23 May In correctional settings across America, the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model is actively used to assess offender security and programmatic needs. James (2018) discussed the Ris
In correctional settings across America, the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model is actively used to assess offender security and programmatic needs. James (2018) discussed the Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System in great detail. Please read this article using the following link: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44087.pdf. Along with his research, as well as the information presented within the textbook, discuss your opinion of the following:
- Considering the eight central risk and needs factors of offenders, use a real-life example (either someone personally known to you or someone that you read about in the news) to discuss whether or not risk and needs assessments should be incorporated into sentencing.
- If you believe that it should be considered when determining an offender’s sentence, describe how the eight central risk and needs assessments could be useful.
- How would that be useful to the offender?
- To the criminal justice system?
- And to society at large?
- If you believe that it should not be included, discuss why incorporating the eight central risk and needs assessments into sentencing would not help the criminal justice system.
- How would it harm the offender?
- The criminal justice system?
- And society at large?
- If you believe that it should be considered when determining an offender’s sentence, describe how the eight central risk and needs assessments could be useful.
Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal
Prison System
Nathan James
Analyst in Crime Policy
July 10, 2018
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R44087
Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System
Congressional Research Service
Summary The number of people incarcerated in federal prisons increased dramatically over the past three
decades. While the number of inmates in the federal prison system has decreased since FY2013,
the federal prison population remains substantially larger than it was three decades ago.
Concerns about both the economic and social consequences of the country’s reliance on
incarceration have led to calls for reforms to the nation’s criminal justice system, including
improving the federal prison system’s ability to rehabilitate incarcerated offenders by better
assessing their risk for recidivism and addressing their criminogenic needs. “Criminogenic
needs,” are factors that contribute to criminal behavior that can be changed and/or addressed
through interventions.
There have been legislative proposals to implement a risk and needs assessment system in federal
prisons. The system would be used to place inmates in appropriate rehabilitative programs. Under
the proposed system some inmates would be eligible for earned time credits for completing
rehabilitative programs that reduce their risk of recidivism. Such credits would allow inmates to
be placed on prerelease custody earlier. The proposed system would exclude inmates convicted of
certain offenses from being eligible for earned time credits.
Risk and needs assessment instruments typically consist of a series of items used to collect data
on offender behaviors and attitudes that research indicates are related to the risk of recidivism.
Generally, inmates are classified as being at a high, moderate, or low risk of recidivism.
Assessment instruments are comprised of static and dynamic risk factors. Static risk factors do
not change (e.g., age at first arrest or gender), while dynamic risk factors can either change on
their own or be changed through an intervention (e.g., current age, education level, or
employment status). In general, research suggests that the most commonly used assessment
instruments can, with a moderate level of accuracy, predict who is at risk for violent recidivism. It
also suggests that of the most commonly used risk assessments none distinguishes itself from the
others when it comes to predictive validity.
The Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model has become the dominant paradigm in risk and needs
assessment. The risk principle states that convicted offenders need to be placed in programs that
are commensurate with their risk level; in other words, provide more intensive treatment and
services to high-risk offenders while low-risk offenders should receive minimal or even no
intervention. The need principle states that effective treatment should also focus on addressing the
criminogenic needs that contribute to criminal behavior. The responsivity principle states that
rehabilitative programming should be delivered in a style and mode that is consistent with the
ability and learning style of the offender.
There are several issues policymakers might contemplate should Congress choose to consider
legislation to implement a risk and needs assessment system in federal prisons, including the
following:
Is there the potential for bias in the use of risk and needs assessment?
Should certain inmates be ineligible for earned time credits?
Should prison programming focus on inmates at high risk of recidivism?
Should risk assessment be incorporated into sentencing?
Should there be a decreased focus on long prison sentences?
Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System
Congressional Research Service
Contents
An Overview of Risk and Needs Assessment ……………………………………………………………………… 3
Risk and Needs Factors ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3 Can Risk and Needs Assessment Instruments Accurately Predict Risk? ……………………………. 4
Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) Principles ……………………………………………………………………….. 4
Risk Principle ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5 Needs Principle …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5 Responsivity Principle ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6 “Central Eight” Risk and Needs Factors ……………………………………………………………………….. 6 Empirical Basis for the RNR Principles ………………………………………………………………………… 7
Select Issues for Congress ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8
Concerns About Bias in Risk and Needs Assessment ……………………………………………………… 8 Should Certain Inmates Be Excluded from Receiving Time Credits? ………………………………. 11 Should Priority Be Given to High-Risk Offenders? ………………………………………………………. 15 Should Risk and Needs Assessment Be Used in Sentencing? …………………………………………. 16 Should There Be a Decreased Emphasis on Long Prison Sentences? ………………………………. 17
Tables
Table 1. Major Risk and Needs Factors: The “Central Eight”………………………………………………… 6
Table 2. Conviction Offenses for Inmates Held in BOP Facilities at the End of FY2014…………. 13
Contacts
Author Contact Information ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 18
Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System
Congressional Research Service 1
he number of people incarcerated in federal prisons increased dramatically over the past
three decades. The total number of inmates in the federal prison system increased from
approximately 25,000 in FY1980 to over 219,000 in FY2013.1 Since the peak in FY2013,
the number of inmates in the federal prison system decreased each subsequent fiscal year, falling
to approximately 186,000 inmates in FY2017.2 However, even with the recent decrease in the
number of federal prison inmates, the federal prison population is more than seven times larger
than it was three decades ago.
While research indicates that the expanded use of incarceration during the 1980s and 1990s
contributed to the declining crime rate, the effect was likely small,3 and it has likely reached the
point of diminishing returns.4 Concerns about both the economic and social consequences of the
country’s burgeoning prison population have resulted in a range of organizations including the
American Civil Liberties Union, Right on Crime, and the American Conservative Union’s Center
for Criminal Justice Reform calling for reforms to the nation’s criminal justice system. Congress
also formed the Charles Colson Task Force on Federal Corrections to examine the growth of the
federal prison population and provide recommendations for reforms.5
There are two, not mutually exclusive, methods to reduce the number of incarcerated individuals
in the United States: send fewer people to prison (e.g., placing offenders on probation or in a
diversion program like a drug court) and/or shorten prison sentences (e.g., allowing inmates to
serve a portion of their prison sentence on parole or granting them early release by allowing them
to earn time off their prison sentence). While diverting “low-level drug offenders” from prison or
granting nonviolent offenders early release have been popular proposals to reduce the prison
population, the crime someone is convicted of is not the best proxy for the risk that person might
pose to the community. For example, an offender who has no history of violence and who poses a
low risk for future violence might be convicted of what is legally defined as a violent crime (e.g.,
illegal gun possession or driving the get-away car for someone who committed an armed
robbery).6 On the other hand, an offender with a history of violence might be sentenced to prison
for a nonviolent crime or have a violent offense downgraded to a nonviolent offense as a result of
a plea deal.7
The assessment of offender risk was originally a matter of professional judgment. Prison staff,
based on their own experience and training, would typically determine at intake which offenders
were more or less likely to be a safety or security risk. These assessments would then be used to
assign inmates to the appropriate institution or unit based on their risk determination. Over time,
1 Data on the number of federal prison inmates can be found online at https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/
population_statistics.jsp.
2 In FY2013, the number of inmates under BOP’s jurisdiction was 219,298, in FY2014 it was 214,149, in FY2015 it
was 205,723, in FY2016 it was 192,170, and in FY2017 it was 185,617. At the time this report was updated, FY2017
was the most recent fiscal year for which federal prison population data were available.
3 Research by the Brennan Center for Justice and the New York University School of Law estimates that 0%-7% of the
decline in crime in the 1990s can be attributed to increased incarceration, while 0%-1% of the decrease in crime since
2000 can be attributed to increased incarceration. Oliver Roeder, Lauren-Brooke Eisen, and Julia Bowling, What
Caused the Crime Decline?, Brennan Center for Justice, New York, NY, February 12, 2015, p. 6.
4 Anne Morrison Piehl and Bert Useem, “Prisons,” in Crime and Public Policy, ed. Joan Petersilia and James Q.
Wilson, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 542.
5 See P.L. 113-76 and the joint explanatory statement to accompany P.L. 113-76, printed in the January 15, 2014,
Congressional Record, p. H514.
