Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model has become the dominant paradigm in risk and needs assessment. The risk principle states that high-risk offenders need to be placed in programs that provide more intensive treatment and services while low-risk offenders should receive minimal or even no intervention. The need principle states that effective treatment should focus on addressing needs that contribute to criminal behavior. The responsivity principle states that rehabilitative programming should be delivered in a style and mode that is consistent with the ability and learning style of the offender. However, the wide-scale adoption of risk and needs assessment in the criminal justice system is not without controversy. Several critiques have been raised against the use of risk and needs assessment, including that it could have discriminatory effects because some risk factors are correlated with race; that it uses group base rates for recidivism to make determinations about an individual's propensity for re-offending; and that risk and needs assessment are two distinct procedures and should be conducted separately. There are several issues policymakers might contemplate should Congress choose to consider legislation to implement a risk and needs assessment system in federal prisons, including the following: - Should risk and needs assessment be used in federal prisons? - Should certain inmates be excluded from earning additional time credits? - Should risk assessment be incorporated into sentencing? - Should there be a decreased focus on punishing offenders? Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2015. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: R44087: Accessed July 8, 2015 at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44087.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44087.pdf Shelf Number: 135962 Keywords: Correctional Programs Inmates Prisoner Rehabilitation Prisoners Risk and Needs Assessment Risk Assessment

Author: Moore, Robin, ed. Title: A compendium of research and analysis on the Offender Assessment System (OASys): 2009-2013 Summary: The compendium presents the OASys studies completed between 2009 and 2013, including a systematic review of the underlying evidence base, a survey of assessors' views and experiences, and analyses of various aspects of reliability and validity. Updated versions of the operational risk of reoffending predictors are presented. The findings support the continuing development of offender assessment. Details: London: National Offender Management Service, 2015. 367p. Source: Internet Resource: Analytical Series: Accessed July 30, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449357/research-analysis-offender-assessment-system.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449357/research-analysis-offender-assessment-system.pdf Shelf Number: 136266 Keywords: Offenders Prediction Recidivism Reoffending Risk Assessment

Author: Moodie, Kristina Title: Working with young people who offend: An examination of the literature regarding violence, substance misuse and harmful sexual behaviour Summary: This paper presents a review of the recent literature relating to effective practice with young people displaying harmful sexual behaviour (HSB), violence or risky substance misuse. The intention is to build upon and update the 2007 literature review Research and practice in risk assessment and risk management of children and young people engaging in offending behaviour, funded by the Risk Management Authority (RMA) and carried out by the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research (SCCJR). The initial methodology identified that only experimental, or well-designed quasi-experimental studies were to be included in the review, however a broader approach has been adopted in order to more clearly identify any emerging and potentially promising interventions that would be of interest or use to practitioners. The search of the literature encompassed eight electronic databases and included search terms related to violence and harmful sexual behaviour in general, and five further needs and risk factors. These were: antisocial or violent peers; lack of social ties; substance misuse; deviant sexual arousal; and impaired social functioning. More than 1,000 articles were identified initially and over time these were filtered down to a total of 98 that fit the criteria of being of interest to practitioners. The information extracted has been organised into three main themes of Harmful Sexual Behaviour, Violence, and Substance Misuse. What came to the fore in this review is that current research in the domains of youth violence and harmful sexual behaviour seem to be comparatively rich both in terms of measuring and managing risk. However, perhaps due to interest in these particular areas of study being fairly recent, there is currently only one tool that has achieved widespread use and those few tools that do show promise have not yet been examined over a long enough period of time to make any definitive claims. Within the realms of violence and HSB research there are various forms of intervention described in peer reviewed articles, with some highlighting greater success than others. It is however evident that the area of substance misuse is one that desperately needs further attention. The lack of a validated risk measurement tool and mixed outcomes as a result of interventions suggests that this is an area of study that would benefit from a comprehensive review in its own right. Although serious and extremely worrying for families and societies, the risk posed by young people exhibiting sexually harmful behaviour and those who violently offend is proportionately much lower than the risk of young people misusing substances, yet there is not the equivalent research interest in this area that might have been expected. Similarly, despite identifying that parental involvement in family work within HSB intervention is important and yields positive outcomes, within the recent literature there were very few recent articles examining this more closely. What is also highlighted within this review are the number of risk assessment tools and measures that have not yet been validated and/or are not being used in Scotland, a pattern also seen repeated within the intervention literature. The young people who fall within these categories are complex, live chaotic lives and have multiple needs. They are individuals and need a tailored response; if there are no or few options for practitioners this will impact on the work that can be done with each person. Details: Glasgow: Centre for Youth and Criminal Justice, 2015. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 13, 2015 at: http://www.cycj.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Working-with-young-people-who-offend-website-copy.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cycj.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Working-with-young-people-who-offend-website-copy.pdf Shelf Number: 136395 Keywords: Drugs Abuse and Crime Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment Sex Offenders Sexual Violence Young Adult Offenders Youth Violence

Author: Vaswani, Nina Title: Exploring the Effectiveness of Multi-Agency Sexual Harmful Behaviour Risk Assessment Pilot: FIFE and Forth Valley Summary: Around one-third of sexual abuse is perpetrated by children and young people under the age of 18. The behaviour is typically aimed at young children, adolescent peers and - more unusually - adults. The behaviour can cover the full range of contact and non-contact behaviours we typically see in adult sexual offending behaviour. Defining children's sexual behaviour that harms others can be challenging as children and young people are often involved with sexual experimentation and what constitutes typical or developmentally expected behaviour is under defined. It is also often the context of the behaviour and the relationship between participants that informs whether behaviour is healthy, problematic or abusive rather than the behaviour in isolation. The majority of children and young people who display harmful sexual behaviours grow out of these behaviours over time. However, a minority will persist in this behaviour into adulthood without appropriate interventions and some who display "problematic" sexual behaviours may go on to act in more abusive ways without monitoring and support. Some children and young people who display problematic (rather than harmful or abusive) behaviour will require a limited intervention e.g. work with family around boundary setting and some input to the child about healthy sexual relationships. However for some the behaviour may be related to trauma that the child has experienced, and support to help the child make sense of their experiences as well as assistance for the child in developing new coping strategies to handle difficult feelings may be necessary. Thus accurately identifying the level of concern about a young person's behaviour at the earliest possible stage is essential for ensuring that young people receive the appropriate level of intervention, including that young people with a predominantly healthy pattern of behaviour are not drawn unnecessarily into service provision designed for high risk young people. While specialist risk assessment tools are available to develop a detailed understanding of the level of risk presented, many young people will not require this level of assessment. It became clear that Youth Justice lacked a streamlined and effective early screening tool that was accessible by a range of relevant professionals involved in decision-making about young people who have displayed concerning sexual behaviour, but who may not be experts or specialists in this field. To this effect, the Youth Justice National Development Team created a screening matrix, drawing upon the knowledge and evidence-base about sexually harmful behaviour in young people, that was designed for use with all young people aged under 18 displaying concerning sexual behaviour. Application of the screening matrix generates a category of concern about the young person's behaviour, increasing from low concern through to moderate and high concern to guide initial assessment and decision-making. The matrix is accompanied by brief guidance about how to interpret the level of concern, and is designed to be completed by professionals who have some understanding about child behaviour and development but who are not necessarily specialists in child sexual behaviour. The use of the matrix was originally intended to be piloted across the Fife and Forth Valley Community Justice Area between January and July 2013, although in effect the pilot only took place within Forth Valley. The area is coterminous with the Forth Valley Division of Police Scotland and with NHS Forth Valley and has a population in the region of 300,000. The area is geographically diverse, from large urban areas such as Falkirk to rural areas with small populations such as Clackmannanshire. Although the area comprises three Local Authority areas, in the end Stirling Council did not participate, with the result that all cases highlighted arose from either Falkirk or Clackmannanshire. Among all 32 Local Authorities, these areas were ranked 13th and 16th respectively accordingly to highest level of deprivation by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2012. The aim of the pilot was to enhance and standardise the information flow and dialogue between the Police and the SW SPOC in response to an allegation of sexually problematic or harmful behaviour against a young person. The intention was also to increase confidence in early decision-making to allow young people whose behaviour was not of major cause for concern to be diverted to appropriate interventions and processes such as Early and Effective Intervention (EEI), thereby freeing up Social Work time for the highest risk young people who may require specialist assessment and intervention. Details: Glasgow: Centre for Youth and Criminal Justice, 2013. 23p. Source: http://www.cycj.org.uk/resource/exploring-the-effectiveness-of-the-multi-agency-sexual-harmful-behavior-risk-assessment-pilot/. Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cycj.org.uk/resource/exploring-the-effectiveness-of-the-multi-agency-sexual-harmful-behavior-risk-assessment-pilot/ Shelf Number: 136580 Keywords: Juvenile Sex Offenders Risk Assessment

Author: Michel, Steve Title: Use of Programs and Interventions with Canada's Federally Sentenced Radicalized Offenders Summary: What it means By examining the institutional and community-based interventions which the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) has utilized with radicalized offenders and the congruence of these interventions with identified needs, CSC achieves a more comprehensive understanding of how past and current intervention options address the needs of radicalized offenders. This knowledge can be used to inform any future intervention referrals for radicalized offenders, identify limitations in current intervention options, and highlight opportunities for adaptation of existing or new interventions for this group. What we found The three most commonly attended interventions by radicalized offenders were identified as institutional employment, education, and psychological services. When examining core correctional programming specifically, radicalized offenders were most likely to participate in living skills, violent offender, personal development, and substance abuse programming, however this involvement was much less frequently identified than participation in other institutional interventions such as social programs or chaplaincy. Those with an identified need in the education and employment domain were the most likely to participate in at least one intervention that addressed the education and employment domain. The next most common need domain addressed was community functioning (for those assessed by the Dynamic Factor Identification and Analysis, or DFIA) and personal/emotional needs (for those assessed by both the DFIA and its revised version DFIA-R). Least likely to be addressed were needs related to the marital/family domain; however this was a need area that was not frequently identified as problematic for radicalized offenders. Why we did this study Since 1989, CSC has applied the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) principle in order to identify and address the risks and criminogenic needs of the federally sentenced offender population. The effectiveness of this approach has been empirically assessed and validated on offender populations in general. However, to date, there has not been research to demonstrate the applicability of the RNR principle with radicalized offenders. This paper identifies the interventions in which radicalized offenders participated in relation to their identified criminogenic and violent extremist needs. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2015. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report No. R-345: Accessed August 31, 2015 at: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/005/008/092/005008-0345-eng.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Canada URL: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/005/008/092/005008-0345-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 136628 Keywords: Correctional Programs Counter-terrorism Radicalization Radicalized offenders Rehabilitation Risk Assessment Terrorism

Author: Monahan, John Title: Risk Assessment in Criminal Sentencing Summary: The past several years have seen a surge of interest in using risk assessment in criminal sentencing, both to reduce recidivism by incapacitating or treating high-risk offenders and to reduce prison populations by diverting low-risk offenders from prison. We begin by sketching jurisprudential theories of sentencing, distinguishing those that rely on risk assessment from those that preclude it. We then characterize and illustrate the varying roles that risk assessment may play in the sentencing process. We clarify questions regarding the various meanings of "risk" in sentencing and the appropriate time to assess the risk of convicted offenders. We conclude by addressing four principal problems confronting risk assessment in sentencing: conflating risk and blame, barring individual inferences based on group data, failing adequately to distinguish risk assessment from risk reduction, and ignoring whether, and if so, how, the use of risk assessment in sentencing affects racial and economic disparities in imprisonment. Details: Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia School of Law, 2015. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper, No. 53 : Accessed September 21, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2662082 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2662082 Shelf Number: 136838 Keywords: Mass Incarceration Offender Rehabilitation Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: Jones, Alexander Title: Exploring the Potential for Pretrial Innovation in Massachusetts Summary: Reducing the number of inmates awaiting trial in jail through data-informed decision-making is one of the most promising innovations that Justice Reinvestment presents. Housing, feeding, and providing security for detainees is expensive, and there are also large collateral consequences. The defendant will likely lose their job, their housing, and perhaps even their children if a jail stay is required. While incarcerated awaiting trial, few detainees receive services they may urgently need to address underlying problems. Recognizing that resources can be better spent elsewhere, a number of states are moving aggressively to keep low-risk defendants out of jail. States in the lead on adopting new pretrial procedures have been able to reduce their jail populations because they were holding a large number of defendants who did not present a danger or flight risk; these detainees were simply too poor to afford bail. In addition to lowering jail populations, improvements to the pretrial process have the potential to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in incarceration. Research has shown that pretrial detention is harmful to mounting a defense, and that more low-income and minority defendants are forced to await trial in jail because they cannot post the money required for their release. While data limitations make it difficult to determine how many low-risk defendants are awaiting trial in Massachusetts jails, the growth of the state's pretrial population at a time when arrest rates are falling is an indicator that the pretrial process may be operating inefficiently. Between 2008 and 2013, the number of arrests in Massachusetts fell by 10 percent; in contrast, the state's pretrial jail population rose by nearly 13 percent. The disparity is even larger when contrasted with the drop in the number of defendants sentenced annually to serve terms in state prisons and county Houses of Correction, which has fallen by 22 percent since 2008. This policy brief provides a short primer on the pretrial process in Massachusetts, highlights critical issues that suggest there are opportunities to improve the system, and offers an action plan for pretrial innovation in Massachusetts. Details: Boston: Massachusetts Institute for a New Commonwealth 2015. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Brief: Accessed September 30, 2015 at: http://massinc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/bail.brief_.3.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://massinc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/bail.brief_.3.pdf Shelf Number: 136925 Keywords: Bail Jails Justice Reinvestment Pretrial Detention Risk Assessment

Author: Harmon, Rachel Title: Why Arrest? Summary: It is no exaggeration to say that arrests are the paradigmatic police activity. While many debate the necessity of particular arrests, neither participants in the criminal justice system nor contemporary critics have seriously considered whether law enforcement � as a general matter - requires arrests. This essay challenges the long-held assumption that, even if not every arrest is legitimate, arrests as a general matter are worthwhile because they are critical to law enforcement goals. As recent news events have suggested, arrests are more harmful than they first seem, not only to the individuals arrested but also to their families and to society as a whole. More importantly, our traditional justifications for arrests - starting the criminal process and maintaining public order � at best support a much more limited practice of arrest than we currently permit. Overwhelmingly, arrests can be replaced with alternatives, even for serious crimes, and neither public safety nor public order will likely much suffer. As a result, whether or not arrests are fairly imposed on individuals, contemporary arrest practice is illegitimate because the coercion it involves is largely unnecessary. Details: Charlottesville: University of Virginia School of Law, 2015. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 60 , 2015: Accessed October 26, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2673553 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 137055 Keywords: Arrests Police Discretion Police Use of Force Risk Assessment

Author: Bayliss, Anda Title: Risk, bureaucracy and missing persons: An evaluation of a new approach to the initial police response Summary: Key findings Three forces piloted a new approach to missing persons for a three month period. While officers were previously required to attend all incidents as the default initial response, the pilot introduced a new risk assessment process and 'absence' category. During the pilot, this category of incidents (involving a person who was not where they were expected to be but not thought to be at risk of harm) were to be monitored by police call handlers without officers being deployed immediately. The evaluation found promising qualitative evidence of the pilot having achieved its primary aim - to make the initial police response to missing persons reports more proportionate to risk. It was thought - as a side benefit - that a more proportionate approach might also help free up police capacity. The evaluation found consistent evidence of the pilot having achieved this secondary aim. Did the pilot result in a more proportionate and risk-based response? - The qualitative research found a widespread perception among officers that the pilot had helped to better identify those at risk, and ensured that higher risk incidents received the attention they required. - This result was not reflected in some of the survey findings. Based on officer descriptions, a high proportion of incidents in the pilot sites were assessed to be low risk. Did a more proportionate response help free up police capacity? - Despite an increase in the number of recorded incidents in the pilot sites, around a third were classified as absences and, thus, did not require officers to attend. - By being more proportionate, the pilot forces were able to target resources better and free up capacity. A saving of 200 shifts over the three month period was estimated as a result of officers not attending absences. The amount of time spent on the initial response to missing persons was also reduced in the pilot sites (-23%) relative to the comparison sites (-3%). In theory, these resources could be redirected towards higher risk incidents. Did the pilot improve officer attitudes and job satisfaction? - Most response officers and supervisors who were interviewed welcomed the pilot, and said their attitudes about attending missing persons incidents had improved. - A survey of officers, however, did not reveal a consistent pattern of attitude change. How did partners view the pilot? - There was widespread view among partners that the police should move away from a 'one size fits all' approach to missing persons. - About two-thirds of respondents were positive or neutral about the pilot. A third were more critical, mainly raising concerns about the application of the new category. - The quality of the engagement partners reportedly received from the police before implementation seemed to affect their level of support for the pilot. - The reduction in missing person coordinators in the pilot forces - an organisational change that was unconnected to the pilot - was potentially regarded as a greater problem. How was the pilot perceived to have affected police safeguarding work? - There was no evidence to suggest the pilot had undermined forces' ability to carry out proactive safeguarding work (though it was a perceived concern for some partners). - The reduction in missing person coordinators in the pilot forces reportedly would have placed pressure on monitoring and partnership work after the pilot (though it continued). Details: London: College of Policing, 2013. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 2, 2015 at: http://whatworks.college.police.uk/Research/Documents/Missing_persons_PUBLICATION_PQ.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://whatworks.college.police.uk/Research/Documents/Missing_persons_PUBLICATION_PQ.pdf Shelf Number: 128750 Keywords: Criminal Investigation Missing Persons Police Effectiveness Risk Assessment

Author: Spence, Douglas H. Title: Recidivism by Direct Sentence Clients Released from Day Report Centers in 2011: Predictors and Patterns over Time Summary: This study investigates the factors that predict the likelihood that DRC clients will be arrested, booked into jail, or incarcerated within 2 years of release. It also examines the timing of recidivism events during the period after release. The strong relationship between successful program completion, risk scores, and recidivism provides evidence of the impact of DRC programming and the predictive validity of the LS/CMI risk assessment tool. Analysis of LS/CMI subcomponent scores reveals important areas of criminogenic need for the DRC client population in WV, and suggest means for further improving the quality of service delivery in DRCs. Findings related to the timing of recidivism point to additional opportunities for reducing recidivism rates through the use of targeted post-release supervision strategies. Implications for quality assurance, effective treatment dosage, and adherence to evidence-based practices are also discussed. Details: Charleston, WV: Criminal Justice Statistical Analysis Center, Office of Research and Strategic Planning, 2016. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 3, 2016 at: http://jrsa.org/sac-spotlight/wv-recidivism/wv-drc-recidivism.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://jrsa.org/sac-spotlight/wv-recidivism/wv-drc-recidivism.pdf Shelf Number: 137750 Keywords: Alternative to Incarcerations Day Reporting Day Reporting Centers Offender Risk Assessment Prediction Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Davidson, Leighann J. Title: Evidence-Based Offender Assessment: A Comparative Analysis of West Virginia and U.S. Risk Scores Summary: This study describes the results of more than 8,000 LS/CMI risk assessments provided to West Virginia offenders in 2013 and 2014. West Virginia normative data is compared to U.S. offender population norms derived from assessment data gathered from nine states across the country. Results indicate West Virginia has a lower risk offender population compared to other states - this is true regardless of correctional setting (i.e., community or institutional confinement). Approximately 74-76% of West Virginia offenders under correctional supervision have risk scores that are below the U.S. average. The low risk population under supervision, in part, explains the comparatively low recidivism rates observed in West Virginia. Compared to other states, West Virginia offenders have lower levels of need in most areas, especially the Procriminal Attitude/Orientation and Antisocial Pattern domains. The study results suggest there may be substantive differences in the risk and needs of male and female offenders in West Virginia. Consideration of LS/CMI risk scores may enhance the state's efforts to manage its correctional population, protect the public, and save resources. Details: Charleston, WV: West Virginia Criminal Justice Statistical Analysis Center, Office of Research and Strategic Planning, 2015. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 3, 2016 at: http://www.djcs.wv.gov/ORSP/SAC/Documents/Davidson%20et%20al%202015_EBP%20Offender%20Assessment%20Comparative%20Analysis.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.djcs.wv.gov/ORSP/SAC/Documents/Davidson%20et%20al%202015_EBP%20Offender%20Assessment%20Comparative%20Analysis.pdf Shelf Number: 137752 Keywords: Offender Risk Assessment Prediction Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Spence, Douglas H. Title: The Predictive Utility of Risk and Needs Assessment Summary: Risk and needs assessment plays a crucial role in determining the services offenders receive while in correctional custody and their level of supervision after release. According to the principles of effective correctional intervention, clients assessed as having a higher risk of recidivism should receive both a greater treatment dosage and a higher level of case supervision. This strategy of providing more services to higher risk individuals is frequently described as adhering to the "risk principle" (Andrews and Dowden, 2006). In order to adhere to the risk principle, however, correctional programs must first ensure that they are accurately assessing offenders' risk and needs. The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI), and its predecessor the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R), are two of the most prominent and widely-used tools for assessing offenders. Both have been subjected to extensive empirical research and have been shown to accurately predict the likelihood of recidivism for a variety of offender populations (Vose, Cullen and Smith, 2008). The LS/CMI is currently used by all correctional agencies in West Virginia to assess risk for recidivism. The tool is completed through a process that involves an offender interview combined with the use of official records. The collective information is used to calculate risk scores that indicate an overall risk for recidivism as well as identify specific criminogenic needs (i.e., dynamic risk factors shown to be empirically related to recidivism). These factors include: education/employment, family/marital relationships, substance abuse, procriminal attitudes, antisocial peers, leisure/recreation activities, antisocial personality, and past criminal behavior. LS/CMI scores are utilized to make a variety of decisions including level of supervision and services to be provided to protect public safety. Several recent and forthcoming studies conducted by researchers from the Office of Research and Strategic Planning (ORSP) assess the effectiveness of the LS/CMI for predicting recidivism by offenders in WV. These studies investigate the statistical relationships between various offender characteristics (including LS/CMI scores) and the likelihood of committing a new offenses during a 24 month follow-up period. Details: Charleston, WV: Criminal Justice Statistical Analysis Center, Office of Research and Strategic Planning, 2015. 5p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Brief; Evidence-Based Practice Series, No. 1: Accessed February 3, 2016 at: http://www.djcs.wv.gov/ORSP/SAC/Documents/JCEBP%20Research%20Brief%201_final.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.djcs.wv.gov/ORSP/SAC/Documents/JCEBP%20Research%20Brief%201_final.pdf Shelf Number: 137753 Keywords: Alternative to Incarcerations Day Reporting Day Reporting Centers Offender Risk Assessment Prediction Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Pierce-Danford, Kristy Title: Creating an Effective Pretrial Program: A Toolkit for Practitioners Summary: These are times of significant change for county jails and justice systems. Public Safety Realignment, the 2011 law that shifted management of people convicted of certain nonviolent, non-serious, non-sex offenses from state prisons and parole to county jails and probation, has had a major impact. More individuals are being sentenced to county jail instead of state prison, including people who violate conditions of their parole. Some county jails face limited capacity or strained resources. Combined with ongoing county budget challenges, more than ever, local leaders need effective strategies to safely manage their justice populations and reduce costs at the same time. On average, more than 60 percent of those in local jails in California are awaiting trial. They are being detained "pretrial" while their case goes through criminal proceedings. There are models of pretrial diversion and supervision programs that can effectively manage these individuals in a community setting. Reducing the number of pretrial detainees in jails or the length of their stay can conserve considerable resources and allow the jail to meet other public safety needs. In a post-Realignment California, assessing pretrial program options is both an opportunity and a necessity. Fortunately, pretrial program models have evolved considerably in recent decades, and there is evidence to show that they can be more successful than the money bail system at ensuring public safety and court appearance. There are many evidence-based options available to communities seeking to implement or strengthen pretrial programs. There is not one "correct" model for pretrial programs, and they can be successfully administered through the courts, probation departments, sheriff departments, county administration, independent agencies or any combination of these. Many counties are now exploring such programs, asking critical questions about whom among those awaiting trial needs to be in jail and who can be managed successfully in the community. This toolkit offers guidance to county officials on how to develop and operate these programs at the local level, building upon available literature on effective pretrial policies and practices. Specifically, officials will find: - Key information about the legal framework and national standards for pretrial programs; - How to implement a pretrial risk assessment; - Pretrial diversion and supervision advice; - How to assess your current system; and - Recommendations on using data to measure and enhance pretrial programs. Details: Oakland, CA: Californians for Safety and Justice, 2013. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 23, 2016 at: http://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/211/9f/a/223/CSJ_pretrial_toolkit.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/211/9f/a/223/CSJ_pretrial_toolkit.pdf Shelf Number: 137944 Keywords: Bail Jails Pretrial Detention Pretrial Diversion Pretrial Interventions Pretrial Release Pretrial Supervision Risk Assessment

