It is our intent to create a respectful environment for understanding and healing, a Discussion-Safety-Zone for Related Topics, while maintaining our Visitors' Zones-of-Privacy, and to interact on a non-judgmental basis. Today far too many communities fail to create these safety-zones!
Hi Folks, how are you today?
Legal Issues and Court Cases:
                           affecting sex offenders ©
Hi Folks, how are you today?
It is our intent to create a respectful environment for understanding and healing, a Discussion-Safety-Zone for Related Topics, while maintaining our Visitors' Zones-of-Privacy, and to interact on a non-judgmental basis. Today far too many communities fail to create these safety-zones!

Subscribe -OR-
to "Update" List
Click to Notify Us

Comment or
E-mail Us

 Home Page:

 Court Cases:
In Court Today
Archive (Topic)

 Bills in the
   U.S. Congress:

Our Position

 Write Your
   In Congress:

Letters / e-mails

   and Courts:

How To Access

  Special Reports:

Topic List



 Residency Laws:
No SO Zones

 Registration Costs:
Reg: Costs

 Registration Term:
Reg: Term

 Adult Issues:
In Society
In Prison

 Juvenile Issues:
In Society
In Prison


In Society
In Commit


In General

 Risk Assessment:


  -Criminal Justice;
  -Mental Health;


 and Studies


 Laws Violate:  

Human Rights

 Media and
 About Sex




 and Facts
 About Sex

The Truth

Contact Us
Site Map


Helpful Hints

 Current News:

 Model Relapse
Prevention Plan:


*** A Compilation of Risk Assessment Tools In Use Today ***

Risk Assessment Screening Tools in use today; 2005. If the author's name is preceded by "**-" then we don't have any further information about that tool, excepting what is shown in the comments area. Clicking on a "**-" name will return you to this page! Should anyone be able to point us to other tools, please contact us with those links to include in this list.
Screening Tool:Authored by:Comments:
AASI Abel Screening, Inc. (Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest™). (For Juveniles) The AASI™ is an empirically validated assessment measure for the evaluation of sex offenders that consists of a measure of visual reaction time (VRT) and a questionnaire. The questionnaire is designed to assess sexual interest in 21 problematic sexual behaviors, including pedophilia (i.e., sexual abuse of a child). The questionnaire is divided into four sections. Section I contains items that inquire about the respondent’s demographics, social relationships as a teenager, past sexual abuse and sexual coercion of the respondent, child molestation related cognitive distortions, sexual attraction, sexual fantasies, and masturbation. Section II contains five items that assess the respondent’s subjective appraisal of his social skills and of the role of alcohol and pornography in his sexual behavior. Section III gathers information about the following 21 sexual behaviors: exhibitionism, public masturbation, fetishism, frotteurism, voyeurism, zoophilia, telephone scatologia (obscene phone calls and letters), necrophilia, sexual masochism, coprophilia, adult-child sexual contact (the respondent as the perpetrator), coercive sexual behavior (rape), sexual sadism, transvestic fetishism, professional sexual misconduct, sex with prostitutes, sexual affairs, sex with strangers, use of pornography, calling telephone sexlines, and gender identity dysphoria (transsexualism). Section IV includes items that ask respondents to rate each of the 21 sexual behaviors described in Section III on how sexually arousing it is, amount of sexual fantasy, and legal history (i.e., convictions, arrests, or accusations). The last 20 items of Section IV represent a measure of social desirability.

