The effectiveness of treatment for sexual offenders remains controversial, even though it is widely agreed that certain forms of human service interventions reduce the recidivism rates of general offenders. The current review examined whether the principles associated with effective treatments for general offenders (risk-need-responsivity; RNR) also apply to sexual offender treatment. Based on a meta-analysis of 23 recidivism outcome studies meeting basic criteria for study quality, the unweighted sexual and general recidivism rates for the treated sexual offenders were lower than the rates observed for the comparison groups (10.9%, n = 3,121 vs. 19.2%, n = 3,625 for sexual recidivism; 31.8%, n = 1,979 vs. 48.3%, n = 2,822 for any recidivism). Programs that adhered to the RNR principles showed the largest reductions in sexual and general recidivism. Given the consistency of the current findings with the general offender rehabilitation literature, the authors believe that the RNR principles should be a maj...

The Principles of Effective Correctional Treatment Also Apply To Sexual Offenders: A Meta-Analysis

http://www.antoniocasella.eu/archipsy/SINGH_2011.pdf

A comparative study of violence risk assessment tools: a systematic review and metaregression analysis of 68 studies involving 25,980 participants.

Contrary to popular belief, not all sex offenders who target children are pedophiles, and not all pedophiles commit sexual offenses. But what is unequivocal is that pedophilia, which is defined as a persistent sexual interest in prepubescent children, is an emotionally charged and controversial topic. Parents are understandably worried about the safety and well-being of their children and want to protect them from being sexually exploited. Mental health and criminal justice professionals want to learn more about the assessment methods and intervention techniques that are available to develop and implement effective policies and practices.In this book, author Michael C. Seto addresses key concerns and questions in dealing with these clinical populations: How can pedophilia be detected? What causes pedophilia and sexual offending against children, and what is the relationship between the two? How do we assess risk to sexually offend? Finally, what do we know about intervention and prevention to reduce the occurrence of sexual offenses against children? In addition to a comprehensive synthesis of theory and research, the author demonstrates how this knowledge informs current treatment practices with the inclusion of illustrative case examples, sample interview questions, assessment tools, and online resources.

Pedophilia and Sexual Offending Against Children: Theory, Assessment, and Intervention

Objective To investigate the predictive validity of tools commonly used to assess the risk of violence, sexual, and criminal behaviour. Design Systematic review and tabular meta-analysis of replication studies following PRISMA guidelines. Data sources PsycINFO, Embase, Medline, and United States Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts. Review methods We included replication studies from 1 January 1995 to 1 January 2011 if they provided contingency data for the offending outcome that the tools were designed to predict. We calculated the diagnostic odds ratio, sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, the number needed to detain to prevent one offence, as well as a novel performance indicator—the number safely discharged. We investigated potential sources of heterogeneity using metaregression and subgroup analyses. Results Risk assessments were conducted on 73 samples comprising 24 847 participants from 13 countries, of whom 5879 (23.7%) offended over an average of 49.6 months. When used to predict violent offending, risk assessment tools produced low to moderate positive predictive values (median 41%, interquartile range 27-60%) and higher negative predictive values (91%, 81-95%), and a corresponding median number needed to detain of 2 (2-4) and number safely discharged of 10 (4-18). Instruments designed to predict violent offending performed better than those aimed at predicting sexual or general crime. Conclusions Although risk assessment tools are widely used in clinical and criminal justice settings, their predictive accuracy varies depending on how they are used. They seem to identify low risk individuals with high levels of accuracy, but their use as sole determinants of detention, sentencing, and release is not supported by the current evidence. Further research is needed to examine their contribution to treatment and management.

/pdf/use-of-risk-assessment-instruments-to-predict-violence-and-2yl5rehyjh.pdf

Use of risk assessment instruments to predict violence and antisocial behaviour in 73 samples involving 24 827 people: systematic review and meta-analysis

Actuarial risk assessment scales and their associated recidivism estimates are generally developed on samples of offenders whose average age is well below 50 years. Criminal behavior of all types d...

http://www.static99.org/pdfdocs/HelmusThornton_et_al_2012_Static-99RStatic-2002R.pdf

Improving the Predictive Accuracy of Static-99 and Static-2002 With Older Sex Offenders: Revised Age Weights

In most cases, scoring a STATIC-99 is fairly straightforward for an experienced evaluator. If you are unfamiliar with this instrument we suggest that you turn to the back pages of this manual and find the one-page STATIC-99 Coding Form. You may want to keep a copy of this to one side as you review the manual. We strongly recommend that you read pages 3 to 21 and the section " Scoring the STATIC-99 and Computing the Risk Estimates " before you score the STATIC-99. These pages explain the nature of the STATIC-99 as a risk assessment instrument; to whom this risk assessment instrument may be applied; the role of self-report; exceptions for juvenile, developmentally delayed, and institutionalized offenders; changes from the last version of the STATIC-99 coding rules; the information required to score the STATIC-99; and important definitions such as " Index Offence " , Category " A " offences versus Category " B " offences, " Index Cluster " , and " Pseudo-recidivism ". Individual item coding instructions begin at the section entitled " Scoring the Ten Items ". For each of the ten items, the coding instructions begin with three pieces of information: The Basic Principle, Information Required to Score this Item, and The Basic Rule. In most cases, just reading these three small sections will allow you to score that item on the STATIC-99. Should you be unsure of how to score the item you may read further and consider whether any of the special circumstances or exclusions apply to your case. This manual contains much information that is related to specific uses of the STATIC-99 in unusual circumstances and many sections of this manual need only be referred to in exceptional circumstances. We also suggest that you briefly review the ten appendices as they contain valuable information on adjusting STATIC-99 predictions for time free in the community, a self-test of basic concepts, references, surgical castration, a table for converting raw STATIC-99 scores to risk estimates, the coding forms, a suggested report format for communicating STATIC-99-based risk information, a list of replication studies for the STATIC-99, information on inter-rater reliability and, how to interpret Static-99 scores greater than 6. We appreciate all feedback on the scoring and implementation of the STATIC-99. Please feel free to contact any of the authours. Should you find any errors in this publication or have questions/concerns regarding the application of this risk …