Author: Pretrial Justice Institute Title: Pretrial Risk Assessment: Science Provides Guidance on Assessing Defendants Summary: Every day, criminal justice officials make decisions that have major implications for public safety and costs. Which defendants should be released pretrial and how should they be released, and which should be detained until adjudication? These decisions require an assessment of the risk that each defendant poses to be arrested on new charges or to fail to appear in court. Up until recently, jurisdictions all across the country have been limited to one of two approaches to making those assessments. The first approach has been to use a money bond schedule, which is simply a list of all criminal charges and a corresponding dollar amount attached to each charge. The more serious the charge, the higher the corresponding bond amount. Money bond schedules presuppose that there is a strong link between the charge and pretrial risk. The second approach has been through the use of intuition. Under this approach, pretrial release decision makers look at the factors that they believe to be related to higher risk and make their decisions accordingly. Officials in many jurisdictions using this approach have pooled the collective intuition of local decision makers to design what is known as a "consensus-based" pretrial risk assessment tool. While such consensus-driven tools promote consistency in pretrial release decision making, there remains no evidence that these tools are actually accurate predictors of pretrial risk. In recent years, many jurisdictions have turned to science to see if there is any validity to the two existing approaches and whether a third, empirically-derived approach could be developed. After a decade of studies, we now know the answers: money bond schedules and intuition-derived tools are poor predictors of risk, and empirically-derived tools can be accurate predictors of pretrial risk. Details: Gaithersburg, MD: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2015. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed March 9, 2016 at: http://www.pretrial.org/download/advocacy/Issue%20Brief-Pretrial%20Risk%20Assessment%20(May%202015).pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.pretrial.org/download/advocacy/Issue%20Brief-Pretrial%20Risk%20Assessment%20(May%202015).pdf Shelf Number: 138136 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Title: Screening and Assessment of Co-occurring Disorders in the Justice System. Summary: This monograph examines a wide range of evidence-based practices for screening and assessment of people in the justice system who have co-occurring mental and substance use disorders (CODs). Use of evidence-based approaches for screening and assessment is likely to result in more accurate matching of offenders to treatment services and more effective treatment and supervision outcomes (Shaffer, 2011). This monograph is intended as a guide for clinicians, case managers, program and systems administrators, community supervision staff, jail and prison booking and healthcare staff, law enforcement, court personnel, researchers, and others who are interested in developing and operating effective programs for justice-involved individuals who have CODs. Key systemic and clinical challenges are discussed, as well as state-of-the art approaches for conducting screening and assessment. The monograph also reviews a range of selected instruments for screening, assessment, and diagnosis of CODs in justice settings and provides a critical analysis of advantages, concerns, and practical implementation issues (e.g., cost, availability, training needs) for each instrument. A number of the evidence-based instruments described in this monograph are available in the public domain (i.e., are free of charge) and can be downloaded on the internet. Not all of the instruments described in this monograph are designed for universal use in screening or assessing for both mental and substance use disorders, and some may not be suitable for use with special populations or in specific justice settings. For example, the screening and assessment instruments described here are primarily designed for use with adults in the justice system, and many have not been validated for use with juveniles. Many of the assessment instruments reviewed in this monograph also require specialized training and clinical expertise to administer, score, and interpret. These considerations are explored in more detail in later sections of this monograph that review specific instruments. A significant and growing number of people in the justice system have CODs. For example, over 70 percent of offenders have substance use disorders, and approximately 17�34 percent have serious mental illnesses�rates that greatly exceed those found in the general population (Baillargeon et al., 2010; Ditton, 1999; Lurigio, 2011; SAMHSA�s GAINS Center, 2004; Peters, Kremling, Bekman, & Caudy, 2012; Steadman, Osher, Robbins, Case, & Samuels, 2009; Steadman et al., 2013). Several populations, such as juveniles, female offenders, and veterans, are entering the justice system in increased numbers and have elevated rates of CODs, including substance use, trauma, and other mental disorders (Houser, Belenko, & Brennan, 2012; Pinals et al., 2012; Seal et al., 2011). These individuals often require specialized interventions to address their CODs and staff who are familiar with their unique needs. People with CODs present numerous challenges within the justice system. These individuals can at times exhibit greater impairment in psychosocial skills and are less likely to enter and successfully complete treatment. They are at greater risk for criminal recidivism and relapse. The justice system is generally ill-equipped to address the multiple needs of this population, and few specialized treatment programs exist in jails, prisons, or court and community corrections settings that provide integrated mental health and substance use services (Lurigio, 2011; Peters et al., 2012; Peters, LeVasseur, & Chandler, 2004). A major concern is that the justice system does not have a built-in mechanism for personnel to identify individuals with these types of behavioral health issues, and there is all too often a failure to effectively screen and assess people with CODs who are in the justice system (Balyakina et al., 2013; Chandler, Peters, Field, & Juliano-Bult, 2004; Hiller, Belenko, Welsh, Zajac, & Peters, 2011; Lurigio, 2011; Peters et al., 2012; Taxman, Cropsey, Young, & Wexler, 2007; Taxman, Young, Wiersema, Rhodes, & Mitchell, 2007). The absence of adequate screening for CODs prevents early identification of problems; often undermines successful progress in treatment; and can lead to substance use relapse, recurrence of mental health symptoms, criminal recidivism, and use of expensive community resources such as crisis care and hospital beds (Peterson, Skeem, Kennealy, Bray, & Zvonkovic, 2014). Lack of screening for CODs also prevents comprehensive treatment/case planning, matching justice-involved people to appropriate levels of treatment and supervision, and rapid placement in specialized programs to address CODs (Lurigio, 2011; Mueser, Noordsy, Drake, & Fox, 2003; Peters et al., 2012). Screening for CODs should be provided at the earliest possible point in the justice system to expedite consideration of these issues in decisions related to sentencing, release from custody, placement in institutional or community settings, and referral to treatment and other related services (Hiller et al., 2011). Screening provides a brief review of symptoms, behaviors, and other salient background information that may indicate the presence of a particular disorder or psychosocial problems. Results of screening are typically used to determine the need for further assessment. Assessment provides a lengthier and more intensive review of psychosocial problems that can lead to diagnoses and placement in different types or levels of treatment and supervision services. Due to the high prevalence of CODs among offenders, screening and assessment protocols used in justice settings should address both types of disorders. The high prevalence of trauma and physical or sexual abuse among offenders indicates the need for universal screening in this area as well (Steadman et al., 2013; Steadman, Osher, Robbins, Case, & Samuels, 2009; Zlotnick et al., 2008). Mental health screening in the justice systems should include examination of suicide risk, as rates of suicidal behavior are elevated among offenders who have CODs. Motivation for treatment is an important predictor of treatment outcomes and can also be readily examined during screening in the justice system. Another important component of screening is drug testing, which can enhance motivation and adherence to treatment (Large, Smith, Sara, Paton, Kedzior, & Nielssen, 2012; Martin, 2010; Rosay, Najaka, & Hertz, 2007). Cultural differences should be considered when conducting screening and assessment, and staff training is needed to effectively address these issues. Complexities in using certain screening and assessment tools early in criminal case processing include identifying issues that can be potentially incriminating (e.g., ongoing substance use). Jurisdictions may work out memoranda of agreement to ensure that screenings do not result in inadvertent further criminalization. The earlier in the criminal process a screening can be done (such as prior to arraignment), the better the chance of directing more individuals toward treatment without creating further legal difficulties. Assessment and diagnosis are particularly important in developing a treatment/case plan and in determining specific problem areas that can be effectively targeted for treatment interventions and community supervision. Assessment tools generally involve somewhat more in-depth questioning than screening. Some can be administered by non-clinicians, while full assessments require someone with a clinical background to formulate diagnoses and develop robust treatment planning. Diagnostic instruments allow for a more focused and in-depth mechanism, the purpose of which is to delineate specific diagnoses to help codify what an individual may be experiencing symptomatically. The diagnostic nomenclature can lead to "labeling," but is utilized throughout health care to help communication among health professionals, inform treatment, and enhance consistency in therapeutic approaches. Key diagnostic instruments include the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). Use of this type of instrument results in identifying the diagnosis or diagnoses that most closely link to an individual�s reported symptom cluster. Screening, assessment, and diagnostic information are vitally important in matching offenders to appropriate types of services, and to levels of intensity, scope, and duration of services. As described in more detail later in this monograph, key areas of information that contribute to effective treatment matching include (1) criminal risk level, and criminogenic needs that independently contribute to the risk for recidivism, (2) history of mental or substance use disorders and prior treatment, (3) functional assessment related to mental and substance use disorders, including the history of interaction between the disorders and the effects of these disorders on behaviors that lead to augmented risk for involvement in the justice system, (4) functional impairment related to the CODs that may influence ability to participate in different types of treatment or supervision services, and (5) other psychosocial factors that may affect engagement and participation in these services (e.g., transportation, housing, literacy, major medical problems). In the absence of a comprehensive and evidence-based assessment approach, CODs are often undetected in justice settings, leading to inappropriate placement (e.g., in low intensity services) and poor outcomes related to treatment and supervision. In addition to the screening, assessment, and diagnostic instruments for use with offenders who have CODs, other instruments have been designed specifically to match people to different types of treatment modalities, or levels of care. Although traditionally considered a part of correctional supervision, the Risk, Need, and Responsivity (RNR) model (Andrews & Bonta, 2010a, 2010b) is increasingly used more systematically in the justice system to identify treatment and recovery needs that are related to criminal recidivism. The RNR model provides an important framework to assist in matching offenders to various levels of treatment and criminal justice supervision, and incorporates areas of criminal risk that are not addressed within typical clinical assessment tools. Key issues related to screening and assessment of CODs in the justice system include failure to comprehensively examine one or more of the disorders, inadequate staff training to identify and assess the disorders, bifurcated mental health and substance use service systems that feature separate screening and assessment processes, use of ineffective and non-standardized screening and assessment instruments, and the absence of management information systems to identify people with CODs as they move from one point to another in the justice system. Another challenge in conducting screening and assessment is determining whether symptoms of mental disorders are caused by recent substance use or reflect the presence of an underlying mental disorder (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013). Other important threats to the accuracy of screening and assessment information include the potentially disabling effects of CODs on memory and cognitive functioning and the perceived and sometimes real consequences in the justice system related to self-disclosure of mental health or substance use problems (Bellack, Bennett, & Gearon, 2007; DiClemente, Nidecker, & Bellack, 2008; Drake, O�Neal, & Wallach, 2008; Gregg, Barrowclough, & Haddock, 2007). Staff training should be provided in the screening and assessment of CODs within the justice system. This training should address signs and symptoms of mental and substance use disorders; how symptoms are affected by recent substance use; strategies to engage offenders in the screening and assessment process; cultural considerations in conducting screening and assessment; approaches for enhancing accuracy of information compiled; implementation of risk assessment; use of evidence-based screening, assessment, and diagnostic instruments; and use of assessment information to develop and update individualized treatment/case plans. A variety of online and other types of modules are available to train staff in the screening and assessment of CODs. Details: Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2015. 270p. Source: Internet Resource: HHS Publication No. (SMA)-15-4930: Accessed march 10, 2016 at: http://store.samhsa.gov/shin/content//SMA15-4930/SMA15-4930.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://store.samhsa.gov/shin/content//SMA15-4930/SMA15-4930.pdf Shelf Number: 138160 Keywords: Assessment of Offenders Co-Occurring Disorders Drug Offenders Mental Health Services Mentally Ill Offenders Mentally Ill Persons Risk Assessment Substance Abuse Disorders Substance Abuse Treatment

Author: Bechtel, Kristin Title: A Meta-Analytic Review of Pretrial Research: Risk Assessment, Bond Type, and Interventions Summary: This study makes an attempt to aggregate, via meta-analysis, what we currently know about pretrial decision making and jurisdictions' responses to the pretrial population. This meta-analysis began with an exhaustive search for pretrial research which may have revealed the most prominent finding - that being a distinct lack of research that utilizes any amount of methodological rigor. We identified a large number of studies that met our most general criteria (i.e., research about pretrial decision making) but mainly dealt with legal and/or philosophical issues regarding pretrial detention and due process. Studies that utilized empirical data and strong methodological designs were distinctly lacking. Of the studies that could be included, effect sizes were generated that may show some promise for court notification programs, pretrial supervision practices, and the potential effect of restrictive bond schedules. However, strong conclusions cannot be made as the quality of the pretrial research, overall, is weak at best. The findings of this study hold several policy implications for the field of pretrial research and practice. First, future research studies in the field of pretrial need to focus on methodological quality and rigor. Second, it appears that some conditions of release may be related to a defendant's likelihood of failure to appear. Third, it appears that none of the conditions of release reviewed in this study are related to a defendant's likelihood of re-arrest while on pretrial release. Finally, it is recommended that the field of pretrial develop a sound research agenda and execute that plan with rigor, transparency, and an approach that favors the continued cumulation of knowledge. Details: Unpublished Paper, 2016. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2741635 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2741635 Shelf Number: 134249 Keywords: Bail Decision-Making Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Guy, Laura S. Title: Advancing Use of Risk Assessment in Juvenile Probation Summary: Juvenile probation officers at three sites in two States (Mississippi and Connecticut) were trained to use the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY; Borum, Bartel & Forth, 2006) and the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Second Version (MAYSI-2; Grisso & Barnum, 2000, 2006). Also included in the use of these instruments was a decisionmaking model for case planning that integrated information about behavioral health variables and risk for reoffending. A standardized implementation process was used to assist sites in the selection of tools, development of policies, categorization of available services and interventions, as well as the development or modification of existing case plans. Results indicate that probation staff can be trained to complete violence risk assessment using the structured professional judgment approach. This produced a high degree of inter-rater agreement, and case management decisions can take into account a youth's risk for future offending. The study advises that in order for risk assessment to impact youths' cases and individual outcomes, risk assessment must occur early in the judicial process. Risk assessment should be conducted before making decisions about disposition, placement, and the services to be provided. It is also recommended that States use a structured, empirically validated approach to risk assessment. A variety of inconsistencies were found in probation staffs' use of the MAYSI-2, despite efforts to train staff to use this assessment tool. Reasons for this inconsistent use of MAYSI-2 are suggested, and recommendations are offered to address it. Study limitations and future research are discussed. Details: Boston: University of Massachusetts Medical School Department of Psychiatry, 2015.202p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 29, 2016 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/grants/249155.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/grants/249155.pdf Shelf Number: 138470 Keywords: Case Management Juvenile Offender Classification Juvenile Offenders Juvenile Probation Reoffending Risk Assessment

Author: Serin, Ralph C. Title: Selecting and Using Risk and Need Assessments Summary: The purpose of this document is to provide Drug Court staff with a concise and current overview of important issues relating to offender risk assessment and to provide a list of recommended contemporary risk instruments. Numerous risk scales are currently used in the United States (see Desmarais & Singh, 2013) to assess static risk factors and criminogenic needs (dynamic risk factors that are related to the client�s propensity for criminal behavior), of which substance abuse is but one. Almost all of these are applied to predict risk post-adjudication. Consequently, we set out to identify those risk scales best suited for use by Drug Courts. To do so, we used validity criteria widely accepted in the research literature on risk assessment (see Overview of Risk Assessment Instruments). Those that met all the criteria are described under Recommended Risk Instruments, and those that met only some of the criteria are described under Promising Risk Instruments. These sections are preceded by a general discussion of the issues pertaining to risk assessment, as well as best practices for selecting an instrument to suit a particular Drug Court"s needs and capacity. Details: Alexandria, VA: National Drug Court Institute, 2015. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Drug Court Practitioner Fact Sheet, Vol. X, No. 1: Accessed April 5, 2016 at: http://www.ndcrc.org/sites/default/files/selecting_and_using_risk.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.ndcrc.org/sites/default/files/selecting_and_using_risk.pdfhttp://www.ndcrc.org/sites/default/files/selecting_and_using_risk.pdf Shelf Number: 138561 Keywords: Drug Courts Drug Offenders Problem-Solving Courts Risk Assessment

Author: Lawrence, Sarah Title: Managing Jail Populations to Enhance Public Safety: Assessing and Managing Risk in the Post-Realignment Era Summary: Just 20 months after Public Safety Realignment began, the effects of the legislation on California's criminal justice system are unprecedented both in depth and in scope. And they are still taking shape. Arguably, county jail systems have been one of the most significantly altered components of the criminal justice system. The management of county jail systems in California is a challenging, dynamic, and complex undertaking. Realignment is exacerbating some of the challenges and accelerating some of the changes that county jails were facing before October 2011 when Realignment began. The number of individuals in jail has been growing; the status of individuals held in jail custody has been changing; and the length of time individuals stay in jail is getting longer. In short, almost every aspect of California's jail population has been in a state of flux since Realignment was implemented. An examination of all of the contributing factors and criminal justice tools related to jail management is beyond the scope of this effort. The focus here is on a handful of selected topics that 1) are considered to play an important role in the management of jails, 2) have been directly affected by AB 109 or have newly emerged as a result of the new regime, and 3) are thought to be ripe subjects for law and policy debate and reform. We approach these topics by breaking down jail populations into two groups (non-sentenced versus sentenced) and the issue into two stages (assessment of risk and management of risk). The first section presents an overview of who is in jail in California based on the most recently available data. The second section examines how the risk profiles of defendants are assessed during the pretrial phase, and what we know from research to be the most effective approaches to addressing risk. Next, risk management options in the form of detention, bail release, own recognizance release, and pretrial services supervision are discussed. The attention then shifts to the sentenced population in California jails and some of the tools available to criminal justice practitioners to manage jail populations, including, split sentences, electronic monitoring, and early release. This paper is intended to help lay the foundation for the first meeting of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center's Executive Session on the Front-End Issues of Public Safety Realignment (see sidebar). The first of these four, day-long meetings will focus on issues related to jail management. A group of experts from across California representing a variety of perspectives will be convened to discuss some of the pressing issues related to Realignment's effect on jails. Details: Stanford, CA: Stanford Law School, Stanford Criminal Justice Center, 2013. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 12, 2016 at: http://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/default/files/child-page/440504/doc/slspublic/Paper%20on%20jail%20mgmt%20July%202013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/default/files/child-page/440504/doc/slspublic/Paper%20on%20jail%20mgmt%20July%202013.pdf Shelf Number: 138635 Keywords: County Jails Criminal Justice Reform Jail Population Pretrial Services Public Safety Realignment Risk Assessment

Author: Coyne, Michelle A. Title: Predicting Arrest Probability Across Time: A Test of Competing Perspectives Summary: Criminal involvement is non-randomly distributed across individuals and across groups. Debate regarding the etiology of differences in criminal involvement remains. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997, the current study examined latent class membership in the probability of arrest over a 15-year time span starting when participants were 12-16 years-old and ending when they were 28-31 years-old. Latent class regressions were employed to prospectively investigate whether various demographic and criminological risk factors from the base wave could predict class membership. Models were also estimated separately by sex and by race to identify potentially important differences and consistencies in class structure and risk prediction. Results from the latent class growth analyses resulted in two to three classes characterized by an abstainer group, an adolescent-limited group, and a stable moderate-level chronic group. In general, being male, increased substance use, and increased delinquency were consistent predictors of class membership. Regarding race and sex differences, being a minority was moderately related to class membership in males but was not significant for females. Being male was a very strong predictor of class membership for Black and Hispanic participants but a relatively weak predictor for White participants. Overall, results supported a general risk factor perspective over a gender or race specific risk perspective. Across race, sex, and cohort, self-reported delinquency was the strongest risk predictor of class membership, suggesting that differential arrest probability is predominantly explained by differential involvement in delinquent behavior. Details: Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati, 2015. 272p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed April 25, 2016 at: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/pg_10?0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:ucin1439306285 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/pg_10?0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:ucin1439306285 Shelf Number: 138808 Keywords: Arrest Life-course Criminology Prediction Risk Assessment

Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Aviation Security: Airport Perimeter and Access Control Security Would Benefit from Risk Assessment and Strategy Updates Summary: Why GAO Did This Study Incidents of aviation workers using access privileges to smuggle weapons and drugs into security-restricted areas and onto planes has heightened awareness about security at commercial airports. TSA, along with airport operators, has responsibility for securing the nation's approximately 440 commercial airports. GAO was asked to review TSA's oversight of airport perimeter and access control security since GAO last reported on the topic in 2009. This report examines, for airport security, (1) the extent to which TSA has assessed the components of risk and (2) the extent to which TSA has taken actions to oversee and facilitate security, among other objectives. GAO examined TSA documents related to risk assessment and security activities; analyzed relevant TSA security event data from fiscal years 2009 through 2015; obtained information from TSA and industry association officials as well as from a non-generalizable sample of 11 airports, selected based on factors such as size. What GAO Recommends GAO is making six recommendations, including that TSA update its Risk Assessment of Airport Security, develop and implement a method for conducting a system-wide assessment of airport vulnerability, and update its National Strategy for Airport Perimeter and Access Control Security. DHS concurred with the recommendations and identified planned actions to address the recommendations. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2016. 85p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-16-632: Accessed May 31, 2016 at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/677586.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/677586.pdf Shelf Number: 139249 Keywords: Airport Security Aviation Security Drug Trafficking Risk Assessment Smuggling Transportation Security

Author: Latessa, Edward J. Title: The Ohio Risk Assessment System Misdemeanor Assessment Tool (ORAS-MAT) and Misdemeanor Screening Tool (ORAS-MST) Summary: In 2006, the University of Cincinnati (UC) Center for Criminal Justice Research (CCJR), in partnership with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC), developed the Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS), a system designed to assess risk, need, and responsivity factors of offenders at each stage in the criminal justice system (see Latessa, Smith, Lemke, Makarios, & Lowenkamp, 2009). The ORAS is comprised of five validated risk assessment instruments: 1) Pretrial Tool (PAT), 2) Community Supervision Tool (CST), 3) Prison Intake Tool (PIT), 4) Reentry Tool (RT), and 5) Supplemental Reentry Tool (SRT)1, as well as two screening tools: 1) Community Supervision Screening Tool (CSST) and 2) Prison Intake Screening Tool (PST). Since its' inception, the ORAS has been implemented across the state and is used in municipal and common pleas courts, community based correctional facilities (CBCFs), and ODRC institutions. Details: Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati, Center for Criminal Justice Research, 2014. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 11, 2016 at: https://ext.dps.state.oh.us/OCCS/Pages/Public/Reports/ORAS%20MAT%20report%20%20occs%20version.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://ext.dps.state.oh.us/OCCS/Pages/Public/Reports/ORAS%20MAT%20report%20%20occs%20version.pdf Shelf Number: 139392 Keywords: Community Supervision Misdemeanors Offender Risk Assessment Pretrial Detention Pretrial Supervision Prisoner Reentry Risk Assessment

