Risk Assessment for Offenders Applying LS CMI in Hong Kong: SRACP Experience by C F Li

Risk Assessment for Offenders Applying LS CMI in Hong Kong: SRACP Experience by C F Li

This article provides an overview of the Risk Assessment for Offenders Applying LS CMI in Hong Kong based on the experience of C

  • Uploaded on | 0 Views
  • sita sita

About Risk Assessment for Offenders Applying LS CMI in Hong Kong: SRACP Experience by C F Li

PowerPoint presentation about 'Risk Assessment for Offenders Applying LS CMI in Hong Kong: SRACP Experience by C F Li'. This presentation describes the topic on This article provides an overview of the Risk Assessment for Offenders Applying LS CMI in Hong Kong based on the experience of C. The key topics included in this slideshow are . Download this presentation absolutely free.

Presentation Transcript

Slide1Risk Assessment for OffenderApplying LS/CMI in Hong Kong SRACP experience by C.F. Li (SRACP)

Slide2Overview1. Introduction of Service / Case Management Inventory  RNR principles  General Risk / Need Factors (Central Eight Criminogenic Needs )  Specific Risk / Need Factors  Other Client Issues (Social, Health & Mental Health)  Special Responsivity Considerations

Slide32. SRACP Experiences Applying LS/CMI to Offender Rehabilitation Services      - Training - Preparations - Implementation  Preliminary findings of 1000 + assessments  Feedback from Users

Slide4Introduction to LS/CMIHistory of Offender Risk Assessment  1st generation : Clinical Assessment  2nd generation : Static Risk Assessment  3rd generation : Integrated Risk and Need  4th generation : Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI)  by  Andrews, Bonta, & Wormith (2004)

Slide5Some Features of LS/CMI :1. Easy to complete and score 2. Can be used in all forensic settings (e.g. prisons, probation, aftercare rehabilitation) 3. Can be used in different disciplines and officials, (e.g. correctional officers, probation offers, psychologists, social workers, psychiatrist, criminologists, etc.) 4. Has a complete case management system 5. Has a very large normative sample (Over 130,000 of adult offenders from North America) 6. Excellent reliability and validity

Slide6RNR Principles Risk  Need  Responsivity

Slide7Risk Principle The level of service should vary with level of risk  High risk cases have high probability for recidivism, and vice versa  Over treatment may actually increase risk of recidivism (e.g. through increased association with high risk offenders)  Match level of treatment to level of risk  i.e. Devote time, energy and resources to risky cases  Higher risk level, more services with higher intensity

Slide8Need Principle Target treatment interventions toward reducing major dynamic risk factors and/or enhancing major protective / strength factors  i.e. Match service interventions to criminogenic needs  Beginning with higher risk / need factors   Stress on more intrinsic risk / needs

Slide9Responsivity Principle Match treatment mode to offender characteristics 2 types of Responsivity  General Responsivity – refer to general approaches, e.g. Behavioural model, Cognitive Behavioural techniques  Specific Responsivity – refers to personal characteristics, e.g. personality, ability, motivation, age, gender, race, language, various barriers, etc   Tailor treatment to the individual abilities, style, culture and personality

Slide10Section 1 : General Risk / Need Factors Central Eight  43 items for 8 subcomponents  Score and Profile  Total score indicate probability of recidivism from Very Low Risk to Very High Risk  Provide direction and priority of intervention  Strength / Protective factors of the Offender

Slide11Score and Profile

Slide12Central Eight – criminogenic needs1. Criminal History 2. Education / Employment 3. Family / Marital 4. Leisure / recreation 5. Companions 6. Alcohol / Drug Problem 7. Pro criminal Attitude / Orientation 8. Antisocial Pattern

Slide13Section 1.1  - Criminal History The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour  Includes:      - Frequency of behaviour - Onset under 16 years old at first arrest or charge - Seriousness – any incarceration - Behaviour during treatment

Slide14Section 1.2  - Education / Employment Involvement and commitment to the social institutions of education and employment  Frequent job changes  Never employed for over 12 months continuously  Achievement in school  Suspension or expulsion

Slide15Section 1.3  - Family / Marital As interpersonal sources of reward for prosocial behavior and costs for criminal behavior  Models, supports  Satisfaction, rewarding familial / marital relationships

Slide16Section 1.4 - Leisure / Recreation Substantial free time outside of work and school  How does individual occupy his/her free time?  Organized, structured activities  Good use of time?  Prosocial activities

Slide17Section 1.5  - Companions Friends – spends time with, opinions valued, provide help when needed, etc  Acquaintance – not close friends  Influence attitude, behaviour  Models of behaviour  One of single best predictors of criminal behaviour

Slide18Section 1.6  - Alcohol / Drug Problem One of the most common criminogenic need areas targeted by treatment programs  Interferes with prosocial behaviour and interactions, relationships with others  Focus on the abuse (rather than substance related offences)  Focus on current use (Status)

Slide19Section 1.7  - Procriminal Attitude / Orientation What and how a person thinks and feels about violating laws or alternatives  Attitudes supportive of crime (e.g. usefulness of crime)  Negative attitudes towards convention (alternatives to crime)  Attitude towards sentence / offence  Attitude towards supervision / treatment

Slide20Section 1.8  - Antisocial Pattern General personality and behavioural patterns  Diversity and early onset of antisocial behaviour  Assaultative or violent behaviour  Escapes, breach of probation / release conditions  Pattern of generalize trouble

Slide21Section 2 – 5  Section 2 : Specific Risk / Needs Section 3 : Prison Experience – Institutional Factors Section 4 : Other Client Issues Section 5 : Special Responsivity Considerations  No score is assigned to these sections  Used in case management planning and in consideration of override decisions

Slide22Section 2   :   Specific Risk / Need Factors   2.1 : Personal Problems with Criminogenic Potential - Diagnosis of psychopathy or other personality disorder - Emotion (Anger) management deficits - Problem solving  / self management skill deficits - Poor social skills 2.2 : History of Perpetration - History of sexual / physical assault - Other violence - Other antisocial behaviour

Slide23Section 3   :   Prison Experience – Institutional Factors   Items mainly for Corrections officials 3.1 : History of Incarceration - previous classification, current security needs, misconducts 3.2 : Barriers to release - notoriety of offence, lack of community support

Slide24Section 4 : Other Client IssuesSocial, Health & Mental Health    Noncriminogenic needs - Physical disability, learning disability, homeless, financial problem, mental disorder, depression, suicide attempts, victim of family violence, etc  Factors contribute to overall well being of offender  May not reduce risk level

Slide25Section 5 : Special Responsivity Considerations   Responsivity factors reflect differences in learning styles and / or personal interests  Factors are not to be interpreted as risk, need, or problematic characteristics - Cultural issues, gender- specific issues, ethnicity issues, low intelligence, communication barriers, mental disorder, antisocial personality, etc  The best treatment program may be completely ineffective if it is delivered in wrong style / direction

Slide26Section 6 : Risk Summary and OverrideExamples of override  Low score in section 1, but crime was a serious one, may increase risk level  High score in section 1, but has many strengths, may decrease risk level  Policy based decision -   some jurisdictions / criminal justice agencies may have internal policies that certain types of offenders must be declared a particular risk level, e.g. sexual offenders

Slide27Section 7 : Risk / Need Profile

Slide28Section 8 : Program / Placement Decision Institutional Offenders  Community Offenders  Aftercare / Rehabilitation recommendation  Presentence Report

Slide29Section 9 - 11 : Case Management Protocol Built-in case management protocol to the assessment  Intervention and goals are based on result of sections 1-5  Section 9 : Identify program targets and develop of case plan  Section 10 : Monitor intervention and record progress  Section 11 : Summarize results, Discharge summary

Slide30Section 9 : Case Management Plan9.2.1 Criminogennic Needs Criminogenic Needs Goal Intervention Time Frame 1. Alcohol abuse Abstinence of alcohol Attend alcoholic treatment program 12 months 2. Leisure / Recreation Participate in structured activities Join a football team 6 months 3. 4.

Slide31Section 9 : Case Management Plan9.2.2. Other client Non-Criminogennic Needs Requiring Attention   Other Needs Goal Intervention Time Frame 1. Victim of family violence Accept personal history Victim counselling 12 months 2. 3.

Slide32Section 9 : Case Management Plan9.2.3. Special Responsivity Considerations   Responsivity Issue Proposed Approach to Address Issue 1. Lack of Motivation Motivational interviewing 2. Denial / minimization Challenge client by reviewing history on many fronts (drinking, relationships, family, marital)

Slide33Section 10 : Progress Record10.1.  Criminogenic Needs  

Slide34Section 10 : Progress Record10.2.  Other Client Non-Criminogenic Needs  

Slide35Section 11 : Discharge Summary

Slide36Applying LS/CMISRACP Experience

Slide37Training Social workers attended training conducted by Professor Stephen Wormith in November 2009  10 social workers qualified as trainers and 27 as qualified users  Second batch training in March, 2010 by SRACP trainer  15 more social workers (and 1 CP) qualified as users

Slide38Preparation and Implementation Working group formed  Test run in April – June 2010  Quality Assurance Exercise  Revision of current Workflow and Procedure  Full implementation in July 2010  Evaluate and collect feedback from LS/CMI users in March, 2011

Slide39Observation / Preliminary Findings Until March 31, 2011, 1092 assessments conducted successfully  Scored from 2 to 37  Average score = 22.58 (High Risk)

Slide40Overall Risk / Need LevelNearly 60% of cases are High risk or above Very Low Risk Low Medium High Very High Less than 1 % 5% 27% 49% 18%

Slide41Most Concerned Criminogenic factors(High risk / need level or above) 1. Leisure and Recreation (82.5%) 2. Employment and Education (77.7%) 3. Companions (59.5%) 4. Alcohol / Drug Problem (36.9%)

Slide42Feedbacks from Social Worker Helps to understand needs of client  Helps to prioritize client’s needs  Helps to formulate intervention plan  Helps to Evaluate client’s rehabilitation progress  Common language to communicate with colleagues

Slide43Future Works Validation  Translation of Chinese Version  Treatment program development

Slide44 ~ The End ~ Thank You