A California court has rejected this test: US -v- Birdsbill, No. 03-30204 (9th Cir. May 4, 2004 Unpublished), reasons: (1) the AASI test is a psychological instrument to be used for treatment, not for diagnostic purposes, and it is not designed to assess the tendency of a person to abuse children sexually; (2) Dr. Abel did not use a control group and it is unclear how or whether the test ferrets out "fakers"; (3) the test has not been subject to adequate peer review because Dr. Abel has proprietary rights over the test and has not shared his formula with other scientists (and those who have tried to assess the test's validity have come up with dubious and inconsistent results); (4) the potential error rate "varies from poor ... to appalling," which makes it an unreliable instrument; and (5) the relevant scientific community does not generally accept the AASI test as a diagnostic test for pedophilia.
Worling & Curwen, 2001. (Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offence Recidivism) (ERASOR) (For Juveniles Only) This scheme is designed for use with adolescents to determine their risk of sexual re-offence. It uses both static and dynamic factors that are empirically linked to sex offending: Historical sexual assaults; Sexual interests, Attitudes and behaviours; Psychosocial functioning; Family/Environmental functioning; and Treatment. //// ERASOR: is a 25-item empirically guided risk instrument designed to assess risk for sexual recidivism in 12 to 18 year old youth who have previously committed a sexual assault.
HCR-20 Webster, Douglas, Eaves, Derek & Hart 1997. (Historical Clinical and Risk Management). (For Adults Only) Identify presence/absence of violence risk factors for adults. The HCR-20 is a 20-item checklist to assess the risk for future violent behavior in criminal and psychiatric populations. Items were chosen based on a comprehensive review of the literature and input from experienced forensic clinicians. The HCR-20 includes variables which capture relevant past, present, and future considerations and should be regarded as an important first step in the risk assessment process.

Violence is defined as "actual, attempted, or threatened harm to a person or persons." The professional who completes the HCR-20 Coding Sheet must first determine the presence or absence of each of the 20 risk factors according to three levels of certainty (i.e., Absent, Possibly Present, Definitely Present). In some settings, responsibility for the assessment may be divided among several different professionals. The 20 items are divided into three sections: 10 Historical Items (previous violence, age at first violent offense, family and vocational background, etc.); 5 Clinical Items (current symptomatology and psychosocial adjustment); 5 Risk Management Items (release and treatment plan, necessary services and support).
IAT Jan De Houwer, Belgium....(Implicit Association Test.) The IAT as a tool for studying dysfunctional associations in psychpathology: strengths and limitations.
IM-RAT Stetson School, Barre, Mass....(Interim Modified Risk Assessment Tool.) The IM-RAT is designed for re-evaluation over time, or as an on-going measure of assessment during treatment, and largely is a measure of dynamic factors, or responsiveness to treatment.The current version is the V2 (second) version.
J-SOAP-II Prentky, Righthand, 2000.(Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol II.) The J-SOAP-II is a 26 item checklist to aid in the review of risk factors associated with sexual and criminal offending. Designed for boys ages 12-18 years old. The J-SOAP-II may also be used for nonadjucdicated youth with a history of sexually coercive behavior.
J-RAT Stetson School, Barre, Mass.....(Juvenile Risk Assessment Tool) (For Juveniles Only) The J-RAT is designed and intended to be used for the initial assessment of juvenile sexual offenders, assessing both static (historical) and dynamic (susceptibe to change, treatment-responsive, or criminogenic) variables. We have recently (10/26/01) modified the J-RAT, which now has the designation V2.
LA-SAAT Stetson School, Barre, Mass.....(Latency Age Sexual Adjustment & Assessment Tool.) The Stetson School has also recently developed a latency age assessment tool to evaluate both sexual reactivity and sexual assaultiveness in children 8-12. The LA-SAAT is in its first version, and serving as our prototype as we test its usefulness and value.