Author: Fennell, Nathan Title: Risk, Not Resources. Improving the Pretrial Release Process in Texas Summary: Texas' resource-based bail system keeps low-risk individuals unnecessarily detained before trial and allows risky defendants to buy their freedom with limited oversight. This practice undermines public safety, disproportionately harms low-income defendants, and costs counties millions of dollars every year. By adopting pretrial reform in line with national standards, Texas can reduce its jail population while making communities safer. Details: Austin: Lyndon B. Johnson school of Public Affairs, 2016. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Brief: Accessed July 19, 2016 at: http://lbj.utexas.edu/sites/default/files/file/Risk,%20Not%20Resources-%20Improving%20the%20Pretrial%20Release%20Process%20in%20Texas--FINAL.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://lbj.utexas.edu/sites/default/files/file/Risk,%20Not%20Resources-%20Improving%20the%20Pretrial%20Release%20Process%20in%20Texas--FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 139666 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Mayson, Sandra G. Title: Dangerous Defendants Summary: Bail reform is underway - but it is proceeding on shaky ground. The reform model, which deploys actuarial risk assessment to identify "high-risk" defendants, assumes that the state has the prerogative to detain or control dangerous defendants. This assumption is not new. But it is anomalous. In general, we do not permit the state to restrain sane, responsible adults solely to stop them from committing hypothetical future crimes, even those who are high-risk. The reform movement's focus on danger thus crystallizes a fundamental question about pretrial policy: What justifies the state in restraining defendants for dangerousness before trial if we would prohibit the same restraint for equally dangerous members of the public? Although there is an extensive literature on preventive detention, neither the Supreme Court nor prior scholarship has focused on this comparative question. This Article endeavors to answer it. It makes the first effort to articulate and evaluate potential justifications for subjecting defendants to restraint that we would forbid for non-defendants who pose an equal risk. The Article explores doctrinal, deontological and instrumentalist justifications, but ultimately rejects them. It contends that pretrial restraint for dangerousness can only be justified at the risk threshold where we would authorize equivalent restraint of a member of the population at large. Communities, policymakers and courts should therefore determine what they believe this threshold to be, then ensure that pretrial risk assessment and management are tailored to it. Details: Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, School of Law, 2016. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 16-30 : Accessed August 30, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2826600 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2826600 Shelf Number: 140086 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Holsinger, Alexander M. Title: Exploring the Relationship Between Time in Pretrial Detention and Four Outcomes Summary: An increasing amount of attention has been paid to the pretrial phase of justice case processing both in research and policy. In particular, the issue of if, when, and how to use pretrial detention (jail time before a case is resolved with guilt or innocence) has been under a great deal of scrutiny. While the study of pretrial detention and its potential effects on case processing and outcome is not new (see for example Rankin, 1964; Tribe, 1971), emerging research has undertaken a more granular analysis of what effect pretrial detention - even short amounts - may have on other outcomes besides findings of guilt or innocence, and/or sentences to incarceration (as opposed to a community-based sanction) and for how long someone is sentenced to incarceration in some form. Shortly after arrest (and in turn shortly after being booked into a jail, most commonly at the county administrative level) several justice decisions are made. Most jurisdictions have some form of a standardized information collection procedure that gathers basic yet relevant data such as demographic factors and criminal history factors (most often involving the check of an automated database of some form). Likewise, at some point shortly after case initiation, the decision whether or not to assign bail is made and, if bail is assigned, how much. In recent years the use of some form of an actuarial (objective, research- based) risk assessment that determines the relative likelihood of various things like failure to appear is applied as well that will inform several decisions, both immediately and potentially later on. And all these broad factors - criminal history, bail, actuarial risk to flee - and others work toward influencing the decision regarding whether or not someone should remain in jail until their case is resolved (which in some instances can take several weeks if not months), or, if they should be allowed to remain in the community (Abrams & Rohlfs, 2011; Demuth, 2003; Myers, 2009). As noted above some of the original research examined pretrial detention through the lens of the effect that it may have on case outcome (Rankin, 1964). Consider, for example, the fact that someone who is detained pretrial is unable to have easy access to defense counsel, is unable to discuss their situation with witnesses and other potential social support, and is, by definition, cut off from the vast majority of their lives. These effects of pretrial detention and others may increase the likelihood that someone is unable to mount an adequate defense, thereby increasing the likelihood of conviction, and in turn a sentence to a secure facility. These effects may hold regardless of whether a person is actually guilty or innocent, in fact (Williams, 2003; Wald, 1964; Spohn, 2009). While the cumulative disadvantage of pretrial detention (Spohn, 2009; Schlesinger, 2007) has been well documented regarding the potential effect on case outcome, there is value in taking a closer look at other ways in which that disadvantage may accumulate. Put another way, aside from the negative effects noted above (increase likelihood of conviction, increase likelihood of sentencing to a secure as opposed to a community- based sanction upon a finding of guilt), how might the potentially negative effects of pretrial detention manifest themselves in other ways? As mentioned above, through the denial of liberty and freedom, pretrial detention has an effect on things like access to defense counsel and other resources that can affect case outcome. However, pretrial detention may hold other implications for several other harbingers of adult functionality, which may affect an individual's life in other ways, thereby having further reaching impacts that in turn make serial involvement with the criminal justice system more likely. Details: Boston: Crime and Justice Institute, 2016. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 3, 2016 at: http://www.crj.org/page/-/publications/Exploring%20Pretrial%20Detention.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.crj.org/page/-/publications/Exploring%20Pretrial%20Detention.pdf Shelf Number: 140156 Keywords: Pretrial Detention Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Australia. Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre Title: Regional Risk Assessment on terrorism Financing 2016: South-East Asia & Australia Summary: The Syria-Iraq conflict and the rise of the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)1 have energised extremists and their sympathisers across South-East Asia and Australia. The region is also dealing with long-running domestic conflicts and insurgencies that share the characteristics of terrorism, even if they are not connected to ISIL or violent global extremism. This highly-charged and dynamic security environment has intensified terrorism financing risks in the region, posing new challenges for authorities. Small-cell terrorist activity, foreign terrorist fighter travel and the growing number of lone actors will see continued use of self-funding to raise funds and cash smuggling to move them. These proven, easy-to-use terrorism financing methods reduce the need for terrorists and their supporters to resort to more complex financial activity or adopt new payment systems. The region's porous land and close maritime borders, as well as informal cash-intensive economies, also influence the continued use of established methods. Terrorism financing funds flowing out of the region are currently channelled mainly into the Syria-Iraq conflict, but comprise only a small portion of international funding to factions fighting in that area. While outflows to foreign conflict zones pose a high risk, concern is growing over signs of funding entering the region to support local terrorist actors. Details: Canberra: AUSTRAC, 2016. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 3, 2016 at: http://www.austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/regional-risk-assessment-SMALL_0.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/regional-risk-assessment-SMALL_0.pdf Shelf Number: 140160 Keywords: Financing of Terrorism ISIS Islamic State Risk Assessment Terrorist Financing Violent Extremists

Author: Skeem, Jennifer L. Title: How Well Do Juvenile Risk Assessment Measure Factors to Target in Treatment? Examining Construct Validity Summary: There has been a surge of interest in using one type of risk assessment instrument to tailor treatment to juveniles to reduce recidivism. Unlike prediction-oriented instruments, these reduction-oriented instruments explicitly measure variable risk factors as "needs" to be addressed in treatment. There is little evidence, however, that the instruments accurately measure specific risk factors. Based on a sample of 237 serious juvenile offenders (M age=18, SD=1.5), we tested whether California Youth Assessment Inventory (CA-YASI) scores validly assess the risk factors they purport to assess. Youth were assessed by practitioners with good inter-rater reliability on the CA-YASI, and by research staff on a battery of validated, multi-method criterion measures of target constructs. We meta-analytically tested whether each CA-YASI risk domain score (e.g., Attitudes) related more strongly to scores on convergent measures of theoretically similar constructs (e.g., criminal thinking styles) than to scores on discriminant measures of theoretically distinct constructs (e.g., intelligence, somatization, pubertal status). CA-YASI risk domain scores with the strongest validity support were those that assess criminal history. The only variable CA-YASI risk domain score that correlated more strongly with convergent (Zr=.35) than discriminant (Zr=.07) measures was Substance Use. There was little support for the construct validity of the remaining six variable CA-YASI risk domains - including those that ostensibly assess strong risk factors (e.g., "Attitudes," "Social Influence"). Our findings emphasize the need to test the construct validity of reduction-oriented instruments - and refine instruments to precisely measure their targets so they can truly inform risk reduction. Public Significance: This study suggests that scores on a juvenile risk assessment instrument provide little direction for targeting treatment to reduce young people's risk of reoffending. With the exception of "Substance Abuse," we found little evidence that scores on ostensibly treatment-relevant scales measure the risk factors they purport to measure. The instrument must be refined, to support valid interpretations about risk factors to target in treatment. Details: Unpublished paper, 2016. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 16, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2832954 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2832954 Shelf Number: 147859 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Recidivism Risk Assessment Risk Reduction

Author: Lehmann, Robert J.B. Title: Using Crime Scene Behavior for Risk Assessment in Sexual Offenders Summary: Sexual offending represents an important judicial, clinical, and policy issue and tends to invoke considerable public concern. Recent meta-analytic research indicates that about 8% of men and 20% of women had suffered some form of sexual abuse prior to the age of 18 (Pereda, Guilera, Forns, & Gomez-Benito, 2009). Tjaden and Thoennes (2006) report a lifetime prevalence of rape in men of about 3% and in women of about 18%. Accordingly, courts, police, and forensic practitioners invest considerable resources in predicting and preventing sexual offending by known sexual offenders. In general, those involved in assessing an offender's risk for future sexual offending seek to collect diverse information about the offender and the offenses committed to inform their decisions. Furthermore, the importance of including crime scene information into forensic risk assessment (referred to as "risk assessment" from hereon) is emphasized throughout the literature (e.g., Beech, Fisher, & Thornton, 2003; West, 2000). In Germany, the analysis of crime scene behavior is an essential part of clinical-idiographic risk assessment (Rasch, 1999). Expert witnesses are implicitly required by law to explain an offender's risk by providing evidence from their crime scene behavior. Indeed, the courts have placed increasing demand on the analysis of an offender's crime scene behavior to date. Moreover, the analysis of an offender's criminal behavior following a clinical-idiographic approach (Dahle, 2005) is part of the minimum standards of risk assessment in Germany (Boetticher et al., 2007). In spite of the theoretical relevance of crime scene analysis (CSA) for risk assessment, there is little empirical evidence to support what crime scene behavior is most relevant for risk assessment. Therefore, the empirical analysis of the predictive accuracy of crime scene behaviors for the assessment of future sexual offending is needed. For example, whereas frequently used actuarial risk assessment methods rely heavily on the criminal history of an offender with only limited and a-theoretical inclusion of crime scene related variables, CSA could also be applied in cases where offenders have no such criminal history (i.e., first-time offenders) or where the criminal history is simply unknown (e.g., foreign offender). Furthermore, according to German regulations, risk assessment can only be completed using a clinical-idiographic risk assessment approach, which pays particular attention to the individual circumstances and characteristics (e.g., crime scene information) of a particular case. To provide for a scientific and controllable framework as well as for transparency, it is essential to structure the clinical-idiographic assessment content-wise and to follow specific methodological guidelines. In terms of the theoretical and empirical basis for the process of analyzing the crime scene behavior evaluators have to draw on, for example, general theories of criminality and social psychology or dated (non-validated) offender typologies. So far, there are no explicit guidelines or risk assessment instruments assisting the evaluator to structure the CSA or indicating what is the relevant information to include. Therefore, the possibilities for quality control (e.g., comprehensiveness, completeness) of the CSA are limited. To diagnose deviant sexual preferences diagnosticians often rely on the self-report assessment of the patients themselves. However, given the elevated risk associated with a diagnosis of a sexual paraphilia, patients may have a tendency for dissimulation. To overcome this problem researchers have recently suggested the use of behavioral indicators derived from a person's criminal history as a complementary method for diagnosing sexual paraphilia (Nitschke, Mokros, Osterheider, & Marshall, 2012). In addition to being a useful complement for the clinical diagnosis of sexual paraphilia, crime scene behavior could generally provide potentially rich information about other enduring offender propensities as well. These propensities (e.g., whether a sexual offense was motivated by general antisocial behavior or sexualized aggression) could have important implications for risk assessment, offender treatment, and police investigations. They could help therapists to identify the important clinical phenomena evident in the offense behavior or could inform risk assessment for police investigations in cases where the offender has yet to be identified (e.g., behavioral investigative advice). Altogether, crime scene information is an important and understudied factor that might be a valid contribution to risk assessment as well as for other applied contexts (e.g., the delivery of treatment services). Crime scene information is valuable as it is a more objective measure of what the offender actually did, and is not dependent on self-report. Also, it should commonly be available and easily assessable by the analysis of victim statements, police reports, and court decisions. However, to date no systematic and theory-based empirical evaluation is available that tries to identify the relevant crime scene information to be included into a comprehensive risk assessment. Details: Berlin: Freie Universitat Berlin, 2014. 83p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed September 28, 2016 at: http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/diss/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/FUDISS_derivate_000000015568/Lehmann.Robert.diss.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Germany URL: http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/diss/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/FUDISS_derivate_000000015568/Lehmann.Robert.diss.pdf Shelf Number: 146119 Keywords: Crime Analysis Crime Scenes Criminal Investigation Risk Assessment Sex Offenders

Author: Stavrou, Efty Title: The revised Group Risk Assessment Model (GRAM 2): Assessing risk of reoffending among adults given non-custodial sanctions Summary: Aim: To re-examine the Group Risk Assessment Model (GRAM) for predicting reoffending in adults given non-custodial sentences and to assess the accuracy of the model. Method: Adult offenders given non-custodial sentences in 2011 were the cohort of interest. Reoffending within 24 months of the index appearance was measured using court data. Models predicting reoffending using personal, index offence and criminal history characteristics were undertaken using multivariate logistic regression and model fits were assessed. Model validity and reliability was also measured by applying the model estimates to sub-group data and to separate smaller cohorts. Results: Of the 81,199 adult offenders, 26% reoffended within two years of the index appearance. The best model fit for GRAM 2 comprised age, gender, Indigenous status, number of concurrent offences, prior custodial sentence, prior proven offences and the index offence type. The internal and external validity of the model was strong, however application of the model to offenders from smaller geographical areas or to those with a prior history of prison or property offending should be undertaken with care. Application of the model for screening purposes should also be carefully considered. Conclusion: The GRAM 2 has been shown to be a robust tool for predicting reoffending. Although reliable, model estimates and their applicability should be re-examined periodically. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 197: Accessed October 12, 2016 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-GRAM2-Group-Risk-Assessment-Model-CJB197.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2016-GRAM2-Group-Risk-Assessment-Model-CJB197.pdf Shelf Number: 145439 Keywords: Prediction Recidivism Reoffending Risk Assessment

Author: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, Inc. Title: Assessing Risk of Recidivism Among Juvenile Offenders: The Recidivism Risk Instrument. Technical Report Summary: The past four decades have been witness to an increasing interest in risk assessment in the corrections field. Risk assessment is based on the calculation of statistical relationships between offender characteristics and outcomes such as recidivism. The process of risk assessment involves estimating an individual's likelihood of continued involvement in delinquent behavior, based on the relationship of specific characteristics to delinquency (Gottfredson & Moriarty, 2006; Krysik & LeCroy, 2002). Several trends have contributed to the increased popularity of risk assessment. A steady increase in the number of juveniles that were entering the juvenile justice system has heightened the demand for rehabilitation services. This increased demand for services combined with their high cost has prompted efforts to target services, based on a systematic assessment of need, to those at the high end of the risk continuum, while reducing efforts aimed at those on the low end. The assignment of low risk cases to intensive services may not only be a waste of scarce resources, but may in fact be criminogenic (Andrews et al. 1986). Statistical risk assessment is increasingly being used to replace assessments based on "clinical" judgments which are subjective and less accurate than statistical instruments. Actuarial/statistical risk instruments generally classify youth as low-, medium-, or high-risk for recidivism by estimating an offender's likelihood of reoffending based on their similarity to others who have recidivated in the past. Accordingly, the goal of statistical risk instruments is to identify a group of offenders with different rates of recidivism and focus intensive treatment interventions on those offenders with the greatest risk of returning to custody. Research has shown that a small number of offenders contribute disproportionately to the crime rate. For instance, research on two cohorts of first-time juvenile delinquents in Orange County, California found that approximately 10% of the juveniles accounted for over one-half of all subsequent offenses (Kurz & Moore, 1993). Based on these findings, Orange County developed a risk-based intervention strategy that emphasizes risk rather than crime seriousness. The recognition that a relatively few individuals commit the majority of crimes has prompted a more streamlined approach to the early identification of the most persistent juvenile offenders. The purpose of identifying high-risk juveniles early in their criminal careers is to provide them with cost effective prevention and treatment services. In Orange County, the chronic offender population averages nearly 20 months of incarceration within 6 years of their first offense, making the cost of incarceration alone $44,000 per individual in 1993 dollars (Kurz & Moore, 1993). At the rate of approximately 500 new chronic juvenile offenders per year, the estimated cost for incarceration in Orange County is $22 million per cohort. A reduction in placement would result in significant cost savings. Further, there is reason to suspect that predictors of recidivism for boys differ from predictors of recidivism for girls (Emeka & Sorensen, 2009). For example, Plattner and colleagues (2009) identified sex specific predictors of recidivism among a sample of incarcerated youth. For boys, the strongest predictors for recidivism were age at first incarceration and presence of oppositional defiant disorder. For girls, the strongest predictors for recidivism were dysthymia (protective factor) and generalized anxiety disorder. Consistent with previous work, early aggressive or disruptive behavior was not a good predictor of later delinquency for girls. The most common problem encountered in risk prediction research is data limitations. Data limitations constrain the potential for sophisticated and more appropriate statistical approaches to analysis. There are two basic sampling issues that lead to limitations in the data. First, the size of the sample is critical. In terms of how big the sample should be, Jones (1996) recommends at least 500, half for estimation and half for validation. If a large number of variables are being tested in multivariate statistical analysis, it is common practice to ensure that the sample includes at least 10 subjects for each predictor variable considered (Norman & Streiner, 1986). Second, the sample must be representative of the population to whom the instrument will be applied; therefore, it should be a random sample. Even if a sample is large and appropriately drawn, serious problems may still emerge. The patterns found in one sample can lead to overestimating patterns that might exist in other samples. Representativeness can encompass the variables of age, gender, race and ethnicity, regional area, and time period (Jones, 1996). Criticism of several studies has revolved around the use of only one sample for estimation, and the subsequent failure to test the accuracy of the derived model on an independent validation sample (Krysik & LeCroy, 2002; Schwalbe, 2007). The primary purpose of using a separate sample for validation is to test the extent that empirically derived relationships persist across samples. When the risk assessment instrument is validated on the same sample from which it was estimated, the rate of correct classification is naturally much higher. Thus, the use of at least two samples is recommended, one for estimation and one or more for validation. The lack of differentiation on the criterion variable is always more apparent during validation than the construction of the instrument. The prediction instrument developed on a selective sample is often applied to a population containing a wider range of risk than that of those individuals originally studied. Under such circumstances, the best policy is to identify a random sample that is as closely related as possible to the population of interest. If this is not possible, it may be useful to examine empirically differences between the original sample and the population of interest. Invariably the best laid plans are constrained by the quality of the data available. Often this problem is not recognized, or it may be noticed and not addressed. The main effect of missing data is to reduce the size of the sample at the stage of multivariate analysis. How this problem is dealt with depends in part on how much data is missing, and how important the particular variables afflicted are thought to be as predictors. If there are few missing values and the data are missing completely at random, then the analysis should be based on those cases with a complete set of variable values (Jones, 1996). Other than a reduced sample size, this complete case approach poses no problems. An alternative approach that makes use of available information is to include all cases that have values for a specified group of variables. This available-cases approach has the significant disadvantage that statistics such as means and variances are based on samples of different sizes. A third approach is the imputation of missing values. This involves the estimation of missing values based on those data that are available (Little & Rubin, 1987). In instances where a person's risk-level is assessed at more than one point in time, it is necessary to move away from a reliance on variables that remain constant toward more dynamic indicators. Static indicators can be historical (e.g., parent criminality) or ascribed (e.g., gender or race). As individuals can exercise no control over static factors, they are insensitive to change over time. The repeated use of these same variables can result in individuals being censured over and over for the same attributes. Psychiatric measures, response to supervision or institutionalization, employment, and family situation, are examples of dynamic factors. One risk assessment instrument involving dynamic factors is offered by Baird (1984). He has developed an initial risk assessment instrument and a reassessment instrument. His reassessment instrument retains the most significant initial predictors such as age at first adjudication, prior criminal behavior, and institutional placements of more than 30 days, and adds to this dynamic factors such as response to supervision and the use of community resources. Dynamic factors introduce a stronger element of judgment or discretion into the classification process. Underwood (1979) cautions that the inclusion of subjectively scored items may provide opportunity for personal biases to be passed off as scientific judgment. The goal in risk assessment is to choose the smallest number of variables with the greatest predictive validity. This goal, however, can be modified by the issue of face validity. Burnham (1990) argues that decision makers feel uncomfortable with only a limited set of data items and require a range of information, most of which they do not take into account. He differentiates between information, that which leads to predictive efficacy; and noise, those items necessary for the instrument to be supported by the user. Most commonly, prediction models include both individual and environmental variables as predictors. Ideally, the pool of possible predictors is theoretically derived, with one variable representing each theoretical construct, and each of the selected variables tested for validity and reliability. In practice, prediction in the area of criminality is constrained by poorly defined theory. Given these cautions, we turn our attention toward key predictor variables supported in the literature. Details: Tucson, AZ: LeCroy and Milligan Associates, 2012. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 12, 2016 at: http://www.lecroymilligan.com/data/resources/recidivism-risk-instrument-final-report-10312012-final-revision-b.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.lecroymilligan.com/data/resources/recidivism-risk-instrument-final-report-10312012-final-revision-b.pdf Shelf Number: 140672 Keywords: Juvenile Offenders Prediction Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, Inc. Title: Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections Risk Assessment Project Findings Summary: The primary purpose of this project was to construct an interim risk tool for the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC). The function of the interim risk tool is to statistically estimate the likelihood that an offender will continue to be involved in delinquent activity, and classify the offender according to their relative risk of continued involvement (Gottfredson, 1987; Krysik & LeCroy, 2002). The goal of statistical risk assessment is to effectively group offenders by risk level in order to allocate resources for higher-risk youth while maintaining validity and consistency in the assessment and decision-making process. The development of an interim risk tool was constructed through an integrated three step approach: (1) a review of the literature related to modeling risk in juvenile correctional populations was conducted; (2) the interim risk tool was developed and subsequently validated on a separate, independent sample; and (3) risk tool administrators and users were surveyed to determine their perceptions and use of the current ADJC risk prediction instrument. Historically, the type of information included in risk instruments includes the offender's criminal history, social history (e.g., substance abuse, education/employment, family background, psychological profile), and demographics (i.e., age, gender, race/ethnicity) (Cottle et al., 2001; Krysik & LeCroy, 2002). In most risk tools, the likelihood of recidivism is most closely related to a few consistent variables - criminal history, substance abuse, family background, and school performance. Details: Tucson, AZ: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, 2006. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 12, 2016 at: http://www.lecroymilligan.com/data/resources/adjcriskassessmentprojectfindingsreportfinal-1.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.lecroymilligan.com/data/resources/adjcriskassessmentprojectfindingsreportfinal-1.pdf Shelf Number: 140673 Keywords: Juvenile Corrections Juvenile Offenders Prediction Risk Assessment

Author: Pedneault, Amelie Title: Risk Assessment of Sex and Kidnapping Offenders: A Review of Practices and Training Needs in Washington State Summary: In Washington State, sexual and kidnapping offenders who return to the community after a conviction or at the end of their incarceration must register with their local law enforcement agency. Each agency is required to classify offenders on their sexual re-offense risk within the community at large; Level 1 represents a low level of sexual risk, Level 2 poses a moderate risk, and Level 3 a high risk (RCW 4.24.550 section 6b). The determination of offenders' risk level should consider the recommendation made by the Department of Corrections, Department of Social and Health Services, and End of Sentence Review Committee (RCW 4.24.550 section 6a). It is also possible for an agency to conduct their own application of a risk assessment tool, and other pertinent information about aggravating or mitigating factors when determining an offender's risk level (RCW 4.24.550 section 6a). The Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs has written a model policy to assist law enforcement agencies in the development of their own policies and procedures regarding sex offender registration and community notification (RCW 4.24.5501). While agencies can mold their operating policies and procedures on this model, they still have discretion to develop their own. As a result, their processes differ. In order to gain insight into the processes followed in agencies throughout Washington State, an online survey of law enforcement agencies was conducted. The present study has two aims: 1. Review and summarize the risk assignment procedures with which law enforcement agencies throughout Washington State assign a level of risk to sexual offenders. Specifically, the following aspects of the risk assignment process are reviewed: - Tools and materials considered; - Existence of an initial risk level classification appeal process; - Obstacles to timely risk assignments; - Specific procedure applicable when assigning a risk level to juvenile offenders. 2. Review and summarize training opportunities that are pertinent to assignment of risk for sexual offenders. The following two aspects of risk assignment training are reviewed: - Current opportunities to participate in training activities; - Training needs. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2016. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 12, 2016 at: http://www.ofm.wa.gov/sgc/sopb/meetings/board/2016/09/rso_coordinator_report_edits.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.ofm.wa.gov/sgc/sopb/meetings/board/2016/09/rso_coordinator_report_edits.pdf Shelf Number: 140684 Keywords: Kidnappers Police Education and Training Risk Assessment Sex Offenders

