1 / 40

Specialized Populations: When is ORAS not enough?

Specialized Populations: When is ORAS not enough?. The Corrections Institute Center for Criminal Justice Research University of Cincinnati. The Ultimate Goal. To develop the most comprehensive view of the person

jess
Télécharger la présentation

Specialized Populations: When is ORAS not enough?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Specialized Populations: When is ORAS not enough? The Corrections Institute Center for Criminal Justice Research University of Cincinnati

  2. The Ultimate Goal • To develop the most comprehensive view of the person • Incorporate actuarial assessments, structured evaluations, and professional judgment

  3. Best Practices: The Use of a Actuarial Assessment • Medical • Automobile • Insurance • Mechanical • Economics • Healthcare

  4. Anybody Recognize This?

  5. Probably Not. But You Probably Recognize This?

  6. Effectiveness of the QWERTY v DVORAK • Some dispute findings but most accept • DVORAK 33% fewer errors • Guinness Book of World Records • 212 words a minute with DVORAK • 30 times less stressful to hands • Ergonomically superior • Alternate hands • 70% of the keys used are on one row

  7. Why QWERTY over DVORAK? • QWERTY was more effective for typewriters • Why was it not adopted once technology advanced? • We already know what we are doing. • We have been doing this for so long. • It works the way we are doing it. • It is too expensive to change. • It will take too much to relearn what I am doing.

  8. Goal of Assessment • To capture a true picture of the person we are working with regarding his or her strengths, areas of general need, crime producing factors, and support networks

  9. Creating a True Picture Criminogenic Needs Specialized Population Environment Need Specific Assessments Social Support Structured Professional Judgment

  10. Criminogenic Needs • Assess offenders using a valid instrument for the purpose of gathering a composite risk score/level

  11. The Utility of the ORAS • Broad measure of criminogenic needs • Overall risk level • “Red Flags” for domain specific needs • Low • Moderate • High

  12. Use a Valid Risk Assessment Instrument to Predict Recidivism

  13. Specialized Populations • Sexual offenders • Domestic Violence • Operating Motor Vehicle while Intoxicated • Violent offenders • Women offenders • Veteran offenders

  14. Assessing Specialized Populations • Consider general risk • Concentrate on areas that are problematic for that type of offender • Remember, composite risk score relates to the overall likelihood

  15. Who Is More Likely to Reoffend? • 1st time DUI • Drinking at a bar with friends • Crossed the double yellow line • .12 BA • Employed • Has a driver’s license • States “The cop was just doing their job” • “It is not ok to drink and drive” • Family that supports sober lifestyle • 1st time DUI • Drinking at a bar with friends • Crossed the double yellow line • .12 BA • Unemployed • Driving w/o a license • States “The cop was out to get me” • Everyone gets one DUI • Family who engages in alcohol use on a regular basis

  16. DUIs/OMVIs • Not highly related to how much you drink

  17. DUI/OMVI-Multiple DUIs

  18. Two Typologies of DUIs • Problem drinkers who drive • Problem drivers who drink

  19. Offender Types • Sexual offender assessments • Rapid Risk Assessment of Sex Offense Recidivism (RRASOR) • Minnesota Sex Offender Screening Tool (MnSOST-R) • Static-2002R • Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide (SORAG)

  20. Violent/Anger • HCR-20 • Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) • Hostile Interpretation Questionnaire (HIQ) • Hostility Inventory

  21. Domestic Violence • Spousal Assault Risk Assessment • Danger Assessment

  22. Individualized Needs within Each Domain Domain Targets for Change Individual Needs

  23. Domain Areas

  24. Targets for Change • Education • Employment • Financial Situation

  25. Family and Social Support • Family of origin • Current family • Community support networks • Housing

  26. Substance Abuse • Alcohol • Drugs • Type of drugs

  27. Substance Abuse Issue with peers? Physiologically Addicted? Poor emotional regulation?

  28. Peers • Prosocial networks • Antisocial networks

  29. Criminal Attitudes and Behavior Problems • Prosocial/Antisocial Attitudes • Empathy/Compassion • Aggressiveness • Risk Taking

  30. Need Specific Assessments

  31. Attitudes, Values, and Beliefs • Criminal Sentiments Scale-M • Circumstances, Motivation, Readiness, & Suitability • Jesness Inventory • Navaco Anger Scale and Provocation Inventory

  32. Drug/Alcohol • Addiction Severity Index • Adult Substance Use Survey • Alcohol use disorders identification test • Level of Care Utilization System

  33. Mental Health • Brief Jail Mental Health Screen • Diagnostic Interview Schedule IV • MMPI-2 • Personality Assessment Inventory • Traumatic Symptom Inventory

  34. Family • Ecomap • Genogram • Norbeck social Support Questionnaire

  35. Education/Employment • Adult Basic Learning Examination • Basic English Skills Test • Burns/Roe Informal Reading Inventory • Slossom Oral Reading Test • Tests of adult Basic Education

  36. Professional Judgment • Within each target—why is this an issue of this individual?

  37. Environment • How does the environment the person interacts within help, hurt, have no impact?

  38. Social Support • What resources does this person have or is available that can be leveraged to meet his/her needs?

  39. Assessment • On-going process • The more we know, the more we can tailor our interventions • One level of assessment is not enough

  40. Brian.Lovins@uc.edu

More Related