LSI-R (revised) Andrews & Bonta, 1995(Level of Service Inventory - Revised.) 54 items (static & dynamic) scored "yes or no" or "0-3" rating by clinical staff or case managers. the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R), an assessment instrument that is used in various jurisdictions to help target treatment to offenders. The Level of Services-Revised (LSI-R) is a structured Risk/Need assessment meant to identify needed level of care and services for a Criminal Justice population, as well as explore 10 subcomponent areas where specific interventions or supervision rules may be needed. The LSI-R samples 54 risk and needs items that have been found to be associated with and/or are theoretically relevant to criminal conduct including criminal history, antisocial attitudes, antisocial associates, and antisocial personality.
LSI-SV (Revised) **-Andrews & Bonta, 1995(Level of Service Inventory - Revised. Short Version.) 8 Items (static & dynamic) scored "yes or no" or "0-3" rating by clinical staff or case managers. .
MASORR Barbaree, Seto & Maric, 2000.The Multifactorial Assessment of Sex Offender Risk for Re-offense (MASORR) A novel feature of the WSBC programme was the use of a "multifactorial assessment of sex offender risk for reoffense" (MASORR). At the time the WSBC was implemented, a comprehensive review of the scientific literature on the prediction of reoffense among sex offenders was conducted and formed the basis of the MASORR. This review indicated that four factors were predictive of sexual reoffense: (1) a history of sexual offending; (2) deviant sexual arousal; (3) a history of antisocial behaviour and other indicators of an antisocial personality (as measured by the Psychopathy Checklist- Revised); and (4) social competence (estimated from apparent intelligence level and socioeconomic status). The MASORR is therefore based on static predictors of reoffense. It was initially implemented as a pre-treatment assessment of risk. Later, however, it was modified to incorporate two dynamic factors reflecting the man's performance while in treatment. These dynamic factors were motivation for treatment and degree of behaviour change achieved. An overall clinical impression based on the man's involvement with the WSBC was also incorporated into the post-treatment risk evaluation. These various factors were combined to form overall ratings of risk for reoffense, first at pre-treatment (static factors only) and again at post-treatment (initial risk score and consideration of the dynamic factors).
Matrix 2000 **-Hanson, Thornton, 2000.(Risk Matrix-2000) The SACJ has subsequently been updated into MATRIX 2000 (Hanson and Thornton, 2000). MATRIX 2000 represents an important improvement on the SACJ as it provides for greater accuracy and refinement in the identification of high risk offenders, and offers two versions, one for sex offenders and one for violent offenders. Whilst the tool has not yet been subject to extensive published evaluations, it has been validated retrospectively. Development and validation of both versions have however been undertaken with male offenders (and often male prisoners) and they may have a limited transferability to other groups. Furthermore, these tools are also designed to predict recidivism and not levels of harm: the latter is a key concern for staff tasked with decisions about release, community location, treatment interventions and victim safety..
MnSOST-R (Revised) **-Epperson, Kaul & Hesselton, 1998(Minnesota Sex Offenders Screening Tool - Revised.) Originally designed to predict sexual recidivism among rapists and extra familial child molesters..
Oregon (State) **-State of Oregon, Sex Offender Assessment Tool(Oregon Sex Offenders Screening Tool) The sex offender assessment tool used by the Jackson County, Oregon, Department of Probation. It has a scale that uses 34 items (24 in a negative scale and 10 in a positive scale) along with three factors that generate automatic overrides. When scored, the instrument places a sex offender in a low-, medium-, or high-risk category. The instrument is appealing because its factors have face validity (they seem to make sense), they include factors that can change over time (so one can see either progress or deterioration and take appropriate action), and they are numerous enough to seem to mirror the complexities of human behavior. (One limitation of some of the more reliable empirical scales is that they have so few factors that they lack "face validity.")