Author: Thanh, Vo Quoc Title: 6000 Cases of Missing and Absent Persons: Patterns of Crime Harm and Priorities for Resource Allocation Summary: The objectives of the study are to evaluate the existing approach to assessing the risk of harm to missing and absent people, which may affect how to police these incidents whilst taking into consideration the estimated costs involved. The study is based on 5,984 missing or absent cases during a six-month period in Thames Valley Police (TVP). Missing and absent person records were collected along with crime records and incident attendance records. The key findings are that the likelihood of death is rare, since only two out of the 3,706 individuals (0.05%) were known to have died during the period of time they were missing. Around 99% of individuals did not suffer any crime harm whilst missing. Even once non-crime harm was included, events such as: domestic non-recordable, mental health incident and child or adult protection incidents, 98% still did not suffer any type of harm. This is despite 820 (16%) cases graded as high-risk and 3,465 (68%) graded as medium-risk. Only 660 (13%) cases were graded as low-risk. Missing people were more likely to cause harm (suspect) than suffer harm (victim). The average word count for the Risk Assessment was low: with high-risk having two less words than medium for Risk Assessment One, and high-risk having one more word than medium risk for Risk Assessment Two. Consequently, officers and supervisors may be relying on their intuition to risk assess rather than the information available on the risk assessment. The minimum annual estimated police officer labour cost to TVP to police missing person enquiries is between $3.1 and $5.5 million. This is compared to $292,500 for absent person enquiries. The results of the study suggest that low-risk and the new absent category is under-utilised, reflecting a possible overly risk adverse attitude by officers. Details: Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge, Wolfson College, 2015. 150p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed October 13, 2016 at: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/alumni/theses/Quoc%20Thanh%20Vo.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/alumni/theses/Quoc%20Thanh%20Vo.pdf Shelf Number: 144938 Keywords: Missing Persons Risk Assessment

Author: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, Inc. Title: Assessing Risk of Disruptive Behaviors Among Juvenile Offenders: Assessing Risk of Disruptive Behaviors Among Juvenile Offenders Summary: The objective of this study is to develop an instrument to help improve the overall safety of juvenile correctional facilities and provide guidance for professionals to identify high need youth that will require additional support services. Details: Tucson, AZ: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, 2014. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 13, 2016 at: http://www.azdjc.gov/OfficesPrograms/Research/institutionalrisktechnicalreport.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.azdjc.gov/OfficesPrograms/Research/institutionalrisktechnicalreport.pdf Shelf Number: 144937 Keywords: Anti-Social Behavior Juvenile Corrections Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment

Author: Thornton, Sara Title: Predicting Serious Domestic Assaults and Murder in the Thames Valley Summary: Thames Valley Police uses a risk assessment model to identify those cases of domestic violence where the risk of future harm is high. This study looked at all the cases on serious domestic assault and murder between 2007 and 2009 to establish how accurate the risk assessments had been in predicting the serious harm. In 55% of cases there was no prior recorded contact with the police. In only five out of 118 cases was the case assessed as high risk. Effectively there was an 80% false negative rate. In the same period 1740 other victims were assessed as high risk arguably resulting in a 99% false positive rate. A case control study was carried out to try to identify any risk factors that marked out those offenders who committed the most serious domestic assaults from other violent offenders. The case control study found that those who committed serious domestic assault and murder were less criminogenic than the risk pool of all violent offenders - contrary to the central hypothesis of escalating violence. The study also found that male offenders who committed serious domestic assaults were more than three times likely to be suicidal than other violent offenders. Details: Cambridge, UK: Wolfson College, University of Cambridge, 2011. 98p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed October 17, 2016 at: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/alumni/theses/Thornton,%20S.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/alumni/theses/Thornton,%20S.pdf Shelf Number: 145094 Keywords: Domestic Violence Homicide Intimate Partner Violence Prediction Risk Assessment Violence Against Women

Author: Caudill, Jonathan W. Title: Considering the life-course of crime: contextualizing California's AB109 offender under correctional supervision Summary: In January 2012, the California State University, Chico, Consortium for Public Safety Research (CPSR) established a long-term collaborative relationship with the Butte County Sheriff's Office (BCSO) some three and a half months after the State of California started the process of transferring non-serious, non-violent, and non-sexual felony offender supervision to the counties. The significance of this transfer of supervision responsibilities cannot be overstated given the additional resources required to serve this population. As a part of a collaboration agreement, the CPSR has conducted a long-term assessment of the impact of AB 109 on the BCSO. Specifically, the CPSR has focused on the changing correctional client population for this report. As evidenced by the findings presented in the Findings section, the BCSO experienced a substantial shift in correctional client demographics and, thus, was required to reformulate their correctional mission. In the CPSR's first report, Breaking Ground: Preliminary Report of Butte County Sheriff's Alternative Custody Supervision Program, the authors made five results-based recommendations to improve correctional supervision and treatment. These recommendations focused on a clearer understanding of the new correctional client population as well as developing mechanisms to increase efficiencies in supervision and treatment strategies. Specifically, the CPSR made the following recommendations to the BCSO: 1. have the staff conduct a supervision and treatment plan for all potential ACS eligible inmates; 2. support their continued search for an appropriate offender management system that has the capacity to store historical data and network with other county systems; 3. further formalize the ACS program, to include additional officer training and a comprehensive, evidence-based supervision strategy; 4. explore a population-validated risk assessment tool, and; 5. work proactively to prioritize research projects promoting public safety and resource management. The BCSO has made significant strides toward full realization of these recommendations. For instance, the BCSO selected an offender management system and is now engaged in implementation. Further, the Alternative Custody Supervision (ACS) Program has conducted several community supervision trainings, implemented a caseload management system, and, is in the process of solidifying a comprehensive and scientifically validated training protocol for all ACS Deputies. These two recommendations aside, the BCSO requested the CPSR provide specific consultation to explore a population-validated risk assessment tool as the basis for individualized offender supervision and treatment plans. Thus, this report focuses on Life-course persistence in and desistance from crime. The Introduction section provides a general understanding of the Lifecourse framework and the Discussion section uses this framework to: (1) provide a clearer understanding of the correctional population shift in the BCSO via an inmate needs survey; (2) present results from a program exit predictive model; (3) introduce the findings from, and recommendations based on, a population-validated risk assessment instrument pilot study, and; (4) explore the ACS program supervision strategies. In short, this report contains evidence supporting three new recommendations to further the connectivity between service provision and public safety. The first recommendation, the BCSO expand therapeutic services in the jail, is the product of viewing inmate survey results through the Life-course lens. This orientation suggests the BCSO has an opportunity to harness the turning point of incarceration and, therefore, early incarceration programming may encourage desistance from crime. Details: Chico, CA: Consortium for Public Safety Research, California State University, Chico, 2013. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 19, 2016 at: http://www.buttecounty.net/Portals/24/Brochures/2013%20Caudill%20et%20al%20Considering%20the%20Life%20course%20of%20Crime.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.buttecounty.net/Portals/24/Brochures/2013%20Caudill%20et%20al%20Considering%20the%20Life%20course%20of%20Crime.pdf Shelf Number: 145886 Keywords: Community Supervision Inmate Supervision Life-Course Criminology Offender Supervision Public Safety Risk Assessment

Author: McCulloch, Jude Title: Review of the Familiy Violence Risk Assessment and Risk Management Framework (CRAF): Final Report Summary: The Family Violence Risk Assessment and Risk Management Framework (often referred to as the common risk assessment framework, or the CRAF) has been in use in Victoria since 2007. The CRAF is used by many different professional groups who come into contact with family violence in a range of services: its key objective is to prevent the repetition and escalation of family violence. The Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence recommended a review of the CRAF to ensure that it reflects best practice internationally. The Commission suggested that the review and redevelopment of the CRAF should aim to enhance processes of risk assessment for children, pay attention to more effective inclusion of all the forms of family violence covered by the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 [Vic] and should incorporate a rating and/or weighting of risk factors to identify the risk of family violence as low, medium or high. Overall, this Review found that the CRAF has worked effectively to build shared understanding of, and responsibility for, risk assessment of intimate partner violence as the most prevalent form of family violence. While acknowledging its limitations, those who consistently use the framework, testify to its utility in working with women on identifying and understanding their own risk and supporting the professional judgement of support workers in a range of professional contexts. The current CRAF is grounded in well-established international evidence about known risks to women from male intimate partners. The CRAF is recognised nationally and internationally as a practice leader in risk assessment and it has spread more widely and lasted longer than many other similar tools. Recent and emerging research suggests that attention to new risks associated with smart technologies and the importance of coercive and controlling behaviours in risk assessment should be included in the redevelopment of the CRAF. Risk assessment beyond the context of intimate partner violence is much less developed and this limitation influences the utility and application of the CRAF in assessing diverse forms of family violence. The Review provides a snapshot of the use, usability, strengths and limitations of the CRAF. Its recognised strengths are linked most strongly to building a shared understanding of risk and family violence across service providers. It was considered that the CRAF addresses risk assessment in cases of male perpetrated intimate partner violence reasonably well. However, it was identified that it is important to clarify the limits of risk in assessing the needs of victims and to develop more standardised understandings about what risk is being assessed, when assessment should happen, and the roles and responsibilities of different occupational groups in relation to risk identification and assessment. The aspiration of the CRAF to provide appropriate referral pathways and information sharing is not yet realised and there is considerable work to be done in developing, embedding and monitoring effective and optimal pathways for victim/survivors. Details: Clayton, VIC: Monash University, School of Social Sciences, 2016. 156p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 20, 2016 at: http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/974551/Review-of-the-Family-Violence-Risk-Assessment-and-Risk-Management-Framework-CRAF-Final-Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/974551/Review-of-the-Family-Violence-Risk-Assessment-and-Risk-Management-Framework-CRAF-Final-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 145995 Keywords: Family Violence Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment

Author: Matthews, Corey Title: Targeting High Risk Offenders: A Violence Reduction Strategy Summary: The City of Oakland's Human Services Department plans and administers violence intervention programs and services for city residents. This network of programs and services, housed under the name "Oakland Unite" is undergoing a comprehensive strategic planning process. This report highlights the opportunities to enhance service delivery for those at highest risk of offense or reoffense in Oakland Unite's four violence intervention strategies: Focused Youth Services, Family Violence Intervention, Young Adult Reentry Services, and Incident/Crisis Response. It incorporates: 1) A qualitative analysis of focus group discussions with providers of violence intervention services. 2) A municipality comparison of promising practices used by professionals in the field. 3) A literature review of city-led violence reduction strategy reports. It concludes with recommendations on how to refine the City of Oakland's violence intervention model and improve service delivery practices to better serve the highest risk youth and young adults. Recommendations are made with short and long-term considerations. In the short-term, Oakland Unite should: - Invest in After School Programs for young people to offer more options for extracurricular involvement - Research risk assessment tools - Staff a grants manager to apply for and administer external funding resources In the long-term, Oakland Unite should: - Reorganize its referral network to leverage neighborhood, place-based service delivery (i.e. services in East Oakland might be different than those in West Oakland) - Increase Oakland Unified School District support to provide onsite mental health, case management and additional services for young people at the highest risk for re-offense - Adopt a standardized risk assessment - Apply for state, federal and philanthropic funding to increase resources for service delivery Details: Berkeley, CA: University of California Berkeley, Goldman School of Public Policy, 2015. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 12, 2016 at: http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Targeting-High-Risk-Offenders_Advanced-Policy-Analysis_Matthews_Corey-Spring-2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://oaklandunite.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Targeting-High-Risk-Offenders_Advanced-Policy-Analysis_Matthews_Corey-Spring-2015.pdf Shelf Number: 146670 Keywords: Repeat Offenders Risk Assessment Violence Prevention Violent Offenders

Author: Wong, Timothy Title: Validation of LSI-R and ASUS Criminogenic Risk Instruments Summary: This study report is based on a compilation of adult offender risk assessment data from the CYZAP database, and offender arrest/conviction data from the Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS). The report contains detailed analyses of offenders from the Judiciary’s Probation Services, Hawaii Paroling Authority, and the Department of Public Safety, who were administered the Level of Service Inventory Revised (LSIR) and Adult Substance Use Survey (ASUS). These assessment instruments measure criminogenic and alcohol/drug dependency risk levels, as well as the severity of criminogenic and alcohol/drug patterns, known as subdomains. All offenders are classified by risk levels, which provide invaluable information needed for case supervision purposes and determining treatment levels. Both risk instruments are critical to risk and need principles established in evidence-based practices, and necessitate validation; e.g., ascertainment of whether or not they accurately predict recidivism, and if they correctly classify offenders into distinct risk groups. Recidivism is an important outcome measure, since it distinguishes offenders who have re-offended from those who remained free of crime or technical violations over a three-year period. This report presents information on recidivism rates for probationers, parolees, and incarcerated offenders in the State of Hawaii. It also assesses a variety of offender conditions, including criminogenic dimensions, criminal offenses committed, and socio-demographic variables. The major objective of this report is to assist Interagency Council on Intermediate Sanctions (ICIS) agencies in evaluating longer-term outcomes, and documenting change in criminogenic risk patterns. It also provides analytical information on how a complement of predictive risk indicators, specified by risk levels, plays an important role in identifying risk assessment patterns, analyzing policy decisions, and evaluating service delivery options. The statistical charts depicted herein present data relating to the following areas: (1) Recidivism Analysis a. Agency and County b. Socio-demographics c. Time to Recidivism d. LSI-R Risk classification validity (2) Analysis of LSI-R Initial and Most Recent Assessments (3) ASUS and LSI-R Predictive Validity Methodology: The recidivism database includes an unduplicated count of 7,286 offenders, of which 5,126 received two or more LSI-Rs and ASUS’ from 2009 through 2011. The approach of this report is to complement existing LSI-R and ASUS statistical profile information with offender arrest data. The recidivism database was prepared as a flat file of unduplicated offender records. Each record contains data fields that incorporate initial and most recent LSI-R and ASUS assessment information, criminal arrests, and types of charged offenses. Additionally, calculated fields were added to the database to measure change in both the LSI-R total and protective scores, and criminogenic subdomain percentiles. Furthermore, the use of calculated date fields, which measure the length of time between the start of follow-up date and arrest date, is critical for the measurement of recidivism. For the purpose of this report, recidivism is defined as rearrests, revocations, and technical violations, tracked over a three-year period from the onset of supervision or release to parole. Details: Honolulu: Interagency Council on Intermediate Sanctions, 2013. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 16, 2016 at: http://icis.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Validation_LSI-and-ASUS-FYs-2009-2011.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://icis.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Validation_LSI-and-ASUS-FYs-2009-2011.pdf Shelf Number: 147316 Keywords: Probationers Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: Millsteed, Melanie Title: Predictors of recidivism amongst police recorded family violence perpetrators Summary: Prior research has identified that a number of factors are associated with an increased risk of recidivism amongst perpetrators of domestic violence and that the risk assessment tools currently available have limited statistical capacity to accurately predict recidivism. In Victoria, police complete a risk assessment form (the L17 form) for each family incident reported to them. This study sought to analyse the relationship between repeat family incidents, and factors that may predict such incidents including alleged perpetrator characteristics and L17 risk factors recorded by police. Logistic regression modelling identified statistical relationships between some, but not all, of the alleged perpetrator characteristics and risk factors recorded, and the perpetration of further family incidents. Opportunities for further research are identified, including piloting and evaluation of any new or revised risk assessment tools developed in Victoria. Details: Melbourne, AUS: Victoria Crime Statistics Agency, 2016. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: In Brief, no. 4: Accessed November 21, 2016 at: https://www.crimestatistics.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/embridge_cache/emshare/original/public/2016/06/96/97f49b66e/20160530_final_in_brief4.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.crimestatistics.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/embridge_cache/emshare/original/public/2016/06/96/97f49b66e/20160530_final_in_brief4.pdf Shelf Number: 147852 Keywords: Family Violence Intimate Partner Violence Re-offending Recidivism Risk Assessment

Author: AUSTRAC Title: Australia's Superannuation Section: Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing Risk Assessment Summary: AUSTRAC assesses the overall money laundering and terrorism financing (ML/TF) risk for the superannuation sector as MEDIUM. This rating is based on an assessment of the criminal threat environment, the vulnerabilities within the sector, and the consequences or harms associated with the criminal threat. This assessment relates to superannuation funds regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA). The criminal threat environment is varied and multifaceted, ranging from opportunistic offences conducted by individual members, to complex and sophisticated attacks executed by organised crime groups, including from entities based overseas. The size of the superannuation sector ($1.26 trillion in assets)1 makes it an attractive target for money laundering and associated predicate crimes. Fraud is by far the most prevalent predicate crime, with many reported cases of falsified documents and attempted illegal early release of superannuation savings. Many cases of fraud are enabled by cybercrime, with funds observing regular and sophisticated hacking attempts. Terrorism financing is a limited but emerging threat. Foreign terrorist fighters (FTFs), who are generally self funded, have accessed superannuation accounts to finance their activities. The specific characteristics of the superannuation sector that make it vulnerable to ML/TF and predicate crimes include: • the extremely large number of member accounts and volume of transactions • low levels of member engagement, which hampers timely detection of fraud • post-preservation accounts which have few restrictions on making transactions to and from the accounts • voluntary contributions to accumulation accounts by members, where the source of money is difficult to verify • payments to members and outgoing rollovers that are vulnerable to fraud and illegal early release • the growing reliance on online delivery of products and services, resulting in less face-toface interaction with customers and increasing online data storage. Details: West Chatswood, NSW: AUSTRAC, 2016. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 10, 2016 at: http://austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/super-annuation-risk-assessment-WEB.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/super-annuation-risk-assessment-WEB.pdf Shelf Number: 140411 Keywords: Financial Crime Money Laundering Risk Assessment Terrorist Financing

Author: Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Title: Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing measures: United States. Mutual Evaluation Report Summary: 1. This report provides a summary of the anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) measures in place in the United States at the date of the on-site visit (18 January 2016 to 5 February 2016). It analyses the level of compliance with the FATF 40 Recommendations, the level of effectiveness of its AML/CFT system, and makes recommendations on how the system could be strengthened. A. Key Findings  The AML/CFT framework in the U.S. is well developed and robust. Domestic coordination and cooperation on AML/CFT issues is sophisticated and has matured since the previous evaluation in 2006. The understanding of money laundering (ML) and terrorist financing (TF) risks is well-supported by a variety of ongoing and complementary risk assessment processes, including the 2015 National Money Laundering Risk Assessment (NMLRA) and National Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment (NTFRA), which were both published. The national AML/CFT strategies, key priorities and efforts of law enforcement and other agencies seem to be driven by these processes and are coordinated at the Federal level across a vast spectrum of agencies in a number of areas.  The financial sectors bear most of the burden in respect of required measures under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). Financial institutions (FIs), in general, have an evolved understanding of ML/TF risks and obligations, and have systems and processes for implementing preventive measures, including for on-boarding customers, transaction monitoring and reporting suspicious transactions.  However, the regulatory framework has some significant gaps, including minimal coverage of certain institutions and businesses (investment advisers (IAs), lawyers, accountants, real estate agents, trust and company service providers (other than trust companies). Minimal measures are imposed on designated non-financial businesses and professions (DNFBPs), other than casinos and dealers in precious metals and stones, and consist of the general obligation applying to all trades and businesses to report transactions (or a series of transactions) involving more than USD 10 000 in cash, and targeted financial sanctions (TFS) requirements. Other comprehensive AML/CFT obligations do not apply to these sectors. In the U.S. context the vulnerability of these minimally covered DNFBP sectors is significant, considering the many examples identified by the national risk assessment process.  Law enforcement efforts rest on a well-established task force environment which enables the pooling of expertise from a wide range of law enforcement agencies (LEAs), including prosecutors, to support quality ML/TF investigation and prosecution outcomes. Overall, LEAs have access to a wide range of financial intelligence, capabilities and expertise allowing them to trace assets, identify targets and undertake expert financial ML/TF investigations. There is a strong focus on following the money in predicate offence investigations at the Federal level. A similar focus on identifying terrorist financiers in terrorism-related investigations applies. The U.S. investigates and prosecutes TF networks aggressively in line with its risk profile. International cooperation in these areas is generally effective though improvements are underway to further improve the timely handling of (a large volume) of mutual legal assistance (MLA) and extradition requests.  Lack of timely access to adequate, accurate and current beneficial ownership (BO) information remains one of the fundamental gaps in the U.S. context. The NMLRA identifies examples of legal persons being abused for ML, in particular, through the use of complex structures to hide ownership. While authorities did provide case examples of successful investigations in these areas, challenges in ensuring timely access to and availability of BO information more generally raises significant concerns, bearing in mind risk and context.  At the Federal level, the U.S. achieves over 1 200 ML convictions a year. Many of these cases are large, complex, white collar crime cases, in line with the country’s risk profile. Federal authorities have the lead role in all large and/or international investigations. There is however no uniform approach to State-level AML efforts and it is not clear that all States give ML due priority. The AML system would benefit from ensuring that a range of tax crimes are predicate offenses for ML.  The Federal authorities aggressively pursue high-value confiscation in large and complex cases, in respect of assets located both domestically and abroad. The authorities effectively resort to criminal, civil and administrative tools to forfeit assets. At State and local levels, there is little available information, though it appears that civil forfeiture is vigorously pursued by some States.  The U.S. authorities effectively implement targeted financial sanctions for both terrorism and proliferation financing purposes, though not all U.N designations have resulted in domestic designations (mainly on the basis of insufficient identifiers). Most designations take place without delay, and are effectively communicated to the private sector. The U.S. Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) is used by thousands of FIs across the U.S. and beyond which gives the U.S sanctions regime a global effect in line with the size, complexity and international reach of the U.S. financial system. The U.S has had significant success in identifying the funds/other assets of designated persons/entities, and preventing them from operating or executing financial transactions related to terrorism and proliferation. Only minor improvements are needed in this area.  AML/CFT supervision of the banking and securities sectors appears to be robust as a whole, and is evolving for money services businesses (MSBs) through greater coordination at the State level. The U.S. has a range of sanctions that it can and does impose on FIs as well as an array of dissuasive remedial measures, including informal supervisory actions. These measures seem to have the desired impact on achieving the supervisory objectives. The most significant supervisory gap is lack of comprehensive AML/CFT supervisory processes for the DNFBPs, other than casinos. Details: Paris, FATF, 2016. 266p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 14, 2016 at: http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/mer4/MER-United-States-2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/mer4/MER-United-States-2016.pdf Shelf Number: 140443 Keywords: Financial Crimes Money Laundering Risk Assessment Terrorist Financing

Author: Tiry, Emily Title: Road Map to Pretrial Reforms: Profile Analysis of New Hampshire's Pretrial Defendant Population Summary: This report details an effort in New Hampshire to adopt evidence-based policy and practice for pretrial release decision-making. Many states have introduced changes to improve pretrial release decision-making in recent decades. As the first step toward implementing pretrial reforms in New Hampshire, the current study examines the characteristics of the pretrial defendant population, identifies data gaps and limitations, and presents a road map for developing a validated pretrial risk assessment tool. The population analysis findings suggest that the pretrial defendant population in New Hampshire is largely demographically homogenous across counties, but counties vary in their charging, bail-setting, and data collection practices. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2016. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 14, 2016 at: http://www.urban.org/research/publication/road-map-pretrial-reforms/view/full_report Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/research/publication/road-map-pretrial-reforms/view/full_report Shelf Number: 144886 Keywords: Bail Criminal Justice Policy Criminal Justice Reform Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Fisher, Leah R. Title: Washington Residents' Perceptions of Sex Offenders and Sex Offender Policies Summary: Largely feared by the public, sex offenders are often seen as some of the most heinous criminals. Throughout the years, this fear has often been met with legal sanctions and legislation at local and federal levels. While well intentioned, these policies have often been found to be based on misinformation and unfounded assumptions, leading to overall ineffectiveness (Cohen & Jeglic, 2007; Zevitz & Farkas, 2000; Zandbergen & Hart, 2006). The most recent federal legislative response to sex offenses is the Adam Walsh Act of 2006 (AWA); Title 1, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, is commonly referred to as SORNA. SORNA regulates the community notification and registration requirement for states to protect further victimization of children. This is done by requiring states to implement and adhere to specific standards outlined by SORNA. The most widely known SORNA standard is tiering of offenders, which requires that all convicted sex offenders be placed in Tier 1, Tier 2 or Tier 3, based on their offense of conviction. Tier assignment determines registration requirements, and all offenders in the same tier are subject to the same duration of registration and frequency of in-person verification. In many cases, tier assignment will also help jurisdictions determine what level of community notification an offender is subjected to. SORNA requires registration information for all sex offenders to be made available online. It also requires jurisdictions to update registration information within three business days and provide email notices to appropriate parties when an offender moves to a new location, begins employment or starts attending school. Currently, Washington assigns levels to offenders based on an evidence-based risk assessment. That level then determines frequency of in-person verification. Conversely, duration of registration is based on offense class, with more serious offenses requiring longer periods of registration. Therefore, the implementation of SORNA tiering would require a major policy change. Washington legislators and policy makers recognize that such a major change in the management of sex offenders would need to be approached in a way that ensures public understanding. To do this, it is key to understand the perceptions of Washington residents that may underlie support for Washington's registration and notification policies. Moreover, it is important to understand the knowledge base of citizens so education can be provided in the most effective way possible. This will make a potential policy transition smoother, allowing convicted sex offenders the opportunity to reintegrate as it leads to a more informed citizenry. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Statistical Analysis Center, 2016. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 19, 2016 at: http://sac.ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/pdf/perceptions_brief.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://sac.ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/pdf/perceptions_brief.pdf Shelf Number: 147758 Keywords: Risk Assessment Sex Offender Registration Sex Offenders