http://static99.org/pdfdocs/static-99-coding-rules_e.pdf

STATIC-99 Coding Rules Revised - 2003

This article describes principles for developing risk category labels for criterion referenced prediction measures, and demonstrates their utility by creating new risk categories for the Static-99R and Static-2002R sexual offender risk assessment tools. Currently, risk assessments in corrections and forensic mental health are typically summarized in 1 of 3 words: low, moderate, or high. Although these risk labels have strong influence on decision makers, they are interpreted differently across settings, even among trained professionals. The current article provides a framework for standardizing risk communication by matching (a) the information contained in risk tools to (b) a broadly applicable classification of "riskiness" that is independent of any particular offender risk scale. We found that the new, common STATIC risk categories not only increase concordance of risk classification (from 51% to 72%)-they also allow evaluators to make the same inferences for offenders in the same category regardless of which instrument was used to assign category membership. More generally, we argue that the risk categories should be linked to the decisions at hand, and that risk communication can be improved by grounding these risk categories in evidence-based definitions. (PsycINFO Database Record

Communicating the results of criterion referenced prediction measures: Risk categories for the Static-99R and Static-2002R sexual offender risk assessment tools

Policies that differentially apply to sexual offenders at different risk levels require defensible procedures for classifying offenders into risk categories. The current study examines the reliability and validity of Static-99 and Static-99R sexual offender risk assessment tools as implemented in the State of California. California is a valuable case study because it is a large jurisdiction that has devoted considerable resources to the implementation of risk tools. In Study 1, 55 corrections and probation officers scored Static-99R for 14 common cases. Overall, rater reliability was acceptable (intraclass correlation [ICC] .78), with higher reliability found for experienced scorers (ICC .85) than less experienced scorers (ICC .71). In the second study, the predictive ability of Static-99 and Static-99R was examined in a prospective study of 475 randomly selected adult males released in 2006 –2007 and followed for 5 years. Static-99/R scores were strongly related to subsequent sexual recidivism (areas under the curve .80). As well, there was acceptable fit between the expected and observed recidivism rates. These results suggest that it is possible to implement empirically derived risk assessment tools in large jurisdictions without degrading predictive accuracy.

The Field Validity of Static-99/R Sex Offender Risk Assessment Tool in California

Acknowledgements We would like to thank Lana Hollady for formatting, and all the clinicians and researchers whose persistent queries helped resolve scoring questions not addressed in previous versions of this manual. Static-2002 is an actuarial risk tool for evaluating the risk of sexual and violent recidivism among adult male sexual offenders (Hanson & Thornton, 2003). Like Static-99, Static-2002 can be used by a wide range of evaluators (e.g., psychologists, probation officers, psychiatrists, therapists) using commonly available criminal history information. Static-2002 predicts sexual, violent, and any recidivism as well as other actuarial risk tools commonly used with sexual One desirable feature of Static-2002 is that it is intended to assess some theoretically meaningful characteristics presumed to be the cause of recidivism risk (persistence of sexual offending, deviant sexual interests, general criminality). The current document describes the scoring rules for Static-2002. These rules were created from the rules used in the development and validation studies; in addition, consensus opinion was used to elaborate the rules to cases and legal jurisdictions different from those previously encountered. The extent to which readers of this document will be able to appropriately use Static-2002 is unknown, and would likely vary based on prior training in risk assessment and specific competence in the use of actuarial risk tools. The chance of appropriate use should increase given formal training as well as ongoing procedures to limit rater drift (e.g., peer review, case meetings). Static-2002 is designed to be used with certain sexual offenders: (a) Males who have been convicted of a sexual offence (or received an equivalent sanction that qualifies as a sentencing occasion in Item 2 of Static-2002, pages 15-17). (b) Males who committed their most recent sexual offence after their 18 th birthday. (c) With caution, males who committed their most recent sexual offence between their 17 th and 18 th birthday, provided that their release date is when they are at least 18. The release date is either the date of release from a closed custody sentence (in Canada, closed custody is analogous to prison) or the date of sentence for a community sentence or open custody sentence (in Canada, open custody is analogous to a halfway house). (d) The cautionary note for (c) does not change even if the juvenile offender was " waived into adult court, " a procedure allowed in some jurisdictions on 2 some occasions. That legal procedure does not alter …

Amy Phenix

Papers

STATIC-99 Coding Rules Revised - 2003

Communicating the results of criterion referenced prediction measures: Risk categories for the Static-99R and Static-2002R sexual offender risk assessment tools

The Field Validity of Static-99/R Sex Offender Risk Assessment Tool in California

Coding rules for Static-2002