Preliminary research on the tool conducted by the Oregon Department of Corrections Research Unit has shown some predictive ability regarding conviction for a new offense or revocation to prison, but no relationship to conviction for a new sex offense. The short followup period (2 years) for the research may not have allowed enough time for failure related to sexual re-offending to occur, and more research is planned..
PCL-R (Revised) **-Hare, 1991The Hare (Psychopathy Check List - Revised.) Assess psychopathy among general criminal population. 20 items (static & engrained traits) scored by clinical staff using a 3-point ordinal scale. The Hare PCL-R is a 20-item symptom construct rating scale designed to assess psychopathic (antisocial) personality disorders in forensic populations. PCL-R ratings are made by a clinician or researcher on the basis of a semi-structured interview and a review of collateral information.

(PCL-R) and its derivatives (the PCL:YV for adolescents and the PCL:SV ‘screening version’) is a clinical construct rating scale used in semi-structured interview (Hare, 1991). It involves rating 20 items on a 3 point scale divided into three broad categories: interpersonal/affective, social deviance and ‘additional items’. As Kemshall (2002) observes, whilst initially developed from research on male forensic patients and offenders, various studies have confirmed the applicability of the PCL-R to other offender and patient populations. It has also been shown to be a highly reliable tool when used by well-trained assessors. Although not designed as a measurement of violence risk, it may measure the most important factor in the risk of predatory violence, that is, psychopathy.
PCL-SV **-Hare, 1991The Hare (Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version) is an abbreviated version of the complete Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Highly correlated with the PCL-R, the PCL:SV takes about half as long to administer and is an effective screener for psychopathic (antisocial) personality disorder..
RRAS ...(Registrant Risk Assessment Scale.)
RRASOR **-Hanson,R.K. 1997(Rapid Risk Assessment for Sex Offense Recidivism.) Relates to sexual deviance. Four item actuarial instrument rated from offender records. ITEMS: 1) Prior sex offense (not including index offences); 2)Age at release (current age); 3) Victim gender; 4) Relationship to victim. Items weighted according to ability to predict likelihood of recivism over 5-10 years. Total scores range (0-6) with a 10 year estimated likelihood of recidivism from 6.5 to 73.1%. Most offenders score 1-4.

(RRASOR) is essentially an actuarially based tool that weights a number of key variables in terms of their predictive utility (Hanson, 1997). The initial seven items were based upon a meta-analysis and four were subsequently substantiated as having predictive accuracy for sex offence recidivism. The variables that comprise the tool can be scored to produce an overall risk weighting. The ability of the tool to distinguish between high and low risk has been validated and it has been extensively tested both on both developmental and validation samples.
SACJ **-........(Structured Anchored Clinical Judgment.) The Structured Anchored Clinical Judgement (SACJ) attempts to avoid over-dependence upon static predictors (e.g. age, gender) and archival data (e.g. previous convictions) by including a more dynamic component to allow for changes in risk status over time (Hanson and Thornton, 2000). It operates as a three-stage ‘step-wise’ system rather than a simple summative process based on weighted items as is the case with RRASOR. Stage One involves an initial actuarial screening based on five items. Stage Two consists of a more in-depth analysis of aggravating factors, including the addition of dynamic factors. Stage Three consists of the careful monitoring of offender performance over time to note the impact of treatment on risky dispositions, and is heavily reliant upon the availability of clinical data and information on dynamic factors. A shortened version of the SACJ using stage 1 and the first four variables of stage 2 and known as SACJ —MIN is also available although it has yet to be extensively tested outside the United Kingdom prison population..
SACJ-Min **-Grubin, 1998.(Structured Anchored Clinical Judgment.) Relates to sexual deviance, weighing heavily on criminal history.
SAI Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc(Sexual Adjustment Inventory.) Designed to predict sexually deviate & paraphiliac behavior. The SAI has 214 items, can be completed in 45 minutes and contains thirteen (13) scales.
SAVRY Randy Borum, Patrick Bartel, Adelle Forth(The Structured Assessment of Violence & Risk in Youth) is an instrument based on the structured professional judgment model of risk assessment. It is designed to assist professional evaluators in assessing, and making decisions about, a juvenile's risk for violence. It may have applications in mental health/substance abuse services, social services, schools, and juvenile and criminal justice systems..
SAI-J Risk & Needs Assessment, Inc.(Sexual Adjustment Inventory for Juveniles. Designed to predict sexually deviate & paraphiliac behavior. The SAI-J is a 195 item self-report test that can be completed in 45 minutes to one hour.
SCR-20 Boar, Hart, Kropp & Webster, 1997(Manual for Sexual Risk -20) Professional guidelines for the assessment of risk for sexual violence are presented...
SHQ-R (Revised) **-Langevin, Ron and Al 1990.The (Clarke Sex History Questionnaire for Males-Revised) examines a wide range of conventional and deviant sexual behaviors, from common sexual disorders and dysfunctions to sexual abuse and assault. This detailed sex history helps to evaluate the client's potential for sexually conventional behavior in the future at the same time as it indicates the extent to which the client may be dangerous to others. The scales fo the SHQ-R investigate such issues as voyeurism, exhibitionism, sadomasochism, sexual assault and rape, transvestitism, fetishism, childhood sexual experience, fantasies, exposure to pornography, and hypersexuality, along with many other relevant topics. It also has a validity scale to help ensure the accuracy of the responses.
SIR Nuffield, 1982( ) The SIR scale (Nuffield, 1982) inventories static factors including age, marital status, and a number of factors related to the offender's criminal history. Scores on the SIR scale indicate whether an offender is high or low risk for recidivism. Bonta, Harman, Hann and Cormier (1996) found that "the SIR scale continued to show a predictive association with general recidivism" (p. 73), but had only a modest association with violent and sexual recidivism. The SIR does not consider dynamic variables, so its use is limited in terms of managing offender risk (Bonta, et al., 1996)..
SONAR Hanson and Harris (2000)(Sex Offender Needs Assessment Rating) Hanson and Harris (2000) have developed an actuarial tool, called the SONAR, that may be used in conjunction with the other actuarial tools to assess risk for sex offenders. The SONAR measures specifically the change in risk levels throughout the course of an offender's sentence by focussing on dynamic factors related to recidivism. The scale considers five stable factors, including intimacy deficits, social influences, tolerance toward sexual offending, and sexual and general self-regulation. Four acute factors (substance abuse, anger, victim access and negative mood) are also measured. The accuracy of the SONAR in risk assessment has yet to be demonstrated, but because the risk factors measured by the tool are found to be related to sexual recidivism in other studies, it is a reasonable suggestion that the SONAR be used to complement actuarial tools that look at static factors (Hanson & Harris, 2000). .
SORAG **-Quinsey, Harris, Rice & Cormier 1998.(Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide) (For Adult Males Only) Designed to predict sexually violent recidivism among mentally disturbed offenders, considers 12 items including personality disorder, schizophrenia, age, marital status and criminal record.