Author: Cape, Ed Title: The Practice of Pre-trial Detention in England and Wales: Research Report Summary: This study of pre-trial detention (PTD) decision-making in England and Wales is part of a 10 country study funded by the European Commission, and managed by Fair Trials. The authors conducted a defence lawyer survey, observed PTD hearings, examined CPS files, and interviewed judges, magistrates and Crown prosecutors, between November 2014 and June 2015. The information obtained provides important insights into the way in which PTD is regulated and how that works in practice, and the authors make a number of significant recommendations designed to improve the decision-making process and reduce the inappropriate use of PTD. Details: Brighton, UK: University of the West of England, Centre for Legal Research, 2016. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 26, 2017 at: https://www.fairtrials.org/wp-content/uploads/Country-Report-England-and-Wales-MASTER-Final-PRINT.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.fairtrials.org/wp-content/uploads/Country-Report-England-and-Wales-MASTER-Final-PRINT.pdf Shelf Number: 140679 Keywords: Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Simpson, Tiffany Title: Do Objective Measures Reduce the Disproportionate Rates of Minority Youth Placed in Detention: Validation of a Risk Assessment Instrument? Summary: The over-representation of youth of color in the juvenile justice system, often referred to as disproportionate minority contact (DMC) can be found at many stages of the juvenile justice continuum. Further, research has shown that over-representation is not necessarily related to higher rates of criminal activity and suggests that case processing disparities can contribute to DMC. Risk assessment instruments (RAI) are objective techniques used to make decisions about youth in the juvenile justice system. This study examined the effects of implementing an RAI designed to make detention decisions, in a predominantly rural parish in Louisiana. Police officers from three law enforcement agencies investigated 202 cases during the evaluation period. The measures included an objective detention risk screening instrument, a contact form which contained juvenile demographic information, a two-item questionnaire assessing law enforcement's impression of the youth's need for detention placement and risk to public safety, and an arrest coding sheet which assessed subsequent police contacts and arrests among youth over 3 and 6 months of street time (i.e., time outside of secure confinement). Results revealed that overall law enforcement was unwilling to consistently complete the tool and continued to use subjective decision making, with completion rates ranging from 61% to 97% across the participating agencies. Also, subjective decision making by law enforcement actually helped minority youth as law enforcement consistently disregarded formal overrides included in the RAI, resulting in fewer minority youth being detained than were indicated by the RAI. Further, implementation of the tool, as constructed, resulted in small but insignificant reductions in the rates of overall confinement and rates of minority confinement when compared to the rates of confinement during the same time period of the previous year. Additionally, the RAI did not significantly predict future police contact due to items that did not predict recidivism in this sample. Use of a three-item version resulted in a significant increase in the tool's predictive ability. This study demonstrates the importance of additional validity testing following the implementation of detention risk assessment instruments to ensure that these tools reduce unnecessary confinement while protecting public safety. Details: New Orleans: University of New Orleans, 2010. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed January 26, 2017 at: http://scholarworks.uno.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2098&context=td Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://scholarworks.uno.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2098&context=td Shelf Number: 145436 Keywords: Juvenile Detention Juvenile Offenders Minority Youth Racial Disparities Risk Assessment

Author: Hanson, R. Karl Title: A Five-Level Risk and Needs System: Maximizing Assessment Results in Corrections through the Development of a Common Language Summary: Risk and needs assessments are now routinely used in correctional systems in the United States to estimate a person's likelihood of recidivism and provide direction concerning appropriate correctional interventions. Specifically, they inform sentencing, determine the need for and nature of rehabilitation programs, inform decisions concerning conditional release, and allow community supervision officers to tailor conditions to a person's specific strengths, skill deficits, and reintegration challenges. In short, risk and needs assessments provide a roadmap for effective correctional rehabilitation initiatives. When properly understood and implemented, they can help correctional organizations to provide the types and dosages of services that are empirically related to reductions in reoffending. Despite considerable advances in risk and needs assessment, however, the widespread use of a variety of risk and needs assessment instruments has created new challenges. Foremost, how do we compare the results of assessments conducted with different instruments? Although all of these instruments are trying to measure risk and needs, each instrument is unique in that it may comprise varying factors and weight those factors differently from other instruments. Furthermore, the field has not set standards or specifications about the terminology used to describe risk and needs categories across all of these instruments. Although some risk and needs instruments use three nominal risk and needs categories (low, moderate, high), others use four nominal categories (low, low-moderate, moderate-high, high), and still others use five (low, low-moderate, moderate, moderate-high, high). Some instruments use different terms entirely (e.g., poor, fair, good, very good). Complicating matters further, there are no standard definitions of these nominal risk and needs categories, so "low risk," for example, might have different definitions from one instrument to the next. As such, the field of assessment and risk research struggles with perhaps its most significant obstacle: the absence of a precise, standardized language to communicate about risk. To further illustrate this problem, researchers compared risk-level definitions among five assessment measures and found that only 3 percent of the people assessed were identified as high risk across all five instruments and only 4 percent of the people were identified as low risk by all five measures. This means that the same person can be described by different categories across different assessment instruments, or people in the same category can be described differently across different assessment instruments. Beyond the lack of standard definitions of risk and needs categories, there is no consensus about what various labels mean with regard to the probability of reoffending or the specific profile of needs in each risk level. This lack of consensus occurs not just across different instruments, but also across and within jurisdictions that use the same instrument but in different ways. Details: New York: Justice Center, Council of State Governments, 2017. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 30, 2017 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/A-Five-Level-Risk-and-Needs-System_Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/A-Five-Level-Risk-and-Needs-System_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 144876 Keywords: Prisoner Classification Risk and Needs Assessment Risk Assessment

Author: Kleinberg, Jon Title: Human Decisions and Machine Predictions Summary: We examine how machine learning can be used to improve and understand human decision-making. In particular, we focus on a decision that has important policy consequences. Millions of times each year, judges must decide where defendants will await trial - at home or in jail. By law, this decision hinges on the judge's prediction of what the defendant would do if released. This is a promising machine learning application because it is a concrete prediction task for which there is a large volume of data available. Yet comparing the algorithm to the judge proves complicated. First, the data are themselves generated by prior judge decisions. We only observe crime outcomes for released defendants, not for those judges detained. This makes it hard to evaluate counterfactual decision rules based on algorithmic predictions. Second, judges may have a broader set of preferences than the single variable that the algorithm focuses on; for instance, judges may care about racial inequities or about specific crimes (such as violent crimes) rather than just overall crime risk. We deal with these problems using different econometric strategies, such as quasi-random assignment of cases to judges. Even accounting for these concerns, our results suggest potentially large welfare gains: a policy simulation shows crime can be reduced by up to 24.8% with no change in jailing rates, or jail populations can be reduced by 42.0% with no increase in crime rates. Moreover, we see reductions in all categories of crime, including violent ones. Importantly, such gains can be had while also significantly reducing the percentage of African-Americans and Hispanics in jail. We find similar results in a national dataset as well. In addition, by focusing the algorithm on predicting judges' decisions, rather than defendant behavior, we gain some insight into decision-making: a key problem appears to be that judges to respond to 'noise' as if it were signal. These results suggest that while machine learning can be valuable, realizing this value requires integrating these tools into an economic framework: being clear about the link between predictions and decisions; specifying the scope of payoff functions; and constructing unbiased decision counterfactuals. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2017. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper no. 23180: Accessed February 20, 2017 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23180.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23180.pdf Shelf Number: 146686 Keywords: Decision-Making Judges Judicial Decision-Making Judicial Discretion Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Brown, Sarah Title: Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation: Understanding Risk and Vulnerability Summary: This review, looking at the risk indicators and protective factors for Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation, was carried out by Coventry University on behalf of the Early Intervention Foundation, and funded by the Home Office. It aims to provide policy makers and practitioners with an assessment of the best evidence for identifying and appraising risk indicators. The findings are based on a rapid evidence assessment and consideration of ten risk assessment tools currently in use in local areas. Key Findings There is a lack of good quality research evidence on the risk and protective factors for becoming a victim or a perpetrator of Child Sexual Abuse or Exploitation. A small number of indicators of increased risk of becoming a perpetrator were found: being a victim of sexual abuse, being a victim of other forms of abuse and neglect, and having atypical sexual interests or fantasies. It is important to note that these indicators do not cause somebody to become a perpetrator. Two strongly evidenced indicators of increased risk of becoming a victim were found: being disabled, and being in residential care. A number of potential indicators of increased risk of becoming a victim were also found. These included: alcohol and drug misuse, going missing, running away, and association with gangs/groups. However, the research evidence for these is currently weak. The researchers did not find any evidence on the factors that might reduce the risk that a young person will become a perpetrator or victim of child sexual abuse or exploitation. Risk assessment tools and checklists are therefore not based on a strong evidence base, and should be used to inform rather than determine professional decision making. Details: London: Early Intervention Foundations, 2016. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed march 20, 2017 at: http://www.eif.org.uk/publication/csa-risk-and-vulnerability/ Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.eif.org.uk/publication/csa-risk-and-vulnerability/ Shelf Number: 144514 Keywords: Child Pornography Child Protection Child Sexual Abuse Child Sexual Exploitation Risk Assessment

Author: Ohio Criminal Sentencing Commission Title: Ad Hoc Committee on Bail and Pretrial Services: Report and Recommendations Summary: The system of bail was intended to ensure a defendant would appear in court and, eventually, ensure public safety by keeping those defendants who pose a substantial risk of committing crimes while awaiting trial in jail. The reality, however, is that those with money, notwithstanding their danger to the community, can purchase their freedom while poor defendants remain in jail pending trial. Research shows that even short stays in jail before trial lead to an increased likelihood of missing school, job loss, family issues, increased desperation and thus an increased likelihood to reoffend. In 1968, the American Bar Association released criminal justice standards related to pretrial release and over the past several years many states have undertaken reviews of their pretrial systems and adopted various reforms. No less than twenty states have begun to implement reforms like risk assessments for release determinations, citation in lieu of detention, and elimination of bond schedules. (Appendix A). In addition there has been a rise in litigation arguing that pretrial detention violates the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the United States Constitution. For example, in Walker v. City of Calhoun, pretrial detainees challenged the City of Calhoun's bail system, which mandated payment of a fixed amount without consideration of other factors, including risk of flight, risk of dangerousness, and financial resources. The trial court invoked U.S. Supreme Court decisions , finding that the principle of those cases was especially applicable "where the individual being detained is a pretrial detainee who has not yet been found guilty of a crime." The court found that the system violated the Equal Protection Clause since "incarceration of an individual because of the individual’s inability to pay a fine or fee is impermissible." The issue is currently under consideration by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, where the Justice Department has filed a brief in support of striking down the City’s bail scheme. Nationally, pretrial services and bail have come under scrutiny in the past decade. The Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) issued a paper in 2013 supporting the ongoing work of the United States Department of Justice and the Pretrial Justice Institute to reform pretrial services. The Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators has established a National Task Force on Fines, Fees and Bail Practices to address the ongoing impact these financial sanctions have on the economically disadvantaged in the United States. Finally, the United States Department of Justice has funded bail reform initiatives and provided data to states and, in its consent decree with the city of Ferguson, ended the use of secured money bonds. In Ohio, bail reform and pretrial services have been the subject of review in various individual jurisdictions. In Cuyahoga County, Administrative Judge John Russo has formed a committee to review that county's bail system, examine local policies and procedures among jurisdictions within the county, and consider the costs of the system. Lucas County is one of twenty jurisdictions to participate in the MacArthur Foundation Safety + Justice Challenge network intended to support "a network of competitively selected local jurisdictions committed to finding ways to safely reduce jail incarceration." The local goal is to safely reduce jail population and address racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system. Lucas County has implemented an administrative release program, which allows judges to administratively release inmates according to the risk they pose as determined by the Ohio Risk Assessment System Community Supervision Tool, to reduce the local jail population. Lucas County has also implemented use of a risk assessment tool developed by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation ("Arnold tool") to provide public safety assessments to determine risk of failure to appear and new criminal activity. Stark County and the Cleveland Municipal Court are also beginning use of the Arnold tool. Summit County has developed an in-house risk assessment tool for pretrial determinations. The Ohio Criminal Sentencing Commission, in an effort to ensure that Ohio is holding people for the right reasons prior to trial, formed an Ad Hoc Committee on Bail and Pretrial Services to determine the current situation in Ohio and to make recommendations that will maximize appropriate placement for defendants, protect the presumption of innocence, maximize appearance at court hearings, and maximize public safety. One of the primary purposes of pursuing reform of bail practices and pretrial services is to ensure that those that pose the greatest risk to public safety and failure to appear are detained while awaiting trial while maximizing release of pretrial detainees to effectively utilize jail resources. According to a study conducted by the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (DRC), 35.4% of people in local jails are awaiting trial – meaning they have not been convicted of a crime. They are either being held without bail, or cannot afford bail. In most cases it is the latter. Details: Columbus, OH: The Commission, 2017. 256p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2017 at: https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Boards/Sentencing/Materials/2017/March/finalAdHocBailReport.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Boards/Sentencing/Materials/2017/March/finalAdHocBailReport.pdf Shelf Number: 144560 Keywords: Bail Bail Reform Pretrial Detention Pretrial Services Risk Assessment

Author: Stevenson, Megan Title: Bail Reform: New Directions for Pretrial Detention and Release Summary: Our current pretrial system imposes high costs on both the people who are detained pretrial and the taxpayers who foot the bill. These costs have prompted a surge of bail reform around the country. Reformers seek to reduce pretrial detention rates, as well as racial and socioeconomic disparities in the pretrial system, while simultaneously improving appearance rates and reducing pretrial crime. The current state of pretrial practice suggests that there is ample room for improvement. Bail hearings are often cursory, with no defense counsel present. Money-bail practices lead to high rates of detention even among misdemeanor defendants and those who pose no serious risk of crime or flight. Infrequent evaluation means that the judges and magistrates who set bail have little information about how their bail-setting practices affect detention, appearance and crime rates. Practical and low-cost interventions, such as court reminder systems, are underutilized. To promote lasting reform, this chapter identifies pretrial strategies that are both within the state’s authority and supported by empirical research. These interventions should be designed with input from stakeholders, and carefully evaluated to ensure that the desired improvements are achieved. Details: Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Law School, 2017. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 17-18: Accessed March 24, 2017 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2939273 Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2939273 Shelf Number: 144574 Keywords: Bail Electronic Monitoring Pretrial Detention Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Schnacke, Timothy R. Title: "Model" Bail Laws: Re-Drawing the Line Between Pretrial Release and Detention Summary: This paper is designed to help persons craft and justify language articulating who should be released and who should be eligible for detention in a purposeful in-or-out pretrial system through a study of the history of bail, the fundamental legal principles, the pretrial research, and the national standards on pretrial release and detention. It does so, in Part I, by providing the answers to a series of questions that every jurisdiction should be asking before embarking on the task of re-drawing the line between pretrial release and detention. These questions, based on the fundamentals of bail, range from elementary (i.e., "What is bail?") to somewhat complicated (i.e., "How has America traditionally defined 'flight' and how did it struggle with both unintentional and intentional detention for noncapital defendants?") to very practical (i.e., "Can we use the results of actuarial pretrial risk assessment instruments when determining our detention eligibility net?"). In Part II, the paper begins to answer the question, "If we change, to what do we change?" It then introduces three analyses that should be used to assess any proposed model for re-drawing the line between release and detention. In Part III, the paper proposes a "model" process - this author's attempt at purposefully re-drawing the line between release and detention - based on the history, the law, the pretrial research, and the national standards on release and detention, and then, in Part IV, the paper holds the proposed model up to the three analyses. In Part V, the paper operationalizes the concepts from the proposed model into sample templates designed to illustrate how a jurisdiction might phrase certain crucial elements contained in the model. And finally, once this re-drawing of the line between release and detention is done, Part VI of the paper articulates notions that should be a part of any state bail legal scheme in order to make the model provision work. The proposed model can be accepted or rejected by American jurisdictions. Nevertheless, any different model should be subjected to either the same or a more rigorous justification process as is provided in this paper. This paper is likely useful to all persons seeking answers to questions surrounding pretrial justice today. But it should be especially useful to those persons who are taking pen to paper to re-write their laws to determine whom to release and whom to potentially detain pretrial - essentially, to redraw the line between purposeful release and detention. Details: Golden, CO: Center for Legal and Evidence-Based Practices, 2017. 206p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 22, 2017 at: http://www.clebp.org/images/04-18-2017_Model_Bail_Laws_CLEPB_.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.clebp.org/images/04-18-2017_Model_Bail_Laws_CLEPB_.pdf Shelf Number: 145149 Keywords: Bail Bail Reform Pretrial Detention Risk Assessment

Author: South Africa Department of Correctional Services Title: White Paper on Remand Detention Management in South Africa Summary: This White Paper on Remand Detention seeks to add to the 2005 White Paper on Corrections by dealing with inmates who constitute on average one third of the total population at DCS facilities but who were not adequately catered for in the White Paper on Corrections. An additional number of RDs are accommodated in DSD and SAPS facilities. The responsibility of the DCS for those in remand detention follows a decision by Cabinet in 2009 to deal with the management of awaiting-trial detainees (as remand detainees were previously known) by creating a branch within the DCS for this category of inmates. This required an alignment of existing legislation and policies as remand detainees pose very distinct and unique challenges compared to the population of sentenced offenders. Discussions within the JCPS Cluster as well as with external stakeholders led to the development of a White Paper as well as an amendment to the Correctional Services Act in the form of the Correctional Matters Amendment Act, 2011 (Act No 5 of 2011)(CMAA). The CMAA included a review of the definition of awaiting-trial inmates, wearing of uniform for remand detainees, management of terminally ill inmates, temporary surrendering of detainees to SAPS custody and a determination of the maximum period of detention for which a person could remain in remand detention. The Act was passed on 25 May 2011, which led to a further alignment of the White Paper with the Act. This White Paper communicates the principles that drive the Detention Management of Remand Detainees, drawn from local and international laws, and conclude that remand detention is not punitive, occurs as a result of an order of a court of law, is managed with the highest possible ethical and professional standards, and that detainees have to be informed of their rights and obligations and are separated from sentenced inmates. The principles further state that remand detention requires greater levels of effectiveness and integration in the criminal justice system and that institutions should be subject to oversight and control. Overall, the White Paper is based on the constitutional right that a person charged with a crime is innocent until proven guilty and shall be treated as such. Remand Detention Facilities must therefore allow for the minimal limitation of an individual's rights, while ensuring secure and safe custody. Personnel must be trained in human development, in the rights of persons in the criminal justice system process, and in secure and safe custody. Details: Pretoria: Department of Correctional Services, 2014. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 29, 2017 at: http://www.dcs.gov.za/docs/landing/White%20Paper%20on%20Remand%20Detention%20Management%20in%20South%20Africa.pdf Year: 2014 Country: South Africa URL: http://www.dcs.gov.za/docs/landing/White%20Paper%20on%20Remand%20Detention%20Management%20in%20South%20Africa.pdf Shelf Number: 145204 Keywords: Pretrial Detention Remand Detention Risk Assessment

Author: Dzhekova, Rositsa Title: Monitoring Radicalisation: A Framework for Risk Indicators Summary: Radicalisation processes impacting on disaffected and indoctrinated persons and the later involvement of some of them in acts of terrorism are of growing concern for European citizens, their governments and the wider international community. Addressing this threat requires effective prevention policies which some EU member states have been proactive in developing. Effective policies need reliable diagnostic tools designed to identify individuals and groups who might pose a threat. The publication provides a review of existing approaches and tools to identifying, monitoring and assessing radicalisation in Europe and beyond. It further offers a conceptual framework of radicalisation risk and vulnerability indicators and their interpretation as a basis for developing early-warning mechanisms for frontline practitioners in countries which are yet to develop specific prevention and counter-radicalisation policies. The target group of the guide are policymakers at national and EU levels, as well as practitioners directly involved in the prevention of radicalisation in Central and Eastern Europe and beyond. Details: Sofia: Center for the Study of Democracy, 2017. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 29, 2017 at: http://www.csd.bg/artShow.php?id=17916 Year: 2017 Country: Europe URL: http://www.csd.bg/artShow.php?id=17916 Shelf Number: 145207 Keywords: Counter-Radicalization Extremism Extremist Groups Radical Groups Radicalization Risk Assessment Terrorism

Author: Carmichael, Dottie Title: Liberty and Justice: Pretrial Practices in Texas Summary: In most Texas counties, ability to pay financial bail determines which defendants will be released until adjudication of criminal charges. Increasingly, however, policymakers, judges, and other stakeholders are asking whether release based on a defendant's individualized risk might be a better way to ensure court appearance and prevent new criminal activity among people on bond. In October 2016, the Texas Judicial Council's Criminal Justice Committee reviewed the evidence and produced a report advocating expansion of risk-informed release and personal bond. To inform their decision-making and test the potential impacts of this policy guidance, the Council asked the Public Policy Research Institute at Texas A&M University to conduct a two-part study gathering evidence from Texas jurisdictions. T In October 2016, the Texas Judicial Council's Criminal Justice Committee reviewed the evidence and produced a report advocating expansion of risk-informed release and personal bond. The report includes the eight recommendations. Details: Texas A&M University, Public Policy Research Isntitute, 2017. 104p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 1, 2017 at: http://www.txcourts.gov/media/1437499/170308_bond-study-report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.txcourts.gov/media/1437499/170308_bond-study-report.pdf Shelf Number: 145210 Keywords: Bail Bonds Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: National Counter Terrorism Security Office Title: Crowded Places Guidance: See the latest guidance for your sector. Summary: The threat we face from terrorism is significant. As we have seen in the UK and across Europe attacks can happen at any time and any place without warning. Understanding the threat we all face and of the ways we can mitigate it can help keep us safer. Everyone can play a role in this effort by taking steps to help boost their protective security whether that's at work, at home or away; when travelling, when out and about or just simply when online. Having better security for all these areas makes it harder for terrorists to plan and carry out attacks. It also helps reduce the risk of other threats such as organised crime. This document provides protective security advice in a number of sectors and scenarios. It has been developed through extensive research and analysis of previous incidents, and the assessment of current known threats. It covers the key forms of protective security: physical, personnel, cyber and personal, and helps give guidance on how different sectors can act to help make their business, institutions or organisations safer. This guidance is primarily aimed at those in the security sector and those who own or run businesses, organisations, amenities or utilities. Some of the terminology may be unfamiliar to some readers. However, we hope the advice can also be of use to anyone who wishes to improve their own security. To deliver protective security effectively a security plan is essential along with a full risk assessment. It is important to identify an individual responsible for security and to identify what are the important assets, people, products, services, processes and information within your organisation. You can then begin to introduce mitigation to reduce vulnerabilities. A strong security culture must be supported and endorsed from a senior level. Details: London: National Counter Terrorism Security Office, 2017. 174p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 8, 2017 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/617817/170607_crowded-places-guidance_v1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/617817/170607_crowded-places-guidance_v1.pdf Shelf Number: 145987 Keywords: Counter-Terrorism Crime Prevention Crowded Places Risk Assessment Security Terrorism Prevention

Author: Myburgh, John-Etienne Title: Review of Pretrial Risk Assessment and Factors Predicting Pretrial Release Failure Summary: One of the most important areas of prison growth is related to the pretrial population, those persons who are charged with the commission of certain offences and are awaiting commencement or completion of their case. While some of these individuals are released during an initial hearing, others are detained for the duration of their trial. A recent innovation in this area has been the use of pretrial risk assessments (PTRAs), instruments which objectively assess a defendant's risk of failing to appear or to commit a new crime prior to their trial date. Research suggest that PTRAs have validity in decreasing the amount of pretrial defendants housed in prisons or jails, may help to honour the presumption of innocence through the expanded release of low-risk pretrial defendants, and may increase efficiencies in the criminal justice system. Details: Saskatoon: University of Saskatchewan, Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science and Justice Studies, 2015. 89p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 16, 2017 at: https://www.usask.ca/cfbsjs/research/pdf/research_reports/ReviewOfPTRAandRiskFactorsPredictingPretrialReleaseFailure.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: https://www.usask.ca/cfbsjs/research/pdf/research_reports/ReviewOfPTRAandRiskFactorsPredictingPretrialReleaseFailure.pdf Shelf Number: 146218 Keywords: Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Liberman, Akiva Title: Local Validation of SPEP Ratings of Juvenile Justice Program Effectiveness: A Case Study Summary: At the end of 2012, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention launched the Juvenile Justice Reform and Reinvestment Initiative (JJRRI) at three demonstration sites in Delaware, Iowa, and Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. The goal of JJRRI was to bring evidence and best practices to bear on juvenile justice operations using three types of tools: - Dispositional matrices provide evidence-based recommendations concerning dispositional options. - The Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) rating system brings evidence concerning program effectiveness to bear on juvenile justice services and guides improvements to those services. - Validated risk assessments are necessary for both dispositional matrices and SPEP ratings. Together, these tools are intended to increase effectiveness and efficiency in the use of juvenile justice resources. Concurrent with JJRRI implementation, the Urban Institute evaluated the initiative to understand whether it improved the quality and effectiveness of juvenile justice programming. One goal of the evaluation was to understand the implementation of the SPEP rating system, and this was the subject of our first evaluation report (Liberman and Hussemann 2016). The rating system is quite simple in conception, and is described briefly in chapter 2 of this report. Despite its simplicity, however, conducting a first round of SPEP ratings is usually an intensive effort that can take two to three years to complete. Our previous report detailed the implementation requirements of the SPEP: strong data systems and reliable and timely risk assessment. The SPEP often reveals deficiencies in these systems and can then help drive improvements. These improvements, in turn, require support from a range of juvenile justice stakeholders and considerable technical assistance. After reviewing SPEP implementation requirements, that report described the challenges the JJRRI sites encountered and how they were addressed. We concluded that a first round of ratings tends to uncover deficiencies that then motivate reforms with considerable potential to improve the effectiveness of the juvenile justice system. The evaluation also aimed to locally validate the relationship between SPEP ratings and reduced recidivism, which is the subject of this report. A local validation would replicate previous work done in Arizona by Lipsey (2008) and Redpath and Brandner (2010). Of the three JJRRI sites, only Iowa seemed a suitable site for local validation. Iowa's Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning provided the Urban Institute with data for this purpose that are analyzed in the current report. As a prelude to attempting to locally validate the SPEP, chapter 3 reports on Iowa's first round of SPEP ratings, collected between 2012 and 2015. However, although results in Iowa were promising in some respects, they ultimately did not provide an opportunity for local validation. The rest of this chapter briefly introduces JJRRI. Chapter 2 then briefly reviews the SPEP rating system and its data requirements. Chapter 3 examines the data collected in Iowa. Chapter 4 explores the possibility of using that data to locally validate the relationship between SPEP ratings and reduced recidivism. Chapter 5 concludes with a summary and lessons learned. Details: Washington, DC; Urban Institute, 2017. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2017 at: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/90041/local-validation-of-spep-ratings-of-juvenile-justice-program-effectiveness_0.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/90041/local-validation-of-spep-ratings-of-juvenile-justice-program-effectiveness_0.pdf Shelf Number: 146445 Keywords: Evidence-Based Programs Juvenile Justice System Juvenile Offenders Risk Assessment Treatment Programs

Author: Amatya, Pranita Title: Bail Reform in California Summary: On December 5, 2016, Assemblymember Rob Bonta, partnering with California State Senator Bob Hertzberg, introduced the California Money Bail Reform Act of 2017, which aims to reform the current commercial surety bail system. Our project will assist our client in evaluating policy alternatives to the commercial surety bail system. In California, defendants who are assigned bail may contract with a bail bonds agency and pay a ten percent nonrefundable fee to be released from jail custody. This system is referred to as commercial surety bail. Because this system uses a financial condition in order to release defendants from jail, a majority of defendants incarcerated pretrial are incarcerated only because they cannot afford bail. According to the Executive Director of Equal Justice Under Law, Phil Telfeyan, "The problem we see with money bail is that it puts a price tag on freedom. Those who are rich get to pay their way out and those who aren't get to languish in jail." This system, which prioritizes a financial condition over a defendant's potential risk to be rearrested or to fail to appear at court, does not ensure public safety. Beginning in the 1960s, a nationwide bail reform trend began took root, resulting in many states either abolishing or reforming this system. In an attempt to investigate how bail reform efforts would impact the state of California, we conducted policy analysis to compare the commercial surety bail system in California to an alternative system. The alternative system we compare to commercial surety bail involves several important elements. The first element is risk assessment tools, which are predictive algorithms that assess the risk of a defendant failing to appear for a court date and of being rearrested. The second is non-bail release methods, which can include release on one's own recognizance, supervised release, and unsecured bonds. We conducted this analysis in two stages. First, we compared the screening process used in commercial surety bail to the screening process used with non-bail release. Under the commercial surety bail system, judges use bail schedules to screen defendants and assign bail amounts. Under non-bail release, judges use risk assessment tools to screen defendants and inform their release decisions. We analyzed how the bail schedule compares to risk assessment tools on two criteria: predictive accuracy and race neutrality. We found that risk assessment tools scored higher on both criteria. Based on this analysis, we recommend the adoption of a risk assessment tool to inform judicial decision-making. The second stage of our analysis compares the commercial surety bail release method to non-bail release methods based on five criteria: effectiveness, economic bias, fiscal impact, social cost, and political feasibility. We employed a variety of methods in our analysis. We operationalized predictive accuracy, race neutrality, economic bias, and effectiveness by undertaking an intensive literature review. We used high-level cost calculations and estimations to analyze fiscal impact and social cost. Finally, we conducted interviews to operationalize political feasibility. We found that non-bail release methods scored higher than commercial surety bail on four out of the five criteria (all except for political feasibility). Therefore, based on this analysis, we recommend that non-bail release replaces the commercial surety bail system Details: Los Angeles: UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, 2017. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 1, 2017 at: https://university.pretrial.org/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=835f283a-e9fc-9c56-28bb-073a9bcb1dbf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://university.pretrial.org/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=835f283a-e9fc-9c56-28bb-073a9bcb1dbf Shelf Number: 146497 Keywords: Bail Bail Reform Pretrial Detention Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Belton, Emma Title: Assessing the Risk, Protecting the Child: Final Evaluation Report Summary: Assessing the Risk, Protecting the Child (ARPC) is an NSPCC service that assesses men who pose a sexual risk to children and are not in the criminal justice system. The service includes an assessment of the man deemed to be a risk, as well as the capacity of the non-abusing parent/carer to protect the child, and the views and wishes of the children involved. The service was delivered at nine NSPCC sites from 2011-2016. This final evaluation report summarises the findings from the already published qualitative evaluation and integrates this with survey results and tracking data of what happens after assessments are completed. The main findings are: - The voice of the child work was the unique aspect of ARPC, but in over a third of assessments the child's voice was not included as they were either too young or did not feel comfortable taking part. The guide gives some suggestions about how the child's voice can be incorporated in these circumstances, but additional guidance on how to include the child's voice could enhance this work further. - The majority of referrers felt that the assessment reports were of a high quality and helped them form a judgement about the actions needed to protect children. The independent nature of the reports was a key factor in their usefulness. - Referrers, men and protective parents/carers felt that reports could be made more accessible and would find it helpful if the report author discussed it with them face-to-face. The time taken to produce reports could also be shortened. - Although most referrers agreed with report recommendations, one-third of recommendations had not been implemented six months post-assessment, in part because the support suggested was not available locally. Some referrers would have welcomed more guidance on implementing recommendations. The development of the NSPCC Together for Childhood centres may assist in providing the post-assessment professional consultation that some referrers would have found helpful. - Reports assess risk at one particular time-point, and the impact of child protection will be limited to family circumstances remaining the same. Risk should be managed through the lifelong safety plan and, where circumstances change, a referral may be needed to another agency for an updated risk assessment. - The NSPCC is no longer accepting referrals into the ARPC service. This decision follows a strategic review of all of our programmes and resources available to deliver them. Consideration was given to ARPC's fit with our new strategy and the results of this evaluation, and it was felt that greater outcomes for children could be achieved through investment in alternative programmes. The learning from the evaluation may be of use to other agencies delivering this type of work Details: London: National Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Children, 2017. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2017 at: https://www.nspcc.org.uk/globalassets/documents/evaluation-of-services/assessing-the-risk-protecting-the-child-final-evaluation.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.nspcc.org.uk/globalassets/documents/evaluation-of-services/assessing-the-risk-protecting-the-child-final-evaluation.pdf Shelf Number: 146747 Keywords: Child Abuse and Neglect Child Protection Child Sexual Abuse Risk Assessment

Author: Belton, Emma Title: Assessing the Risk: Protecting the Child. Referrers' Perspectives Summary: Assessing the Risk Protecting the Child is a service that works with men who may be a risk to children. Social workers send men to the service to try to help families keep their children safe. Social workers who are worried about a child use the service to see if the man is a danger to the child and whether the parent/carer can keep the child safe from harm. The service also speaks to the child to check how they are feeling about things at home. This report looks at how well social workers thought the assessments went. It also looks at how assessments could be better and how they helped to make decisions such as what can be done to look after the children. This was done by interviewing social workers. Findings from the research show that: - Social workers found that the reports they got back helped them understand more about the family they worked with and how to keep children safe. - Some social workers thought that it took too long to get the reports back. This meant that it took a long time for families to find out what would happen next. Sometimes social workers also thought that the reports were too long and the words used meant that families couldn't always understand them. - Social workers felt that workers at the NSPCC worked well with families so that they could open up and speak more freely. NSPCC staff were seen as being separate from children's service. This meant that families felt like they weren't being judged. - The sessions with children helped them to understand what was going on at home. The sessions with parents/carers helped them by giving them information on how to keep their children safe. This could also encourage parents/carers to make better choices when protecting their children. - Social workers found the ideas the NSPCC had about keeping children safe helpful. Sometimes they would have liked some help with putting the ideas into action. Details: London: National Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Children, 2015. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 23, 2017 at: https://www.nspcc.org.uk/globalassets/documents/evaluation-of-services/assessing-the-risk-protecting-the-child-referrers-perspectives.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.nspcc.org.uk/globalassets/documents/evaluation-of-services/assessing-the-risk-protecting-the-child-referrers-perspectives.pdf Shelf Number: 146882 Keywords: Abusive Men Child Abuse and Neglect Child Protection Child Sexual Abuse Risk Assessment Social Workers

Author: Nelson, Paul Title: Predictive validity of risk/needs assessment for young offenders under community supervision Summary: Aims: To assess whether Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory Australian Adaptation (YLS/CMI-AA) risk/ needs data improve recidivism prediction for young offenders under community supervision, compared to static risk data from the Bureau's Reoffending Database (ROD). Method: The analysis included all 1,050 young offenders who commenced a supervised community order (other than bail or parole) in 2014 with a valid YLS/CMI-AA and ROD record. Recidivism was defined as a new proven offence within 12 months of order commencement. Logistic regression assessed the individual and collective relationships of static risk factors and YLS/CMI-AA scores to recidivism. Area Under the Curve (AUC), model fit indices and multiple cross-validation methods were used to evaluate the models. Results: Interactions between variables in models built with the full sample necessitated that separate models be built for Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders. For non-Indigenous offenders, the AUC for the combined (ROD with YLS/ CMI-AA) model (.767, 95% CI (.728, .807)) was within the acceptable range (0.7-0.8) but did not significantly outperform the ROD-only model (.740, (95% CI .698, .781)). For Indigenous offenders, AUCs were significantly lower than for nonIndigenous offenders, below the acceptable range, and also showed no significant benefit from combining YLS/CMI-AA and ROD data. Compared with AUCs for the combined model, cross-validated AUCs were lower, and corresponding AUCs for the 2013 cohort were inconsistent. Conclusion: YLS/CMI-AA data did not significantly improve the predictive accuracy of static risk-based models of recidivism for Indigenous or non-Indigenous offenders. Validation methods suggested that the results may not generalise beyond the current cohort. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2017. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, no. 205: Accessed August 24, 2017 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2017-Predictive-validity-of-risk-needs-assessment-for-young-offenders-under-community-supervision-CJB205.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/Report-2017-Predictive-validity-of-risk-needs-assessment-for-young-offenders-under-community-supervision-CJB205.pdf Shelf Number: 146891 Keywords: Case Management Community Supervision Offender Supervision Recidivism Risk Assessment Young Offenders

Author: Agnew-Pauley, Winifred Title: The Domestic Violence Safety Action Tool (DVSAT): Results from the first 12 months of implementation Summary: Aim: To report on the first 12 months of implementation of the DVSAT. Method: All referrals in the Central Referral Point (CRP) database were linked to NSW police data to obtain responses to individual items contained in the DVSAT. Descriptive analysis of the DVSAT data was collated including the proportion of 'yes', 'no', 'refused' or 'unknown' responses for each question, and the total number of 'yes' responses for both intimate and non-intimate violence. Results: In the first 12 months of the operation of the It Stops Here: Safer Pathway Program, the DVSAT was administered to a total of 102,605 victims of domestic violence. One in five reported victims of intimate partner violence and one in 10 reported victims of non-intimate partner violence were classified as 'at serious threat'. Threat level was strongly related to scores on the DVSAT but there was also evidence that referrer risk ratings were determined by other factors. Regardless of the DVSAT results, alleged victims were initially classified as 'at serious threat' if they had reportedly experienced three or more prior domestic violence incidents. This arrangement was found to create a high level of service demand and has since been dropped. Conclusion: Research should be undertaken to assess the extent to which the DVSAT tool can accurately predict risk of further victimisation. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2017. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue paper no. 128: Accessed August 24, 2017 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/Report-2017-The-Domestic-Violence-Safety-Action-Tool-BB128.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/Report-2017-The-Domestic-Violence-Safety-Action-Tool-BB128.pdf Shelf Number: 146892 Keywords: Domestic Violence Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment

Author: Wooff, Andrew Title: Measuring Risk and Efficiency in Police Scotland Custody Settings: A Pilot Study Summary: Police custody is a complex area of policing which requires Police Scotland to carefully balance the risks associated with detainees, the new localism agenda and making efficiency savings. With the move to a national Custody Division as part of Police Scotland now beginning to mature, it is an important time to assess how variation in custody practices impacts on police staff and on detainees. This pilot study used qualitative methods to investigate the challenges around risk and efficiency in two separate police custody environments - one rural and one urban. The study found that staffing, healthcare, the Police Scotland custody estate and trust are key for understanding how risks can be minimised and efficiency maximised. The study identified a series of recommendations which if implemented would help improve police custody in Scotland. The study also identifies a series of gaps in the systematic knowledge base which, if addressed, would assist in developing and supporting the recommendations we have identified. Details: Dundee: Scottish Institute for Policing Research, School of Social Sciences, University of Dundee, 2017. 10p. Source: Internet Resource: SIPR Research Summary No. 27: Accessed August 31, 2017 at: http://www.sipr.ac.uk/downloads/Research_Summaries/Research_Summary_27.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.sipr.ac.uk/downloads/Research_Summaries/Research_Summary_27.pdf Shelf Number: 146958 Keywords: Police Custody Prisoners Risk Assessment

Author: AUSTRAC Title: Stored Value Cards: Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing Risk Assessment Summary: AUSTRAC assessed the overall ML/TF risk associated with the use of stored value cards (SVCs) to be medium, and their vulnerability to criminal misuse to be high. The report found that the risk level of individual SVCs varies significantly depending on the features of the specific product. Travel cards that can be reloaded and redeemed offshore in cash carry significantly higher levels of risk than low value retail gift cards. The most common crime-types in which SVCs are implicated are money laundering and cyber-enabled fraud. Of particular concern is the use of SVCs for terrorism financing purposes. The risk assessment contains detailed information to assist industry understand the risks associated with SVCs and how they can mitigate these risks. Details: Canberra: AUSTRAC, 2017. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 20, 2017 at: http://www.austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/stored-value-cards-risk-assessment-WEB.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/stored-value-cards-risk-assessment-WEB.pdf Shelf Number: 148274 Keywords: Credit Card Fraud Financial Crime Money Laundering Risk Assessment Terrorist Financing

Author: AUSTRAC Title: Australia's Non-Profit Organisation Sector. Money Laundering/Terrorism Financing Summary: In 2017, AUSTRAC and the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) released a joint report which assesses money laundering and terrorism financing risks affecting Australian non-profit organisations (NPOs). This report identifies the main criminal, money laundering and terrorism financing threats currently facing NPOs. It highlights key vulnerabilities that are exploited for criminal misuse, or to support or promote terrorism and its financing. It also addresses an international requirement to identify the subset of NPOs at high-risk of terrorism financing misuse. Details: West Chatswood, NSW: AUSTRAC, 2017. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 6, 2017 at: http://www.austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/npo-risk-assessment-FINAL-web.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.austrac.gov.au/sites/default/files/npo-risk-assessment-FINAL-web.pdf Shelf Number: 148733 Keywords: Money Laundering Risk Assessment Terrorist Financing

Author: American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii Title: As Much Justice As You Can Afford: Hawaii's Accused Face An Unequal Bail System Summary: Pretrial incarceration is one of the growing drivers of overcrowding in Hawai'i jails. While all community correctional centers are operating around double their design capacity, about 1,145 men and women, around half of those jailed in those correctional facilities, have not been convicted of any crime and are merely awaiting trial, many for misdemeanors and minor offenses. The primary reason for this indiscriminate jailing of people who should be presumed innocent until proven guilty is that they cannot afford the amount of bail set in their case. To better understand why so many in Hawai'i are being jailed pretrial, the ACLU of Hawai'i conducted an in-depth study of bail setting practices by reviewing online all cases filed in circuit court during the first semester of 2017. Our findings were unsurprising yet shocking. During that period of time, circuit courts in Hawai'i set money bail as a condition of release in 88 percent of cases with only 44 percent of people managing to eventually post the amount of bail set by the court. In other words, while only 12 percent of people were released on their own recognizance or supervised release, in the 88 percent of cases where money bail was used, the majority of people simply could not afford the amount of bail set by the court. With the average bail amount for a class C felony on Oahu being $20,000, it's understandable why most people can't afford it. Setting money bail at an unaffordable amount not only contravenes equal protection and due process rights but also permanently destroys the lives and livelihoods of thousands of families in Hawai'i with little to no benefit to society. Bail is supposed to be set based on a consideration of multiple factors, including flight risk, ability to pay, and danger to the community. Instead, in 91 percent of cases in Hawai'i, initial money bail simply mirrors the amount set by the police in the arrest warrant. And that amount is based solely only on the crime charged. Thus, initial money bail determinations are overwhelmingly being made without any individualized consideration of flight risk, ability to pay, or danger to the community, resulting in some of the longest lengths of pretrial detention in the country. The purpose of bail is not pretrial punishment. Bail is supposed to minimize the risk of flight and danger to society while preserving the defendant's constitutional rights. The bail setting process in Hawai'i, however, does not achieve any of these purposes. Instead, it regularly causes individuals to waive their constitutional rights simply to get out of jail. In fact, while cases where an individual could not afford bail constituted 49 percent of the cases reviewed, 69 percent of the arrestees who changed their pleas from innocent to guilty or no contest did so while held in jail, primarily because they could not afford bail. Like many other states, Hawai'i is in dire need of meaningful bail reform, particularly as it considers plans to relocate the Oahu Community Correctional Center. Any such reform must, at a minimum, result in prompt and individualized bail hearings with adequate procedural protections, in which the government bears the burden of showing that the defendant poses a flight risk or danger to the community and in which narrowly tailored and necessary conditions of release are set to address specific and credible risks. There are many ways of achieving these reforms and we call on the Judiciary, the Legislature, the Prosecutor's Office, and the Department of Public Safety to help us achieve such a constitutional pretrial system. Details: Honolulu: ACLU of Hawaii, 2018. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 16, 2018 at: https://acluhawaii.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/aclu-of-hawaii-bail-report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://acluhawaii.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/aclu-of-hawaii-bail-report.pdf Shelf Number: 149166 Keywords: Bail Bail Reform Pretrial Detention Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: California. Courts. Judicial Branch Title: Pretrial Detention Reform: Recommendations to the Chief Justice Summary: The Chief Justice established the Pretrial Detention Reform Workgroup on October 28, 2016, to provide recommendations on how courts may better identify ways to make release decisions that will treat people fairly, protect the public, and ensure court appearances. In establishing the Workgroup, the Chief Justice recognized the central role of the courts. The Chief Justice provided the following guiding principles for the Pretrial Detention Reform Workgroup:  Pretrial custody should not occur solely because a defendant cannot afford bail.  Public safety is a fundamental consideration in pretrial detention decisions.  Defendants should be released from pretrial custody as early as possible based on an assessment of the risk to public safety and the risk for failing to appear in court.  Mitigating the impacts of implicit bias on pretrial release decision-making should be considered.  Reform recommendations should consider court and justice system partner resources.  Nonfinancial release alternatives should be available.  Consistent and feasible practices for making pretrial release, detention, and supervision decisions should be established. During the course of its yearlong study, the Workgroup examined the complex issues involved in the current pretrial release and detention system. Members reviewed a wide variety of research and policy materials and heard presentations from state and national experts, justice system partner representatives, the commercial bail industry, state and local regulators, victim and civil rights advocacy organizations, California counties that have experience with pretrial services programs, and jurisdictions outside California that have undertaken pretrial reform efforts. At the conclusion of this process, the Workgroup determined that California's current pretrial release and detention system unnecessarily compromises victim and public safety because it bases a person's liberty on financial resources rather than the likelihood of future criminal behavior and exacerbates socioeconomic disparities and racial bias. Details: Sacramento: Judicial Council of California, 2017. 112p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 20, 2018 at: http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/PDRReport-20171023.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/PDRReport-20171023.pdf Shelf Number: 149188 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Detention Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Pretrial Services Racial Disparities Risk Assessment

Author: MacDonald, Shanna Farrell Title: Reasons for parole waivers, postponements, and withdrawals: Examining indicators for low-risk offenders Summary: One of the Correctional Service of Canada's (CSC) strategic priorities is the safe transition of offenders from the institution to the community. Discretionary release provides offenders with a gradual and structured reintegration process for this transition. In addition, offenders on discretionary release, i.e. parole, are more likely to remain in the community than offenders who are released on statutory release (Public Safety Canada, 2015). For offenders who waive, postpone, or withdraw their parole application, the potential amount of time they have to reintegrate into society prior to the end of their sentence is shortened. This is particularly problematic for offenders deemed a low-risk to reoffend and who could be suitably managed and supported in the community (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Office of the Auditor General, 2015). For this study, all parole reviews scheduled in FY2014-2015 for men and FY2014-2015 and FY2015-2016 for women were extracted. The main focus of this study was to examine parole review outcomes for low-risk offenders, i.e., offenders that were determined to be at a low-risk to reoffend based on actuarial measures. Overall, 8,476 parole reviews were scheduled for lowrisk offenders during the study period, representing 3,663 offenders. Women accounted for 12% of the offenders in this study, 3% of which were Indigenous. Among men, 6% were Indigenous. Of the parole reviews scheduled for low-risk offenders, 37% were waived, postponed, or withdrawn. Variations by type of delay/cancellation, gender, ethnicity and region were evident. Indigenous women and men had higher rates of parole delays and cancellations than nonIndigenous offenders. Rates were highest in the Ontario and Pacific regions. Postponements, however, were more common in the Quebec region. Examination of the reasons provided by offenders for parole delays and cancellations showed that avoid a negative decision, program non-completion, and other were the most common. Additional analyses were conducted to determine if structured indicators (such as demographics, criminogenic factors, offender behaviour, and correctional interventions) collected by CSC supported the reasons provided by offenders. For instance, among offenders citing program noncompletion, almost two-thirds were referred to programming. Among these offenders, many were either still in the program, waitlisted or had recently completed the program in relation to their scheduled review date. Furthermore, waiving, postponing, or withdrawing parole does not appear to negatively impact on the Parole Board of Canada's decisions at subsequent parole reviews. This study builds on prior research examining the reasons that offenders choose to delay or cancel their parole reviews while also exploring the specific characteristics based on the reasons endorsed by offenders. Overall, these results provide CSC with targeted areas for intervention in order to support offenders at low-risk to reoffend reintegrate to the community in a timely and successful manner. Future research areas are also identified. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2017. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: 2017 No. R-396: Accessed February 21, 2018 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-396-eng.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Canada URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-396-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 149193 Keywords: Low Risk Offenders Parole Parole Board Parole Postponements Parolees Risk Assessment

