Questions: Adult Sex Offenders

Risk Assessment

Always/ Yes Typically Generally Not Never/ No
  1. Are formal risk assessments conducted as part of a broader assessment approach with sex offenders?
  2. Do agency policies or procedures require the use of empirically–validated, sex offender–specific risk assessment tools (e.g., RRASOR, STATIC–99) to inform:
    • Sentencing decisions?
    • Levels of community supervision?
    • Treatment intensity?
    • Release decisionmaking?
    • Reentry planning?
    • Which tools are used?
  3. In practice, are validated, sex offender–specific risk assessment tools used to inform:
    • Sentencing decisions?
    • Levels of community supervision?
    • Treatment intensity?
    • Release decisionmaking?
    • Reentry planning?
    • Which tools are used?
  4. Are the results of validated, sex offender–specific actuarial risk assessments used to prioritize interventions for sex offenders (i.e., higher intensity services for higher risk offenders?)
  5. Is specialized training provided to the agency staff/other professionals who are responsible for conducting and using actuarial tools?
  6. Are the results of risk assessments shared with key stakeholders across disciplines or agencies to inform decisionmaking?
  7. Are the same risk assessment tools used/accepted across agencies (thus reducing duplication of assessment efforts and providing a common language for practitioners)?

Questions: Juvenile Sex Offenders

Risk Assessment

Always/ Yes Typically Generally Not Never/ No
  1. Are formal risk assessments conducted as part of a broader assessment approach with juvenile sex offenders?
  2. Do agency policies or procedures require the use of empirically–supported, risk assessment tools designed specifically for juvenile sex offenders (e.g., ERASOR, J–SOAP–II) to inform:
    • Disposition/placement decisions?
    • Levels of community supervision?
    • Treatment intensity?
    • Release decisionmaking?
    • Reentry planning?
    • Which tools are used?
  3. In practice, are empirically–supported risk assessment tools designed specifically for juvenile sex offenders (e.g., ERASOR, J–SOAP–II) used to inform:
    • Disposition/placement decisions?
    • Levels of community supervision?
    • Treatment intensity?
    • Release decisionmaking?
    • Reentry planning?
    • Which tools are used?
  4. Is specialized training provided to the agency staff/other professionals who are responsible for conducting and using risk assessment tools (e.g., ERASOR, J–SOAP–II) for juvenile sex offenders?
  5. Are the results of empirically–supported risk assessment tools designed specifically for juvenile sex offenders used to prioritize interventions for these youth (i.e., higher intensity services for higher risk youth?)
  6. Are the results of risk assessments shared with key stakeholders across disciplines or agencies to inform decisionmaking?
  7. Are the same risk assessment tools used/accepted across agencies (thus reducing duplication of assessment efforts and providing a common language for practitioners)?