6 Leon Neyfakh, “OK, So Who Gets to Go Free?,” Slate, March 4, 2015, http://www.slate.com/articles/
news_and_politics/crime/2015/03/prison_reform_releasing_only_nonviolent_offenders_won_t_get_you_very_far.html.
7 Ibid.
T
Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System
Congressional Research Service 2
the limitations of using professional judgment alone were increasingly recognized and beginning
in the 1970’s actuarial tools to assess risk were developed and implemented in correctional
settings. Subsequent research on these tools revealed that they were better at predicting future
criminal behavior than professional judgment alone. Since then, a variety of risk assessment tools
have been developed and implemented incorporating important advances suggested by research,
including adding factors because they are theoretically relevant (versus adding factors that are
simply available in correctional data systems), adding factors that are changeable (e.g., dynamic
factors), and conducting risk assessment in the context of a risk and recidivism reduction model.8
Because courts and correctional officials make decisions every day about who can safely be
diverted from incarceration or granted early release, they may benefit from tools that can help in
this process. Actuarial risk assessment tools may serve this purpose. Needs assessments could
also help correctional officials make determinations about which offenders need higher levels of
supervision and/or match them to the appropriate rehabilitative programming.
The use of risk and needs assessment in the criminal justice system is not without controversy,
however. Proponents of assessment assert that the tools used to measure the risk and needs of
inmates are better than the independent judgment of courts and corrections officials alone, and
that research on the tools have demonstrated their ability to make relevant distinctions between
high- and low-risk offenders.9 Nonetheless, risk and needs assessment is not 100% accurate. Two
experts in the field note that “[a]lthough statistical risk assessment reduces uncertainty about an
offender’s probable future conduct, it is subject to errors and should be regarded as advisory
rather than peremptory. Even with large data sets and advanced analytical techniques, the best
models are usually able to predict recidivism with about 70% accuracy—provided it is completed
by trained staff.”10
Legislation has been introduced in the current Congress that would require the Bureau of Prisons
(BOP) to implement a risk and needs assessment system.11 Currently, BOP utilizes a classification
and designation tool to make determinations about inmates’ security and custody classification.12
However, BOP’s classification and designation system is only validated to predict institutional
misconduct.13 In addition, BOP staff use their discretion to determine the rehabilitative programs
in which inmates will be placed.14 While the process involves evaluations by a psychologist and
subsequent assessments by a case manager, BOP does not use a validated assessment instrument
8 James Bonta and D.A. Andrews, “Risk-Need-Responsivity Model for Offender Assessment and Rehabilitation, 2007-
06,” Public Safety Canada, https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/rsk-nd-rspnsvty/index-en.aspx#a3
9 Pew Center on the States, Risk/Needs Assessment 101: Science Reveals New Tools to Manage Offenders, issue brief,
September 2011, http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs_assets/2011/
PewRiskAssessmentbriefpdf.pdf, (hereinafter, “Risk/Needs Assessment 101”)
10 Edward J. Latessa and Brian Lovins, “The Role of Offender Risk Assessment: a Policy Maker Guide,” Victims and
Offenders, vol. 5, 2010, p. 212 (hereinafter “The Role of Offender Risk Assessment”).
11 See, for example, S. 1917, S. 1994, and H.R. 3356.
12 BOP makes determinations based on a review and coding of sentencing material, including the presentence report,
provided by the sentencing court, the Office of Probation and Pretrial Services, and the U.S. Marshals. Factors that can
affect an inmate’s security and custody classification include criminal history, prior substance abuse, education level,
public safety factors, and program needs. For more information see U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons,
Inmate Security Designation and Custody Classification, Program Statement 5100.08, http://www.bop.gov/policy/
progstat/5100_008.pdf.
13 Charles Colson Task Force on Federal Corrections, Transforming Prisons, Restoring Lives: Final Recommendations
of the Charles Colson Task Force on Federal Corrections, January 2016, p. 32.
14 Ibid.
Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System
Congressional Research Service 3
to place inmates in rehabilitative programs.15 The system that would be established by legislation
before Congress would evaluate inmates and be used to determine appropriate levels of
supervision and place them in rehabilitative programs and productive activities that match their
needs. Under the proposed system, some inmates would be eligible for earned time credits for
participating in rehabilitative programs that reduce their risk of recidivism. Such credits would
allow inmates to be placed in prerelease custody earlier than under their original sentences.
