Risk assessment tests identify respondents’ (offenders or clients) problems so that evaluators can refer the individuals for appropriate intervention and treatment. To maximize resources and achieve successful outcomes beneficial to both offenders (or clients) and society, level of intervention and treatment should match offenders’ problem severity. For example, offenders with low "problem severity" should be placed in low intervention (treatment) level programs, whereas, offenders with high "problem severity" are matched with high intervention (treatment) level programs. Accurate placement of offenders requires accurate (reliable and valid) assessment.

Of the many evaluation and assessment methodologies, the best alternative, from a psychometrics standpoint, is the objective test. Objective tests can be understood in terms of their statistical reliability, validity and accuracy. The weakest assessment methodology is the interview, because of lack of inter-interviewer reliability. No two interviewers rate offenders exactly alike or at least alike enough to be considered accurate and reliable. Interviewers must repeat, paraphrase, and probe for answers, and this process is strongly influenced by their personalities.

There have been many studies done that demonstrate the importance of placing clients into appropriate interventions and treatment levels. Andrews, Bonta and Hoge (1990) illustrated the relationship between risk and intervention across various measures of risk, types of service, measures of outcome, and types of subjects. In all cases the more intensive service (level of care) did not help low-risk cases and resulted in significantly poorer outcome. Conversely, the effects of more intensive care or treatment were positive and significantly related to positive outcomes for higher risk cases. As Andrews et al. point out, relationships between risk and interventions are not always found, it depends on the assessment of risk and the particular types of service (intervention or treatment) employed. Nonetheless, it is shown that high risk cases are better served with high level interventions.

Behavioral treatments that target the criminogenic needs of high-risk offenders have been found to be effective in reducing recidivism (Gendreau, 1996). Criminogenic needs are identified by risk assessment tests. More specifically, the scales (measures) in Risk & Needs tests can be termed criminogenic needs. With such a diversity of subjects (clients or offenders), no single test can accurately measure risk for everybody. A specific test is needed for specific client and offender groups. Accurate assessment can then identify problem severity and criminogenic needs. And that is what defines appropriate intervention and treatment referrals.

Matching level of intervention and treatment with problem severity supports fairness, along with accurate and standardized referrals. This improves case management and promotes successful outcomes. In this way, an objective approach to program selection and referral can be achieved.

References: