Changes in Risk Assessment

RRASOR
1) Prior sexual charges or convictions

2) Victim gender

3) Age

4) Relationship to victim
 Static99
RRASOR plus 6 items

1. Prior sentencing dates

2. Noncontact offenses
3. Index nonsexual violence
4. Prior non-sexual violence
5. Stranger victim
6. Single
Three Generations of Risk
Assessment
•Clinical Judgment

•Actuarial Assessment

•Actuarial Plus Dynamic

 Approaches to Risk Assessment
d Subjects Studies

Unstructured clinical .43 1,723 9

Structured professional
judgment .41 844 5

Actuarial (sex) .70 14,160 55

(Hanson & Morton-Bourgon 2007)
What Does Static99 Measure?
Who Gets Caught
Differential Disclosure
 Incest
When Did Child Rarely Disclose
Natural Parent

Immediately 17%

Later 30%

Never 55%
 Differential Disclosure

 Abused and neglected children

 Skillful offenders
 Decline in Crime 2008
Decline in Rape & Sexual Assault

1999-2008

53%
 Base Rates Matter

More
Or
Fewer
Reoffenders for each score
 Multiple Norms
 Routine Sex Offenders (CSC)

 Treatment Samples

 Nonroutine Samples

 High Risk Samples

 Which Norms to Use
Correctional Services of Canada
Routine Cases
N = 2406
No screening procedures
No pre-selection for tx, or civil commitment
 Which Norms To Use?
Preselected for Treatment

Referred for sex offender specific

treatment during current or prior
incarceration

Selected but no beds still selected

 Non-routine
 Treatment sample

 High risk samples

 Preselected for other reasons, e.g.,

offense severi
 Which Norms to Use
High Risk Sample

 Preselected for risk

 Factors external to Static-99

 SVP referral, mentally disordered, not

guilty by reason of insanity, referred for
intensive treatment
 Norms
 “Most cases will use routine correctional
sample”
 Scores Versus Recidivism
Original Norms
Score Risk Years
5 10 15

0,1 Low 6% 9% 10%

2,3 Med/Low 10% 14% 18%
4,5 Med/High 29% 33% 38%
6+ High 39% 45% 52%
 New Norms 10 Years
Score Routine5 Routine Treatment High Risk
Observ11ed Adjusted Need
-3 1.4 1.8 3.2
-2 1.8 2.4 4.2
-1 2.3 3.3 5.4 9.8
0 3 4.4 7 12.5
1 3.9 5.7 9 15.7
2 5.1 7.6 11.5 19.7
3 6.6 10 14.5 24.3
4 8.4 13 18.2 29.6
5 10.8 16.9 22.6 35.5
6 13.7 21.7 27.6 41.9
7 17.2 27.8 33.3 48.6
8 21.4 35 39.6 55.3
9 26.3 43.3 46.2 61.9
10 68
 High Risk Sample
 Bengtson, 2008
Pre-trial psychiatric eval in Denmark
Suspected of retardation or psychosis

 Bonta & Yessine, 2005

Dangerous Offenders-
Indeterminate sentences
Potential Dangerous Offenders
Violent Offense after MR
 High Risk Sample
 Haag, 2005
All Canadian offenders released at MR

 Knight and Thornton, 2007

Massachusetts Treatment Center-
Assessed or treated between 1959 -
1984
Sexually dangerous persons
 High Risk Samples
 Nicholaichuk, 2001
Treated at Clearwater treatment
program – maximum security
forensic mental health facility

 Wilson & colleagues

Detained in prison until MR
 Relative Risk vs
Absolute Risk

 Relative risk consistent across 22

samples

 Absolute risk not consistent

Charges vs Convictions
13 samples used charges

15 used convictions
 Reconviction Vs. Rearrest
Rearrest = 1.4 x reconviction

10 Years

Rearrest Reconviction
Static 5 24.5% 21%
Static 6 31.5% 27%
Child Molesters vs Rapists

53% child molesters

47% rapists
Rapists & Child Molesters
Tested separately

Both work with new item

 Treatment %

Primarily treated samples

Only one untreated sample

Samples
N = 7878

21 samples

Helmus
N = 8412
23 samples
 Sample Size
Static99 = 8,893

Logistical regression 10 years

2,528
 Samples Sizes
 Routine 2,406

 Non-Routine 1,642

 Treatment 866

 High Risk 722

Old Sample Size
Static-99 1086
Aging and Risk of Sexual
Offending
 What Difference Does Age Make?
Recidivism & aging -.10
(Hanson & Bussiere, 1998)

Recidivism rates declined steadily with age

Extrafamilial child molesters – maintained
risk longer
N =3751
(Hanson, 2002)
 30
Child molesters
25

20 Rapists
Recidivism 15
rate (%)
10 Incest offenders

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Age-at-release from custody
 Age & Recidivism
Reanalysis of Hanson
All groups declined steadily

Own data – linear decrease with age

N = 468
(Barbaree et al., 2003)
 Fitted Sexual Recidivism Rates by Age
Graphs
60

50

40
One SA
30 Two SA
Three SA
20

10

0
25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59
 Each one unit increase in age was
associated with 98% of the
recidivism rate of the previous
(younger) age

 Recidivism rate of 32-year-olds was

98% of recidivism rate of 31 year-
olds
Current age item did not adequately adjust
for age

Could have left old item and “fitted a

complicated curvilinear age adjustment”

Decided instead to create a new age item

 With New Age Item
Age of release does not add significant
incremental predictive validity

With old age item –

Age of release does add predictive validity

Meaning: New item adequately controls

for age
Comparing Static-99 to Static-99R
Validation Sample
N = 2,392
ROC ROC
5 Years 10 Years
Static-99 .713 .706
Static-99R .720 .710
 New Age Item
Age Score

18 – 34.9 1

35 – 39.9 0

40 – 59.9 -1

60 + -3
Score Range
-3 to 12
 Risk Categories
Score Risk Category
-3 through 1 Low
2,3 Low-Moderate
4,5 Moderate-High
6+ High
 Do Over-rides Help?
Prediction of Recidivism (ROC)
Recidivism Static-99 Static-99 + Static-99 +
Type Over-ride Stable- 2007

Sexual .77 .75 .81

Any violent .74 .71 .77

 Age 61

Attacked 73-year-old woman

Giving him a church tour

Stranger assault
 Mr. Johnson

Age Offense History

29 “Has a history of sexual

assault”
46 Attempted molestation of
11-year-old
 Mr. Johnson
Age Offense History

48 Violent rape of 17-year-old

boy – beat with chain

58 Molestation 6 yr old boy

59.5 Exposure to officer

No High Risk Aging Sex Offenders?
 When to Over-ride?
 Recent Offense – within 5 years

 History of continuous offending

 No evidence of impact of aging

 Static, Stable & Acute
 Static “Non-changeable life factors that
relate to risk for sexual recidivism,
generally historical in nature”
 Static, Stable & Acute
 Stable “Personality characteristics, skill
deficits, and learned behaviours that
relate to risk for sexual recidivism that
may be changed through intervention

 Acute “Risk factors of short or unstable

temporal duration that can change
rapidly, generally as a result of
environmental or intra-personal
conditions”
 Static99R + Stable 2007
Static99R 3 Year Recidivism 5 Year
Score Recidivism
Stable = 5 Stable = 14 Routine High Risk
2 3% 7% 5% 12%
5 7% 18% 11% 25%
7 14% 32% 19% 38%