Author: Clark, John Title: Finishing the Job: Modernizing Maryland's Bail System Summary: This Abell Report, written by John Clark of the Pretrial Justice Institute, provides an overview of why bail reform is urgently needed in Maryland; explores the recent efforts to achieve reform in Baltimore, and highlights recent progress in other states using evidence-based risk assessments that yield a more just, effective, and cost-efficient pretrial system. What's wrong with the current system? It results in economic and racial disparities; It allows defendants who pose a risk to community safety but have access to money to buy their way out of jail, and It ignores evidence-based practices that have been effective in other jurisdictions. Other states, including Colorado and Kentucky, have implemented evidence-based reforms that could provide a model for Maryland. Indeed, over the past few years, two high-level state commissions have studied Maryland's bail system and recommended a series of reforms that would result in a major overhaul of that system. This report offers a path toward implementing the necessary changes and calls on local and state leaders to take action now. Details: Abell Foundation, 2016. 20p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 28, 2018 at: http://www.abell.org/sites/default/files/files/cja-pretrial616(1).pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.abell.org/sites/default/files/files/cja-pretrial616(1).pdf Shelf Number: 149298 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Detention Pretrial Justice Risk Assessment

Author: Robinson, Amanda Title: Establishing the efficacy of a telephone-based police response to domestic violence: Hampshire Constabulary's Resolution Centre. [Technical Report]. Summary: Capitalising on a natural experiment in Hampshire Constabulary, this research utilised police officially recorded data to directly compare a sample of grade-3 domestic abuse incidents that received a telephone-based response from the force's Resolution Centre to a similar sample of incidents dealt with by the same force one year later that received the standard provision of 'slow time' deployment. A clear pattern of findings emerged, which taken together demonstrate the efficacy of providing a telephone-based response to certain types of domestic abuse incidents. Specifically, a detailed and formalised operations protocol has been embedded into the work of the Resolution Centre and all evidence suggests this is leading to a higher quality response overall to grade-3 domestics. The initial response provided by the Resolution Centre results in more crimes being recorded and more investigations that result in formal police action. The practice of risk assessment appears to be more comprehensive and detailed, generating a higher number of disclosures and more cases classified as 'medium' and 'high' risk. Due to the robust methodological approach of the research, these positive findings can be directly attributed to the setting where the police work was performed, rather than any differences in case characteristics. Details: Cardiff: Cardiff University, 2017. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/107133/1/Robinson%20%282017%29%20Hampshire%20Resolution%20Centre_Final%20Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/107133/1/Robinson%20%282017%29%20Hampshire%20Resolution%20Centre_Final%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 151664 Keywords: Domestic Abuse Domestic Violence Family Violence Police Policies and Procedures Police Response Risk Assessment

Author: Maryland. Office of the Public Defender Title: Bail Reviewed: Report of the Court Observation Project Summary: Whether someone accused of a crime is detained pending trial is among the most critical factors in the outcome of the case and the person's well-being. Pretrial detention impacts the ability to work, care for one's family, and maintain housing - regardless of what ultimately happens in the case. The pretrial status of an accused can also impact the ultimate result in their case. Most criminal cases do not go to trial, and what pleas are offered by the prosecutor and accepted by the defendant are heavily weighted by whether the person is currently in jail. The need to get out of jail and return home is a powerful incentive to accept a plea, regardless of the fairness of the offer and sometimes even the person's culpability. Despite the incredible importance of this phase of the proceedings, the general public knows very little about the pretrial process. Unlike criminal trials, pretrial hearings are rarely covered by the media, portrayed in entertainment, or taught in schools. The Pretrial Court Observation Project was designed to educate community members about the pretrial process, while helping gather important data at the critical time of the recent implementation of a Maryland Court Rule change. This report documents the observations and findings of sixty-four volunteers who observed bail review hearings in Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Frederick County, Howard County and Montgomery County. While their observations show clear progress, particularly with the decreased use of money bail, they also identified areas of concern, including the overuse of holding people without bail. The concerns that were identified have identifiable solutions. Among those were the need for a validated assessment tool and the availability of a sufficient range of pretrial services which are needed to ensure pretrial determinations are consistent, fair, and minimize the extent to which presumptively innocent individuals are jailed. The recommendations in this report come from the Community Court Watch observers and are based on their assessments of what is needed to make pretrial a more fair process: - Recommendation 1: Provide judges with resources that encourage release while helping to ensure defendants return to court. - Recommendation 2: Provide judges with tools that measure risk. - Recommendation 3: Educate judges, commissioners and the community. - Recommendation 4: Accused individuals should be present for their bail review hearing. Details: Baltimore: Office of the Public Defender, 2018. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2018 at: http://www.opd.state.md.us/Portals/0/Downloads/articles/Bail%20Reviewed.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://www.opd.state.md.us/Portals/0/Downloads/articles/Bail%20Reviewed.pdf Shelf Number: 149711 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Clark, John Title: Enhancing Pretrial Justice in Cuyahoga County: Results From a Jail Population Analysis and Judicial Feedback Summary: To assist in its ongoing examination of the bail system in Cuyahoga County, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, in coordination with the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, asked the Pretrial Justice Institute (PJI) to review elements of the Cuyahoga County pretrial justice system. PJI examined case filing trend data, analyzed data from a snapshot of persons released on a particular date from four facilities-the Cuyahoga County Jail plus three municipal jails-and solicited feedback from the Court of Common Pleas and municipal court benches regarding needed enhancements to the bail system. This report presents the findings from that effort. Here is a summary of the major findings and recommendations. Trend Data - Despite significant declines in the number of reported violent and property crimes in Cuyahoga County, and even larger declines in the number of criminal cases filed in both the municipal courts and the Court of Common Pleas, there has not been a commensurate reduction in the number of jail bookings or average daily populations. - The Cuyahoga County Jail has been operating, on average, at over 100% capacity in four out of the past five years. Jail Population Analysis - There were significant differences in the demographic characteristics, particularly regarding race, of those released from the three municipal jails on the date of the snapshot, June 1, 2017, compared to those released from the Cuyahoga County Jail. - Twenty-five percent of the felony pretrial population in the Cuyahoga County Jail sample remained detained throughout the pretrial period, with an average length of stay in pretrial detention of 104 days. Of the 75% who were released, whether by financial or non-financial means, the average length of stay was 17 days. - Thirty-eight percent of the Cuyahoga County jail population that was released on personal bond spent more than one week in pretrial detention before that release. - Twenty-eight percent of those with a bond of $5,000 or less never posted it and remained detained throughout the pretrial period. - There was a correlation between seriousness of charge and bond type and bond amounts in the Cuyahoga County Jail sample. Those charged with Felony 1 and 2 offenses were much more likely to get a secured money bond than those charged with Felony 4 and 5 offenses, and, of those receiving a secured bond, much more likely to receive a higher bond. Judicial Feedback PJI invited all Municipal and Common Pleas judges to participate in a voluntary questionnaire consisting of nine questions to identify areas of potential judicial education, stakeholder engagement, and process improvements. Here is a summary of the results: - Thirty-three judges completed the questionnaire. - Over 75% of the judges felt informed about the strengths and weaknesses of the bail system in their jurisdiction, and about ways that it might be improved. - 82% of the judges felt there is value in the Criminal Justice Committee examining the pretrial process in Cuyahoga County and its municipalities. - 79% felt it is important to provide judicial-specific education to understand possible ways to improve the bail system in the areas of actuarial risk assessment (87%) and research-informed risk management strategies (87%). - 13% felt uncertainty about the use of actuarial risk assessment tools with some concern that they may cause additional issues. - 84% of the respondents were "somewhat familiar with" to "not familiar with at all" the use of supervision matrices, while only 15% of the judges were "very familiar with" the uses of supervision matrices. Recommendations 1. Conduct a training on the fundamentals of pretrial justice for the judges of the Court of Common Pleas and of the municipal courts. 2. Conduct a one-to-two day summit of the judiciary in Cuyahoga County to identify a clear vision statement pertaining to pretrial practices within the county. 3. Pilot test 2-4 projects in both the Municipal and Common Pleas Court introducing research and evidenced-based practices in pretrial improvements. 4. Actively and consistently communicate the plans, progress, and outcomes of the pilot sites to the entire judiciary, as well as other key stakeholders, such as prosecutors, defenders, law enforcement, victim advocates, and the community at large. 5. Based on the results of the pilot sites, plan and implement an expansion of new practices system-wide. Details: Rockville, MD: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2017. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 17, 2018 at: http://www.acluohio.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Cuyahoga-County-Jail-Population-Analysis-Report-PJI-2017_final.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.acluohio.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Cuyahoga-County-Jail-Population-Analysis-Report-PJI-2017_final.pdf Shelf Number: 149840 Keywords: Bail Jail Inmates Jails Judges Pretrial Detention Pretrial Justice Risk Assessment

Author: Luminosity, Inc. Title: Pretrial Case Processing in Maine : A Study of System Efficiency & Effectiveness Summary: The Corrections Alternatives Advisory Committee (CAAC) was created by the Maine Legislature in the spring of 2005 to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the state's corrections system and to better manage costs. The objectives of the committee were to increase systemwide efficiencies, enhance state and county coordination, and effectively manage defendants/offenders risk and needs. A portion of the committee's responsibility was to examine the local criminal justice system which is considered the "front end" of the larger criminal justice system. An examination of the "front end" of the system, specifically the pretrial stage (including arrest through case disposition) and how cases are processed in the system was the focus of this study. This in-depth study included an examination of the critical stages of pretrial case processing in all 16 counties in Maine, as well as the policies and practices of the key participants involved. The assessment was completed by conducting extensive research, onsite visits, interviews with nearly 250 key stakeholders, and observations of the critical stages of pretrial case processing. The results of the study led to findings and recommendations for improvements related to system efficiencies, system effectiveness, and risk management of pretrial defendants. Great care was taken to ensure that the recommendations were consistent with maintaining judicial system integrity, protecting the presumption of innocence, and ensuring the highest level of protection to our communities. The report begins with an overview of Maine's pretrial case processing system, including the identification of seven critical stages and eight key system participants. Details: St. Petersburg, FL: Luminosity, 2006. 162p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2018 at: http://digitalmaine.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1031&context=doc_docs Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://digitalmaine.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1031&context=doc_docs Shelf Number: 149868 Keywords: Bail Case Processing Pretrial Detention Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Canada. Public Safety Canada Title: 2016-2017 Evaluation of the National Flagging System Program: Final Report Summary: The Program The National Flagging System was established in 1995 to ensure that provincial/territorial Crown prosecutors were aware of the potential information held in other provinces/territories regarding an offender's high and continuing risk of future violent conduct. The National Flagging System is both a database and a network of provincial/territorial officials, referred to as National Flagging System Coordinators, who are responsible for identifying high-risk offenders for flagging purposes. The National Flagging System operates through the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC), which is housed within the RCMP. CPIC facilitates the sharing of person records to support this Program. When a flagged offender re-offends anywhere in Canada, those NFS Coordinators that have access to CPIC messaging functionality are notified through CPIC. NFS coordinators must apply and be granted CPIC system access before sharing the aforementioned information. The NFS is a $500,000/year grant program for the provinces with base funding of $25,000 per year per province and the remainder divided among the provinces on a population basis. Funding is used for salaries, equipment for electronic storage and file distribution, communication and travel for training and conferences that enhance expertise in the area of high-risk offenders. The territories, while part of the network, are not eligible for funding because the administration of justice is the responsibility of the Public Prosecution Service, a federal body that cannot be funded under the grant program. Why it is important High-risk offenders are a mobile population. Many spend time in the federal penitentiary system and may be moved around the country. After their incarceration, there is high incentive for them to relocate as they are often known in their community. There is a need for coordination among provinces and territories in the management of high-risk offenders. Inter-jurisdictional cooperation is essential in order to ensure that prosecutors have the information necessary to treat them appropriately if they re-offend anywhere in Canada. What we examined The evaluation assessed the relevance and performance of the NFS Program over the period 2012-13 to 2016-17. It examined: 1) continued need, 2) alignment with federal government priorities, 3) alignment with federal roles and responsibilities, 4) progress towards achievement of intended outcomes, and 5) efficiency and economy. What we found Relevance There is a continued need for the NFS and inter-jurisdictional cooperation so that prosecutors have information to ensure flagged offenders are treated appropriately if they re-offend anywhere in Canada. Workload is increasing because of the requirement to maintain files on high-risk offenders who tend to have long criminal careers. Given the mobility of long-term offenders, inter-provincial co-operation and sharing of information are crucial. Without federal funding some provinces are likely to become inactive leading to less communication, information sharing and cooperation among provinces. By identifying and tracking high-risk offenders and providing information on flagged offenders should they reoffend anywhere in Canada, the Program is aligned with the Government of Canada's and Public Safety's objective of a Safe and Secure Canada. The administration of justice is an area of shared responsibility between the federal government and the provinces/territories. The Program is consistent with federal roles and responsibilities to provide national leadership to foster cooperation and coordination among the provinces/ territories in the management of high risk offenders. Cost sharing reflects the need for information sharing with respect to this population as their mobility is increased when transferred within the federal penitentiary system. The NFS is a unique network with no equivalent counterparts. It has synergies with provincial flagging systems and with the new High Risk Child Sex Offender database for which NFS Coordinators have recently agreed to act as a conduit between the RCMP and organizations in the provinces/territories conducting public notifications. Performance - Effectiveness The evidence from interviews as well as document and literature reviews suggests that the Program is contributing to the outcomes identified in its logic model. The Program has helped provinces maintain or increase their capacity to identify and track high- risk offenders by providing funding for resources, training and equipment and by encouraging the development of inter-and intra-provincial/territorial networks. Although the data suggests that offenders who are higher risk than the general offender population are being identified, referred, flagged and tracked, it appears that cases may be missed and flagging criteria may be inconsistent across provinces. Work underway in certain provinces suggests that twice as many offenders should be flagged. A 2015 research study conducted in collaboration with PS points to inconsistency in flagging noting that some provinces are flagging disproportionally more offenders even though there were no differences in risk scores or recidivism rates between provinces.Footnote 1 The study also concluded that "the NFS appeared to function as an appropriate mechanism for tracking offenders at increased risk for violent or sexual recidivism" and identifies the right risk offenders.Footnote 2 Interviewees suggested that the program could be improved by reviewing flagging guidelines and practices. There are no standards for the timeliness of the transfer of information between provinces/territories; however, most interviewees felt it had improved and that files were transferred to meet court deadlines. Increased knowledge about the NFS and flagged offenders among Crown prosecutors and other justice partners is attributed to education and training, good communications between Coordinators and prosecutors and the knowledge and accessibility of Coordinators and staff to those with questions or seeking information. NFS information is seen to affect outcomes because it is readily and nationally available, extensive, complete and of high quality. It would be difficult for a Crown prosecutor to identify and obtain information of this caliber in a timely manner through his/her own efforts. NFS information is used to make decisions on charges, prosecution strategy, bail submissions, plea negotiations and sentencing recommendations as well as to alert prosecutors to the need to consider making an application for Dangerous Offender or Long Term Offender designations and as input into the programming an inmate receives from the Correctional Service of Canada. The NFS facilitates Dangerous Offender and Long Term Offender applications by providing complete criminal histories to support these applications, documenting intensive court processes and significantly reducing resource demands on Crown prosecutors that may in the past have limited the number of applications. A 2015 PS research study found that 14% of flagged offenders included in the study were subsequently designated compared to 1% of Canadian violent recidivists.Footnote 3 Having dedicated NFS staff, partly funded by federal grants, has facilitated the achievement of outcomes and the development of a network and strong relationships that are fostered through Coordinators' meetings. Two factors have been identified by some of the interviewees to have hindered the achievement of the Program's outcomes: information sharing challenges with the Correctional Service of Canada and the backlog faced by the RCMP in entering the criminal records of offenders in the CPIC. However, the RCMP indicated that CPIC does not have a backlog of any information. PS research studies published in 2005 and 2015 have provided confidence that the right people are being flagged and have helped Coordinators understand the impact of the Program. However, no additional research is currently planned. A number of potential improvements related to the Program have been suggested including reviewing flagging guidelines and criteria to improve inter-provincial consistency, implementing automatic notification of flagging candidates from provincial databases to minimize missed cases, preparing case summaries to improve the usefulness of flagging files to Crown prosecutors, increasing the use of electronic files, developing a web-based national database to store flagged offender files, more timely and consistent access to the Correctional Service of Canada data, more training for prosecutors on the Dangerous Offender and Long Term Offender application process and more systematic communication within the network to share information on issues and challenges related to high-risk offenders. Performance - Efficiency and Economy As recommended by the previous evaluation, a Performance Measurement Strategy was completed in 2014 and implemented in 2015. At 8%, the administration ratio for the program is in line with that of other grant programs and is indicative of an efficient administrative process. It is noted that the ratio has increased from 4.5% at the time of the last evaluation. The evaluation has identified a number of opportunities for improvement. To that end, the following recommendations are being made for consideration. Recommendations Internal Audit and Evaluation Directorate recommends that the ADM of CSCCB: In collaboration with the provinces, to develop more structured flagging criteria and guidelines to improve consistency in the application of these criteria by NFS coordinators and across jurisdictions; To work with NFS coordinators and Correctional Service Canada (CSC) to improve consistency, timeliness and ease of access to CSC information by NFS coordinators and across jurisdictions. Management Response and Action Plan Management accepts all recommendations and will implement an action plan Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2017. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 28, 2018 at: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/vltn-ntnl-flggng/vltn-ntnl-flggng-en.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Canada URL: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/vltn-ntnl-flggng/vltn-ntnl-flggng-en.pdf Shelf Number: 149949 Keywords: Offender Monitoring Recidivism Risk Assessment Sex Offenders Violent Offenders (Canada)

Author: Clark, John Title: Upgrading North Carolina's Bail System: A Balances Approach to Pretrial Justice Using Legal and Evidence-Based Practices Summary: This report focuses on helping North Carolina officials work toward a balanced approach to achieving the three goals of the pretrial release decision-making process: to provide reasonable assurance of the safety of the community; to provide reasonable assurance of appearance in court; and to maximize pretrial release. It does so by focusing on legal and evidence-based practices-ones that fully comport with the law and that are driven by research. The use of such practices has been fully endorsed by all the key justice system stakeholder groups, including: the Conference of Chief Justices; the Conference of State Court Administrators; the International Association of Chiefs of Police; the National Sheriffs' Association; the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys; the National Legal Aid and Defenders Association; the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; the National Association of Counties; and the American Bar Association. And the use of such practices has been shown to produce excellent results. Except for very promising work being done in Mecklenburg County, legal and evidence-based pretrial justice practices are not in place in North Carolina. Magistrates and judges in the state place significant emphasis on an antiquated tool-bond guidelines-which several federal courts around the country have recently called unconstitutional. Courts also rely heavily on a release option-the secured bond-that was established in the 19th Century to address a problem that was unique to that time; the ability of a criminal defendant to flee into the vast wilderness of America's growing frontier and simply disappear, never to face prosecution. And only 40 of the state's 100 counties are served by pretrial services programs that can provide supervision of defendants released by the court with conditions of pretrial release. Many of these programs have very limited supervision capacity. The model for legal and evidence-based pretrial release practices in North Carolina includes the use of an empirically-derived pretrial risk assessment tool, the development of a decision matrix that would help magistrates and judges make pretrial release decisions, the implementation of risk management strategies aimed at matching risk levels with the most appropriate level of support or supervision, the expanded use of citation releases by law enforcement, the very early involvement of the prosecutor and defense, and the initiation of automatic bond reviews for in-custody misdemeanor defendants. Implementing such a model of legal and evidence-based practices in North Carolina would be greatly facilitated by changes in the state's laws. Current North Carolina law does not expressly provide for a right to actual pretrial release-it is crafted only in terms of setting or not setting conditions-nor does it articulate a procedure for preventive detention of high risk defendants. A right merely to have conditions set, coupled with the statutory provisions discussing those conditions as well as no decent process for risk-based detention, naturally moves North Carolina magistrates and judges toward using secured money conditions to address risk for both court appearance and public safety, and toward attempting to use unattainable money conditions to detain defendants posing extremely high pretrial risk. In addition, although the statute speaks of pretrial risk, it makes determinations of who is entitled to having release conditions set based primarily on charge as a proxy for risk, and subtly points judicial officials toward using the money condition to address risk. The better practice would be to set forth a right to release for all except extremely high-risk defendants (or defendants who are not as risky but who also face extremely serious charges, or both), provide for a lawful and transparent detention provision based on risk to allow pretrial detention with no conditions, and then create mechanisms so that persons released pretrial are released immediately. Details: Gaithersburg, MD: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2016. 63p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 4, 2018 at: https://nccalj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Upgrading-NCs-Bail-System-PJI-2016-003.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://nccalj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Upgrading-NCs-Bail-System-PJI-2016-003.pdf Shelf Number: 150052 Keywords: Bail Evidence-Based Practices Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: NEPCon Title: Timber Legality Risk Assessment: Laos Summary: This report contains an evaluation of the risk of illegality in Laos for five categories and 21 sub-categories of law. We found: - Specified risk for 16 sub-categories. - No legal requirements for 5 sub-categories. The Timber Risk Score for Laos is 0 out of 100. The key legality risks identified in this report concern legal rights to harvest, taxes and fees, timber harvesting activities, third parties rights and trade and transport. For Legal rights to harvest, the is a risk of: - Conflict over land tenure, and a lack of business registration specifically for plantations (Sub-category 1.1) - Forest concessions being granted in violation of regulations (1.2) - Annual Logging Quotas being based on inadequate inventories and requests from districts, prepared in the office without conducting actual field surveys, leading to approvals for logging not reflecting the resources available on the ground (1.3). - Corruption, lack of certification and stamping procedures for harvesting permits and other documents, resulting in harvesting outside areas approved by the government, clearance of greater areas than areas granted for projects, and permits issued despite lack of documentation (1.4). For Taxes and Fees, there is a risk of: - Inconsistent application of taxes and fees at the provincial level (1.5) - Risk of high corruption levels regarding payment of tax, the high amount of illegal logging indicates that issues might be present in relation to tax payment (1.5) - Risk that smallholders lack business registration, and don't pay taxes (1.5) For Timber Harvesting Activities, there is risk of: - Risk that the implementation of harvesting regulation is lacking, a logging plan is often seen as a quota giving the right to cut a certain volume, and harvesting practice driven by needs to supply the sawmills with their desired wood (1.8) - Risk of legal requirements covering protected tree species being ignored and protected species being harvested without authorization document (1.9) - Risk of non-compliance with health and safety rules, logging crews do not have safety equipment or protective gear, and live under very basic conditions (1.11) - Risk that workers do not have a contract or do not receive their salary (1.12) Third Parties' Rights: Regarding Customary rights (1.13) there is a risk of conflicts on tenure rights, the government maintains a highly centralized system of forest governance with inadequate recognition of customary tenure rights, communal lands are not compensated for when re-allocated to a company For Trade and Transport, there is a risk of: - A lack of, or falsification of the registration of harvested logs (1.16) - Risk of timber being transported without required documents (1.17) - Risk of violation of the ban on export of logs and timber (1.17) This Timber Legality Risk Assessment for Laos provides an analysis of the risk of sourcing timber from areas of illegal harvesting and transport. NEPCon has been working on risk assessments for timber legality, in partnership with a number of organizations, since 2007. Details: Copenhagen: NETCon, 2017. 143p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 24, 2018 at: https://www.nepcon.org/sites/default/files/library/2017-06/NEPCon-TIMBER-Laos-Risk-Assessment-EN-V1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Laos URL: https://www.nepcon.org/sites/default/files/library/2017-06/NEPCon-TIMBER-Laos-Risk-Assessment-EN-V1.pdf Shelf Number: 150354 Keywords: Environmental Crimes Forests Illegal Logging Natural Resources Offenses Against the Environment Risk Assessment