This report provides information on the use of risk and needs assessment instruments. It starts
with an overview of risk and needs assessment. This includes a discussion of the Risk-Needs-
Responsivity principles, which has become the dominant paradigm for reducing the likelihood of
recidivism among convicted offenders. The report concludes with a discussion of the issues
policymakers might consider if they debate legislation to expand the use of risk and needs
assessment in the federal prison system.
An Overview of Risk and Needs Assessment A risk and needs assessment instrument measures offenders’ criminogenic16 risk factors and
specific needs that if addressed will reduce the likelihood of future criminal activity.17 Assessment
instruments typically consist of a series of questions that help guide an interview with an offender
in order to collect data on behaviors and attitudes that research indicates are related to the risk of
recidivism.18 Data collected during the interview is typically supplemented with information from
an official records check, such as a criminal history records check.19 The risk and needs
assessment instrument generates a total score that places the offender into a risk category
(typically “low,” “moderate,” or “high”).
Risk and Needs Factors
Generally speaking, risk and needs assessment instruments consist of both static and dynamic risk
factors. Static risk factors do not change over time. Examples include age at first arrest, gender,
past problems with substance or alcohol abuse, prior mental health problems, or a history of
violating terms of supervision (e.g., parole or probation).20
Dynamic risk factors, also called “criminogenic needs,” change and/or can be addressed through
interventions. Examples include current age, education level, marital status, employment status,
current substance use, and residential stability.21
15 Ibid.
16 “Criminogenic” is commonly understood to mean factors that can contribute to criminal behavior.
17 Risk/Needs Assessment 101, p. 2.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.
20 James Austin, “The Proper and Improper Use of Risk Assessment in Corrections,” Federal Sentencing Reporter, vol.
16, no. 3, February 2004, p. 5 (hereinafter “The Proper and Improper Use of Risk Assessment in Corrections”).
21 “The Proper and Improper Use of Risk Assessment in Corrections,” p. 4.
Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System
Congressional Research Service 4
Can Risk and Needs Assessment Instruments Accurately
Predict Risk?
In general, research indicates that most commonly used risk and needs assessment instruments
can, with a moderate level of accuracy, predict who is at risk for recidivism.22 It also indicates
that of the most commonly used risk and needs assessments, no one instrument is superior to any
other when it comes to predictive validity.23 One group of researchers concluded that “[o]verall,
our results showed that all of the nine tools predicted violence at above-chance levels, with
medium effect sizes, and no one tool predicting [sic] violence significantly better than any other.
In sum, all did well, but none came first.”24
Two scholars have posited two explanations for why well-validated risk and needs assessment
instruments have similar levels of performance. First, some evidence suggests that there is a
“natural limit” to the predictive utility of instruments.25 Simply stated, there is a limit to how
accurately recidivism can be predicted given the current level of knowledge about the causes and
correlates of criminal behavior. Second, well-validated instruments may show similar levels of
performance because they are tapping “common factors” or shared dimensions of risk, even
though the instruments utilize different items or have different approaches.26 For example,
research has found that assessment instruments typically gauge four overlapping dimensions:
criminal history, persistent antisocial lifestyle, psychopathic personality, and alcohol/mental
health issues.27
Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) Principles The Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model is one of the most dominant paradigms in the risk
and needs assessment field. It has emerged as a prominent framework for guiding offender
assessment and treatment because it is one of the few comprehensive theories of how to provide
effective recidivism reduction interventions to offenders. Experts in the field of risk and needs
assessment assert that assessment systems should adhere to the RNR model. As the Vera Institute
of Justice notes, “[u]nderlying the development of evidence-based practices in the criminal justice
system are the risk, need, and responsivity principles” [emphasis original].28
22 The National Center for State Courts provides an overview of some of the most commonly used risk and needs
assessment instruments in their report on using risk and needs assessment in sentencing. See Pamela M Casey, Roger
K. Warren, and Jennifer K. Elek, Using Offender Risk and Needs Assessment Information at Sentencing: Guidance for
Courts from a National Working Group, Appendix A, National Center for State Courts, Williamsburg, VA, 2011
23 Public Safety Canada, Predicting Violent Recidivism, Research Summary, vol. 12, no. 3, May 2007,
http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/prdtng-rcvds/index-eng.aspx; Mary Ann Campbell, Sheila French, and
Paul Gendreau, “The Prediction of Violence in Adult Offenders; A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Instruments and
Methods of Assessment,” Criminal Justice and Behavior, vol. 36, no. 6, June 2009, pp. 567-590; Min Yang, Stephen
C.P. Wong, and Jeremy Coid, “The Efficacy of Violence Prediction: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Nine Risk
Assessment Tools,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 136, no. 5, 2010, pp. 740-767.