VRAG was found to be useful in assessing risk posed by sex offenders as well; however, high VRAG scores are strongly related to violent, but not sexual, recidivism among sex offenders (Rice & Harris, 1997; Wakefield & Underwager, 1998).
SRA (General) **-Explanation(Structured Risk Assessments) Structured risk assessment schemes are essentially information checklists. They are useful because they can help clinicians avoid missing potentially important information, and they provide a way of organizing clinical thinking. They are however, only as good as the information they include. Until recently, structured instruments were the best available option for improving unstructured clinical opinion. (e.g. The Peters and McGovern Rating Scale) However, these early instruments utilized a “current best practices” approach and were not empirically tested. They are now out-of-date, having been supplanted by actuarial scales and structured risk assessment tools that include actuarial information.
SRA (SRA-99) **-Thornton,D 1999David Thornton's (Structured Risk Assessment)..
SVR-20 Boer, Hart, Randall, Kropp & Webster, 1997(Sexual Violence Risk-20) (For Adult Males Only) Assess presence/absence of sexual violence risk factors for adults. The SVR-20 is a 20-item checklist of risk factors for sexual violence that were identified by a review of the literature on sex offenders. Each factor is coded according to whether it is definitely present, possibly present, or not present. The SVR-20 manual, however, does not report data regarding inter-rater reliabilities for these factors. The manual advises evaluators to summarize their ratings into an overall risk rating of low, moderate, or high. Nevertheless, the manual does not specify what values of the SVR-20 (ranging from 0 to 20) correspond to different risk levels. The checklist was developed to improve the accuracy of assessments for the risk of future sexual violence...
Static-99 Hanson,R.K. & Thornton,D 1999(Static 99) (Hanson & Thornton, 1999) is an actuarial tool developed to improve the accuracy of risk prediction for sex offenders previously convicted of at least one sexual offence. Static 99 considers ten static factors that are related to sexual recidivism, including: marital status, age, prior sex offences, prior sentencing dates, male victims and unrelated victims. The Static 99 scale has shown moderate predictive accuracy for sexual recidivism and violent recidivism among sex offenders (Hanson & Thornton, 1999).
Static-2002 Hanson,R.K. & Thornton,D 2002(Static 2002) (Hanson & Thornton, 2002) This paper describes the development of a new risk scale for sexual offenders, Static-2002. Like Static-99 (Hanson & Thornton, 1999, 2000), Static-2002 is intended to be a widely applicable risk scale for the prediction of sexual recidivism, which can be coded using commonly available file information. Preliminary analyses (n = 2,169; k = 7) suggest that Static-2002 shows promise, but further research is needed before it can be used in applied contexts. This description of Static-2002 is presented with the hope that researchers can examine its utility and predictive accuracy in new samples..
VASOR **-McGrath,R & Hoke,S 1994; Cumming,G & Buell,M 1997..(Vermont Assessment of Sex Offender Risk)..
VPS **-Webster, 1994..(The Violence Prediction Scheme). (For Adult Males Only) (VPS) is designed for the assessment of dangerousness in high-risk men (Webster et al., 1994). The scheme utilises the twelve items of the VRAG (called RAG) to produce an actuarial score, combined with structured assessment of ten, largely dynamic items: antecedent history, self presentation, social and psychological adjustment, expectations and plans, symptoms, supervision, life factors, institutional management, sexual adjustment, and treatment progress. While the addition of the dynamic factors adds very little to the accuracy of the actuarial (V)RAG score, the structured clinical assessment is importance for the establishment of treatability and formulation of appropriate risk management plans. .
VRAG Webster, Harris, Rice, Cormier & Quinsey, 1994(Violence Risk Appraisal Guide) (For adult males only) The VRAG initially developed to assess violent recidivism among mentally disturbed offenders, considers 12 items including personality disorder, schizophrenia, age, marital status and criminal record. VRAG was found to be useful in assessing risk posed by sex offenders as well; however, high VRAG scores are strongly related to violent, but not sexual, recidivism among sex offenders (Rice & Harris, 1997; Wakefield & Underwager, 1998).