Author: Transparency International Title: Analysing Corruption in the Forestry Sector Summary: Corruption - the abuse of entrusted power for private gain - undermines good governance and the rule of law. Corruption in forestry further degrades the environment, threatens rural communities and robs the public of billions of dollars each year. Transparency International (TI) is committed to a society where corruption-free forest governance and sustainable management enable increased economic development, poverty reduction and environmental protection. To help achieve this objective, TI's Forest Governance Integrity (FGI) Programme monitors the existing anti-corruption instruments that bring about the greatest improvement in the forestry sector and in good governance overall. Each country's forestry sector is unique, as are each country's anti-corruption mechanisms - its laws and the initiatives led by government, the private sector and civil society. Therefore, in order to best use their human and financial resources, civil society organisations (CSOs) must prioritise which corrupt practices to monitor. Otherwise, the temptation is to try to monitor all corrupt practices, or at least those associated with current programmes. Given the limited resources most CSOs have this would be a logistical impossibility, but perhaps more important, it is vital that activists are critically selective in choosing targets that will provide the most effective impact in the long run. This manual outlines a generic methodology for prioritising the corrupt practices that pose the greatest risk to governance - i.e. those practices that are the most likely to occur and have the greatest impact. Interviews with key experts, supplemented by publicly available data, inform the rapid risk assessment, the results of which are validated through stakeholder consultation. Based on this priority setting, it will be possible to assess more thoroughly the corrupt practices that pose the highest risk. In a second step, expert analysis and stakeholder consultation then help identify the existing anti-corruption instruments that most efficiently tackle these priority practices. These anticorruption instruments then serve as the focus for TI's forestry programme - including its monitoring, outreach and advocacy. A greater understanding of corrupt practices in the forestry sector should help focus the public and decision-makers on generating the political will needed to tackle criminal activity associated with the forestry sector - activity which in many countries drastically reduces revenues that could be used for economic development. Details: Berlin: Forest Governance Integrity Programme, Transparency International, 2010. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 24, 2018 at: https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/analysing_corruption_in_the_forestry_sector_a_manual Year: 2010 Country: Asia URL: https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/analysing_corruption_in_the_forestry_sector_a_manual Shelf Number: 150359 Keywords: Forest Law Enforcement Forests Illegal Logging Natural Resource Political Corruption Risk Assessment

Author: Padfield, Nicola Title: Parole Board Oral Hearings 2016-2017 - Exploring the Barriers to Release: Stage Two of an Exploratory Study Summary: This is the Stage Two report of an exploratory study into oral hearings of the Parole Board carried out in the early months of 2017. Building on the pilot study, an additional 17 cases listed for hearing at oral hearings at 11 different prisons were observed in early 2017, and further interviews were conducted with a variety of participants in the parole process. Conclusions focus on the apparent culture of delay, and the paper makes a number of recommendations to strengthen the role and independence of the Parole Board, to improve processes, and to improve the support given to prisoners in the parole process. (It should be read in conjunction with the Pilot Study, submitted in November 2016. Both reports were originally confidential to the Parole Board but the Board agreed in November 2017 that they could be put in the public domain.) Details: Cambridge, UK: Institute of Criminology; University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law. 2017. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 63/2017: Accessed June 20, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3081039 Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3081039 Shelf Number: 150618 Keywords: Conditional Release Offender Management Parole Boards Parolees Probation Risk Assessment

Author: Veen, H.C.J. van der Title: National Risk Assessment on Money Laundering for the Netherlands Summary: Dutch policy to prevent and combat money laundering is based on the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and EU directives and regulations. The FATF - an intergovernmental body set up by the G7 in 1989 - focuses on global prevention of money laundering, terrorist financing and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. The majority of the FATF's recommendations has been adopted into the fourth EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive, applicable to all EU member states. In short, Article 7 of this directive obliges EU member states to implement a risk-based policy against money laundering and terrorist financing and to establish a National Risk Assessment (NRA). The goal of this NRA is to identify the ten most significant risks relating to money laundering in terms of their potential impact and to assess the 'resilience' of the policy instruments designed to prevent and combat money laundering. Resilience entails the functioning of policy instruments (including legislation), whereby the following is applicable: the greater the resilience, the more the risks are combatted. This initial NRA also describes a number of lessons learned that could be taken into account in the process of subsequent NRAs. Details: The Hague: WODC, 2017. 105p. Source: Internet Resource: Cahier 2017-13a: Accessed July 2, 2018 at: https://english.wodc.nl/binaries/Cahier%202017-13a_2689c_Full%20text_tcm29-328683.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Netherlands URL: https://english.wodc.nl/binaries/Cahier%202017-13a_2689c_Full%20text_tcm29-328683.pdf Shelf Number: 150759 Keywords: Economics and Crime Financial Crime Money Laundering Risk Assessment Terrorist Financing Underground Banking

Author: Travers, Rosie Title: The dynamic predictors of reconviction for women Summary: This research was driven by a policy question about the extent to which rehabilitative services for women in prison or on probation need to be different to those provided for men: Do women and men have different risk factors for criminal behaviour that will demand different interventions? We examined the nature of the most prevalent and most predictive risk factors for reoffending in a sample of nearly 15,000 women and over 95,000 men on community sentences or leaving prison for whom we had Offender Assessment System (OASys) risk and need assessments. We were interested in whether or not there are risk factors that predict reoffending specifically for women. Key findings - The most prevalent criminogenic needs for women were poor problem solving, impulsivity, and unemployment. These were also the most prevalent needs for men. - The prevalence of other needs varied to some extent by gender, but also by risk and offence type. For example, 74% of higher-risk women with a current conviction for acquisitive crime had a Class A drug problem compared to 54% of men in the same risk band and offence type category. This difference between men and women was not evident with those at lower risk of reconviction. - The most prevalent needs were not always the most predictive of reoffending. Five needs emerged as the strongest dynamic predictors of any reoffending for women: Unemployment Binge drinking Impulsivity Regular activities encourage offending Class A drug use - Most needs influenced reoffending to a similar degree for men and women. Class A drug use and binge drinking were more strongly linked to reoffending for women than for men - but were also a risk factor for men. - The strongest dynamic predictors of violent reoffending for women were: Lack of accommodation Temper control Being the victim of domestic violence Problem drinking Lack of closeness with family Binge drinking - There were significant gender differences in the predictiveness of binge drinking, lack of closeness with family, and poor temper control (all more influential for women). - The importance of binge drinking as a major predictor of women's reoffending is a new finding which should translate into policy action. Details: London: HM Prison & Probation Service, 2018. 10p. Source: Internet Resource: Analytical Summary 2018: Accessed July 12, 2018 at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719311/dynamic-predictors-reconviction-women.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719311/dynamic-predictors-reconviction-women.pdf Shelf Number: 150833 Keywords: Female Offenders Offender Rehabilitation Recidivism Reoffending Risk Assessment

Author: Harbinson, Erin Title: Parole Exits and Revocation Knowledge System (PERKS) Project: Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles Summary: In 2017, the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles (the Board) responded to a request for proposals by the Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice (the Robina Institute) with a research project focused on reviewing and improving its management of parole violations. The Board sought specific assistance on how they could incorporate evidence-based practices to inform its decision-making protocol. During FY 2015, the Board revoked 2,655 parolees of which only 8% were for technical violations, however, only 10% or 261 of those revocations occurred via a final hearing (Watts et al., 2017). The remaining cases �waived�, admitting to their violation behavior (Watts et al., 2017). Within this context, the Board sought a review of its revocation process and the best practices used in other states alongside other pertinent research to identify opportunities for reducing re-incarcerations and increasing successful parole completions. This report presents the findings of the Parole Exits and Revocation Knowledge System (PERKS) Project. What follows includes, but is not limited to, a consideration of the following: a) a review of existing practices of states that are using structured revocation decision-making models, b) an assessment of enhanced risk, need, and responsivity tools to consider what personal and social capital or crime desistance variables would improve post-prison decision making by the Board, and c) a summary of suggested modifications of relevant policies and procedures. It is important to begin by noting that the Robina Institute partnered with the Board and a PERKS Project steering committee to accomplish the project�s overall goals. The steering committee included representatives from the agencies impacting the revocation process, namely, from the Board and the Department of Community Supervision (DCS). Details: Minnesota, 2018. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 12, 2018 at: https://robinainstitute.umn.edu/publications/parole-exits-and-revocation-knowledge-system-perks-project-georgia-state-board-pardons Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: file:///C:/Users/AuthUser/Downloads/georgia_perks_parole_tech_asst._report%20(1).pdf Shelf Number: 151487 Keywords: Evidence-Based Policies Pardons Parole Parole Board Risk Assessment

Author: Vincent, Gina M. Title: Risk Assessment And Behavioral Health Screening (RABS): Project Final Technical Report Summary: The Risk Assessment and Behavioral Health Screening (RABS) project was a pre-post, quasi-experimental study of the impact of implementation of a valid risk-needs assessment, behavioral health screening, and risk-need-responsivity (RNR) approach to case management intended to reduce risk while also addressing behavioral health needs. Juvenile justice agencies in Arkansas and Rhode Island were selected to participate following a competitive application process. Four juvenile probation departments in Arkansas and all of juvenile probation in Rhode Island implemented a comprehensive screening/ assessment and case management protocol using the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY; Borum, Bartel, & Forth, 2006), the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Second Version (MAYSI-2; Grisso & Barnum, 2000, 2006), and the CRAFFT. Results indicated that the ostensible impact of implementing the protocol varied by site and depended on the point in the process at which the SAVRY was conducted. In Rhode Island, risk was strongly related to the number of services and rates of placements youth received, which at first glance may indicate case planning approaches followed the risk principle. However, these positive correlations appeared to be due to youth having problems in the community, resulting in referrals to more treatment-related placements, rather than strategic case management decisions at the front end. In Arkansas, there were significant limitations with the administration of the instruments, in three sites. The one site that followed its assessment policy significantly cut recidivism in half and increased the rates of youth being informally rather than formally processed. The presence of potential mental health concerns and receipt of mental health treatment had no association with reduced recidivism in either state even though mental health treatments were the most commonly used services across the board. Policy implications are discussed with a particular emphasis on the need for risk assessments to be conducted pre-disposition for all youth and with strong supervisory oversight in order to improve outcomes. Details: Worcester, MA: University of Massachusetts Medical School, Department of Psychiatry, 2018. 139p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2018 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/grants/251912.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/grants/251912.pdf Shelf Number: 152938 Keywords: Drug Treatment Evidence-Based Practices Juvenile Justice Juvenile Offenders Juvenile Probation Risk Assessment Risk/Needs Assessment

Author: Grommon, Eric Title: Process Evaluation of the IRAS-PAT Pilot Program Implementation. Report to the Indiana Office of Court Services Summary: In 2014, the Indiana Supreme Court Committee to Study Evidence-Based Pretrial Release was tasked with the development and implementation of a pilot project to assess the feasibility, efficacy, economics and methodologies of establishing an evidence-based system for pretrial release decisions in Indiana (Supreme Court Cause No. 94S00-1312-MS-909 and No. 94S00-1412-MS-757). The committee partnered with the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) to develop the pilot project. In spring 2016, the Indiana Office of Court Services (IOCS), in collaboration with the Evidence Based Decision Making policy team (EBDM), entered into agreements with select courts to participate in a pilot program of the Indiana Risk Assessment System - Pretrial Assessment Tool. The pretrial period occurs after arrest and before a disposition has been determined by the court. One of the critical decisions made during this period is whether a defendant should be released back into the community or remain detained in jail pending trial. This decision is multifaceted; should the court decide to release a defendant to the community, the terms and conditions of bail must also be set. One of the main factors used to inform these decisions is the risk of failure-to-appear (FTA) in court. Generally speaking, bail systems are used to offset the risk of defendants failing to appear. In this system, defendants can secure a release from jail pending trial if they are able to meet the bail amount set by the court. Posting money or property is thought to assure that defendants will stand trial as these financial means would be returned if defendants attend court appearances or forfeited if defendants fail to appear. Release or detain decisions are important for a number of reasons. First, these decisions must be consistent with the constitutional rights of defendants. Due process, equal protection, safety from the imposition of excessive bail, and the presumption of innocence are all key considerations that must be taken into account by the court. Second, decisions are being assessed in relation to emerging pretrial practice standards. The American Bar Association (2007) and National Association of Pretrial Service Agencies (2004) have specified a set of benchmarks consistent with Bail Reform Act of 1984 and best practices to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of pretrial efforts. Third, pretrial decisions have significant downstream justice system consequences. Defendants who are detained prior to court disposition are more likely to plead guilty, receive prison sentences, and be incarcerated for longer periods of time than defendants who were released to the community (Heaton et al., 2017; Lowenkamp et al., 2013b; Reaves, 2013). These front-end system decisions impose substantial system costs to state and local governments as well as direct or intangible costs to defendants and their families. In 2010, Indiana adopted the Indiana Risk Assessment System (IRAS), a suite of five separate instruments, created by researchers at the University of Cincinnati, which are designed to be used at specific points in the criminal justice process to identify an offender's risk of a FTA or re-offend and, for some instruments also identify criminogenic needs. One of these instruments, the IRAS Pretrial Assessment Tool (IRAS-PAT) is intended for use during the pretrial period. It was designed to be short but also contain measures that are predictive of both a defendant's FTA and risk of violating pretrial supervision with a new offense. Exhibit 1 shows the items captured from the IRAS-PAT. In keeping with the idea of brevity, the IRAS-PAT consists of seven risk items in three dimensions (criminal history, employment and residential stability, and drug use). Only trained staff can administer the IRAS-PAT which requires a brief face-to-face interview (approximately 10 minutes) with arrestees and follow-up verification of information by pretrial supervision staff. Details: Indianapolis: Center for Criminal Justice Research, Indiana University, Indiana University Public PolicyInstitute, 2017. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 14, 2018 at: https://www.in.gov/publicdefender/files/IRAS-PAT_Report_Pr1%20(3).pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.in.gov/publicdefender/files/IRAS-PAT_Report_Pr1%20(3).pdf Shelf Number: 153463 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Risk Assessment

Author: Sloan, Carly Will Title: The Effect of Risk Assessment Scores on Judicial Behavior and Defendant Outcomes Summary: The use of risk assessment scores as a means of decreasing pretrial detention for low-risk, primarily poor defendants is increasing rapidly across the United States. Despite this, there is little evidence on how risk assessment scores alter criminal outcomes. Using administrative data from a large county in Texas, we estimate the effect of a risk assessment score policy on judge bond decisions, defendant pretrial detention, and pretrial recidivism. We identify effects by exploiting a large, sudden policy change using a regression discontinuity design. This approach effectively compares defendants booked just before and after the policy change. Results show that adopting a risk assessment score leads to increased release on non-financial bond and decreased pretrial detention. These results appear to be driven by poor defendants. We also find risk assessment scores did not increase violent pretrial recidivism, however there is some suggestive evidence of small increases in non-violent pretrial recidivism. Details: Bonn, Germany: Institute of Labor Economics, 2018. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 18, 2018 at: https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp11948.html Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://ftp.iza.org/dp11948.pdf Shelf Number: 154069 Keywords: Bail Bond Defendants Judicial Discretion Non-Financial Bond Pretrial Detention Recidivism Risk Assessment Texas

Author: Bryant, Robin Title: Risk Management in relation to Firearms Licensing Summary: Our primary conclusion is that a structured professional judgement should continue to form the basis for risk assessment and decision-making for shotgun and firearms licencing by MPS Firearms Enquiry Officers (FEOs) and their managers. The preparatory desk-bound study we undertook for this report, and our own empirical research using interviews with FEOs and their managers, together with the collection and analysis of data all support this conclusion. The MPS assesses the risk posed by granting or renewing an individual's shotgun and/or firearm Certificate in robust, fair and clear ways, consistent with legal and national requirements and which follow the guidance of the Home Office, College of Policing and others. None-the-less, assessing risk, in the sense of estimating the likelihood of an individual posing a threat in the future, is a challenging undertaking, made particularly difficult in the context of firearms licensing by the ambiguities inherent in the law and in national policy. Our research leads us to suggest that risk assessment and decision-making by FET (SCO19) could be further improved in the following ways. Recommendation 1 - Develop additional forms of risk assessment based on threats (as an aid to structured professional judgement) Recommendation 2 - Increase cooperation with other non-police agencies to share good practice Recommendation 3 - Enhance FEO training and staff development to aid structured professional judgement Recommendation 4 - Develop further the risk assessment of 'reasons to own', the security of the shotgun/firearm, particular occupational groups and during the whole of the five-year period of licencing Recommendation 5 - Maintain and enhance the home visit for initial applicants Recommendation 6 - Further develop the MPS Vulnerability Assessment Frame (VAF) for use by FEOs as part of their structured professional judgement Recommendation 7 - Adapt FEO and other licencing documentation to better support structured professional judgement Recommendation 8 - If 'risk matrices' are employed by the MPS then these should be used to challenge risk assessments, but not as a basis for structured professional judgement Recommendation 9 - Support the development of future FEO decision-making that utilises the analysis of data Details: Canterbury: Canterbury Centre for Policing Research, Canterbury Christ Church University, 2017. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed march 27, 2019 at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320879541_Risk_Management_in_relation_to_Firearms_Licensing Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320879541_Risk_Management_in_relation_to_Firearms_Licensing Shelf Number: 155186 Keywords: Firearms Licenses Gun Policy Gun Regulation Risk Assessment

Author: Redcross, Cindy Title: Evaluation of Pretrial Justice System Reforms That Use the Public Safety Assessment Effects in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina Summary: Arnold Ventures' Public Safety Assessment (PSA) is a pretrial risk assessment tool that uses nine factors from a defendant's history to produce two risk scores: one representing the likelihood of a new crime being committed and another representing the likelihood of a failure to appear for future court hearings. The PSA also notes if there is an elevated risk of a violent crime. The PSA is designed to provide additional information to judges and others making release decisions - decisions about whether a defendant will be released while waiting for a case to be resolved, and if so, under what conditions. The score is used in conjunction with a jurisdiction-specific decision-making framework that uses the defendant's PSA risk score in combination with local statutes and policies to produce a recommendation for release conditions. The goal of the PSA is to make the restrictions on a defendant's release conditions better align with that defendant's assessed risk of committing new crimes or failing to appear. Over 40 jurisdictions across the country have implemented the PSA. Mecklenburg County, North Carolina was one of the first; it began using the PSA in 2014, switching from another risk assessment. This study presents the effects of the PSA and related policy changes in Mecklenburg County. The first report in the series describes the effects of the overall policy reforms on important outcomes. A supplemental second report describes the role of risk-based decision making in the outcomes and describes the effects of the PSA on racial disparities in outcomes and among different subgroups. Overall, the findings are notable from a public-safety perspective: Mecklenburg County released more defendants and did not see an increase in missed court appointments or new criminal charges while defendants were waiting for their cases to be resolved. The PSA policy changes were associated with less use of financial bail and a higher rate of defendants being released on a written promise or unsecured bond. The proportion of defendants detained in jail was lower than it would have been in the absence of the policy changes. There was an improved alignment between defendant risk and the restrictiveness of release conditions. Fewer cases resulted in guilty pleas and convictions than would have been the case in the absence of the reforms. Because more defendants were released while their cases were pending, they may have had less incentive to plead guilty in order to get out of jail. Even though the PSA policy changes increased the percentage of defendants who were released pending trial - and even though a higher proportion of defendants were facing felony charges in the period after the PSA was implemented - there was no evidence that the PSA policy changes affected the percentages of defendants who made all of their court appearances or who were charged with new crimes while waiting for their cases to be resolved. Most of the changes in pretrial release conditions occurred at a step in the pretrial case process before the PSA report is completed. Thus, having access to the information in the PSA could have had at most only a small effect on the way judges set release conditions. There was no evidence of racial disparity in the setting of release conditions and the PSA had no effect on racial disparities within the system. Black defendants were more likely than other racial groups to be assessed by the PSA as being high-risk, though. Details: New York: MDRC Center for Criminal Justice Research, 2019. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Report 1 of 2: Accessed March 29, 2019 at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/PSA_Mecklenburg_Brief1.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/PSA_Mecklenburg_Brief1.pdf Shelf Number: 155229 Keywords: Bail Pretrial Justice Pretrial Release Public Safety Racial Disparities Risk Assessment

Author: Skeem, Jennifer L. Title: Impact of Risk Assessment on Judges' Fairness in Sentencing Relatively Poor Defendants Summary: The increasing use of risk assessment algorithms in the criminal justice system has generated enormous controversy. Advocates emphasize that algorithms are more transparent, consistent, and accurate in predicting re-offending than judges' unaided intuition, while skeptics worry that algorithms will increase racial and socioeconomic disparities in incarceration. Ultimately, however, judges make decisions - not algorithms. In the present study, real judges (n=340) with criminal sentencing experience participated in a controlled experiment to test whether the provision of risk assessment information interacts with a defendant's socioeconomic class to influence sentencing decisions. Results revealed that risk assessment information reduced the likelihood of incarceration for relatively affluent defendants, but the same risk assessment information increased the likelihood of incarceration for relatively poor defendants. This finding held after controlling for the sex, race, political orientation, and jurisdiction of the judge. It appears that under some circumstances, risk assessment information can increase sentencing disparities. Details: Richmond: University of Virginia School of Law, 2019. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2019-02: Accessed April 18, 2019 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3316266 Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3316266 Shelf Number: 155461 Keywords: Judicial Discretion Risk Assessment Sentencing

Author: Lusher, Amy Title: Microplastics in Fisheries and Aquaculture: Status of Knowledge on their Occurrence and Implications for Aquatic Organisms and Food Safety Summary: This report looks into the issue of microplastics from the fisheries and aquaculture perspective. Based on existing scientific literature, a group of experts assessed the potential impact of microplastics and related contaminants on fish consumers' health and the ecological implications for aquatic organisms. A workshop was organized with invited experts (Rome, 5-8 December 2016) who complemented the published information and carried out a risk profiling of microplastics in aquaculture and fishery products. Despite the large amount of scientific data available, there are still significant knowledge gaps, in particular regarding impacts at fish population and community level, detailed data for a proper risk assessment and implications of nanoplastics presence in the marine environment. Nonetheless, measures should be taken at international, governmental and consumer levels to undertake cost-effective ecological and seafood safety risk assessments on micro- and nanoplastics and associated polymers, to reduce plastic use and encourage the use of alternative materials, recycling and the adoption of sustainable practices in using plastics and managing plastic pollution. Details: Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2017. 147p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 17, 2019 at: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7677e.pdf Year: 2017 Country: International URL: http://www.fao.org/in-action/globefish/fishery-information/resource-detail/en/c/1043135/ Shelf Number: 156469 Keywords: Aquaculture Environmental Crime Fisheries Marine Safety Microplastics Nanoplastics Offenses against the Environment Plastic Pollution Risk Assessment

Author: New Zealand Ministry of Justice Title: Justice Sector: Population Report Summary: This is the second population report from the justice sector. The report is based on a projection model, which provides an overview of the amount of future crime that is likely to be committed by distinct groups in the New Zealand population. Information from the model is combined with international and New Zealand research to provide comprehensive evidence on the most effective ways to prevent crime in New Zealand. Our model estimates the likelihood of future crime for different groups in New Zealand. The population is described in nine 'segments', which are grouped by age, service use, and risk of offending. This segmentation supports a strategic view about the balance of activities to prevent crime and provides the big picture view to help support decisions about which groups to focus on in detail. Details: Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Ministry of Justice, 2018. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 21, 2019 at: https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/2017-Population-report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: New Zealand URL: https://www.safeandeffectivejustice.govt.nz/research/population-report/ Shelf Number: 156558 Keywords: Crime Trends New Zealand Offending Predicted Crime Rates Risk Assessment