24 Min Yang, Stephen C.P. Wong, and Jeremy Coid, “The Efficacy of Violence Prediction: A Meta-Analytic
Comparison of Nine Risk Assessment Tools,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 136, no. 5, 2010, p. 757.
25 John Monahan and Jennifer L. Skeem, “Risk Redux: The Resurgence of Risk Assessment in Criminal Sanctioning,”
Federal Sentencing Reporter, vol. 26, no. 3, February 2014, p. 162 (hereinafter “Risk Redux”).
26 Ibid.
27 Daryl G. Kroner, Jeremy F. Mills, and John R. Reddon, “A Coffee Can, Factor Analysis, and Prediction of Antisocial
Behavior: The Structure of Criminal Risk,” International Journal of Law and Psychology, vol. 28, 2005, pp. 360-374.
28 Vera Institute of Justice’s Center of Sentencing and Corrections, Risk and Needs Assessment, memorandum to the
Risk and Needs Assessment in the Federal Prison System
Congressional Research Service 5
The RNR model of risk and needs assessment and offender treatment incorporates evidence-
based practices for reducing recidivism.29 As the name implies, the model has three main
principles: assessing risk, addressing criminogenic needs, and providing treatment that is
responsive to the offender’s abilities and learning style.30
The RNR model is based on the social psychology of offending, which posits that individuals and
social/situational factors intersect to create values, cognitions, and personality orientations that
are conducive to criminal conduct.31 These ways of thinking and responding are learned and
become reinforced through feedback, and eventually result in individual differences in the
propensity for criminal behavior.32
Many other theories of criminal behavior focus on the social causes of criminal behavior, factors
that cannot be addressed through individual-level treatment. On the other hand, the RNR model
focuses on the proximate causes of criminal behavior, which can be the targets of evidence-based
correctional treatment.
Risk Principle
The risk principle has two aspects: (1) the risk of criminal behavior can be predicted, and (2) the
level of intervention should be matched to the risk level of the offender.33 The risk principle states
that high-risk offenders need to be placed in programs that provide more intensive treatment and
services while low-risk offenders should receive minimal or even no intervention.
Needs Principle
The needs principle states that effective treatment should focus on addressing criminogenic
needs, that is, dynamic risk factors that are highly correlated with criminal conduct.34 Also,
according to the needs principle, effective treatment should not focus on addressing
Delaware Justice Reinvestment Task Force, October 12, 2011, p. 2, https://ltgov.delaware.gov/taskforces/djrtf/
DJRTF_Risk_Assessment_Memo.pdf (hereinafter “Vera Institute of Justice’s memorandum re: risk and needs
assessment”).
29 Pamela M Casey, Roger K. Warren, and Jennifer K. Elek, Using Offender Risk and Needs Assessment Information at
Sentencing: Guidance for Courts from a National Working Group, National Center for State Courts, Williamsburg,
VA, 2011, p. 5.
30 There are several principles other than risk, needs, and responsivity that are a part of the RNR model. These include
three overarching principles: delivering services with respect for people, basing programs on psychological theory, and
reducing criminal victimization. In addition to the risk, needs, and responsivity principles, there are several other core
principles, including introducing human services in order to reduce recidivism, targeting more criminogenic needs
relative to noncrimino
Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.
Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax.
About Wridemy
We are a professional paper writing website. If you have searched a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help in your coursework. We offer HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE Papers.
How It Works
To make an Order you only need to click on “Order Now” and we will direct you to our Order Page. Fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.
Are there Discounts?
All new clients are eligible for 20% off in their first Order. Our payment method is safe and secure.