(VRAG) is the most widely used actuarial tool for violence offence recidivism (Quinsey et al., 1998). It was developed in Canada, based upon patients detained in secure hospitals between 1965 and 1980, and has been the subject of extensive evaluation which has confirmed its predictive utility. The VRAG contains twelve items, with weighted factors used to assign individuals to one of nine risk categories.

The limitations of the VRAG include its inability to predict the nature, severity, imminence, and frequency of future violence and its tendency to encourage those who use it to ignore other risk factors that might be strongly associated with violence.

VRAG also does not provide a basis upon which risk management plans can be developed.

The most frequently reported actuarial risk assessment scale in the empirical literature is undoubtedly the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG: Harris, Rice, & Quinsey, 1993; Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1998; Rice and Harris, 1995, 1997; Webster, Harris, Rice, Cormier, & Quinsey, 1994). The VRAG was developed to assess violent recidivism using mentally disordered offenders who had been committed to the Mental Health Centre in Penetanguishene, Ontario. The VRAG consists of twelve variables: (1) Separation from parents before age 16, (2) Elementary school maladjustment, (3) Alcohol abuse history, (4) Never married, (5) History of nonviolent offenses, 6) Failure on prior conditional release, (7) Age at index offense, (8) Victim injury in index offense, (9) Male victim in index offense, (10) DSM-III diagnosis of any personality disorder, (11) DSM-III diagnosis of schizophrenia, and (12) Hare's (1991) Psychopathy Checklist Score.

The initial heterogeneous construction sample consisted of 618 men (about 15% of whom were sex offenders) who had been referred for assessment or treatment to a maximum security psychiatric hospital as mentally disordered offenders. Follow-up data were gathered, with the average time at risk being about 7 years. Almost one-third of the sample committed a new violent offense. A large number of predictor variables were examined, and the above listed twelve variables were selected. In an early study, the correlation between the twelve predictor variables and violent recidivism was .46 (Harris et al., 1993). The two predictors with the highest univariate correlations were the Psychopathy Checklist (.34) and elementary school maladjustment (.31). It should be noted that violent recidivism included all sexual recidivism (i.e., all hands-on sexual offenses that resulted in an arrest or conviction) (Rice, 2001).

A cross-validation study, using 159 sex offenders that were not included in the original construction sample, yielded similar results (Rice and Harris, 1997). That is, the correlation of the VRAG with violent recidivism was quite comparable (.47) to the correlation of .46 observed in the original study. The VRAG appears to do a better job at predicting violent recidivism (nonsexual as well as sexual) than at predicting the full gamut of sexual recidivism, which inevitably includes many crimes that are on the low end of a violence continuum. In the cross-validation study, the VRAG's correlation with sexual recidivism (i.e., only sexual crimes) was .20 (Rice and Harris, 1997), and the C statistics for violent recidivism (.77) and sexual recidivism (.60) further underscored the VRAG's greater predictive efficacy with violence. (F&P Forensic Associates)
VRS **-Wong & Gordon, 1998, 2000(Violent Risk Scale-VRS) A person's risk for violence can change, for example, after participating in effective treatment programs. A tool that assesses the risk of violence must be sensitive to changes in risk. The VRS is developed based on the conception that to provide a comprehensive evaluation of an individual's risk for violent recidivism and changes in risk during treatment, it is necessary to assess both Static and Dynamic factors. The VRS uses 6 Static and 20 Dynamic factors derived from an extensive review of the risk assessment and treatment literature to identify factors that are empirically or theoretically linked to violence. The static and dynamic factors used in the VRS are also useful in assisting the practitioner in case conceptualization and management. The static factors, such as offense history, are important predictors of recidivism, but remain unchanged regardless of treatment interventions. Dynamic factors, such as interpersonal aggression or emotional control, are also important risk predictors. Unlike static factors, dynamic factors are changeable and, therefore, can be relevant targets for treatment and can reflect changes in risk. The VRS Dynamic and Static factors are rated on a 4-point scale (0, 1, 2 or 3); higher ratings indicate the factors in question are closely linked to violence in the client's lifetime functioning. Dynamic factors that are rated as significant violence risk markers for the client (2 or 3) are appropriate targets for treatment to reduce violent recidivism- the Need Principle. Risk factors rated "0" are the client's areas of strength. The sum of the Static and Dynamic factor scores reflects the client's level of violence risk; the higher the score, the higher the risk. Those with high VRS scores should be at high risk to recidivate violently and, as such, are appropriate candidates for high intensity intervention - the Risk Principle. A Clinical Override is also provided to accommodate exceptional situations not captured by the VRS risk factors.
VRS-SO **-Wong & Gordon, 1998, 2000(Violent Risk Scale - Sex Offender) A sex offender version of the VRS also has been developed. The Violence Risk Scale-Sex Offender Version (VRS-SO) is organized in the same format as the VRS. The rationale for the development and the organization of the VRS also applies to the VRS-SO. There is considerable overlap between the factors in the two scales due to the overlap in the factors that predict sexual and non-sexual violence. The major difference between the VRS and the VRS-SO is that the latter incorporates static and dynamic factors specifically relevant to sexual offending, whereas the VRS focuses on factors associated with non-sexual violent offending. Research results indicate that the VRS-SO also has good psychometric properties, can predict sexual recidivism, assesses treatment readiness and is sensitive to changes as a result of treatment. ..
Rorschach Hermann Rorschach(Rorschach Ink Blot Test). Most people have heard of the Rorschach test (pronounced "raw-shock"), but few have ever seen a real Rorschach inkblot. The blots are kept secret. Psychologists want the blots to remain a secret from the general public so that reactions to the blots will be spontaneous. Hermann Rorschach hoped these spontaneous reactions would yield valuable clues to the test subject's personality. Whether they do remains controversial. Many psychologists think the Rorschach test is hopelessly unreliable; others see it as one of the cardinal tools of modern psychodiagnosis. Even among those who acknowledge the value of the test, there is disagreement on interpretation of responses.
ASUS **-....(Adult Substance Use Survey)..
SARA **-Kropp, Hart, Webster & Eaves, 1999(Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide).(SARA) is a 20-item checklist that has been designed to screen for risk factors for spousal or family-related assault (Kropp et al. 1999). It covers a range of static, dynamic and risk management factors, drawing in part upon items included in the HCR-20. Like the SVR-20 it is being employed by the Scottish Prison Service to provide a more detailed assessment of risk of spousal assault among offenders initially assessed using HCR-20..

Legal Issues & Court Cases Affectine Sex Offenders ©
News & Noteworthy: Articles Concerning Sex offender Issues ©
Beyond the Abuse: A Personal Recovery Program ©
Copyright ©2003-2005 L. Arthur M.Parrish. All rights reserved.Privacy policy
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one striking at the root." - Henry David Thoreau -