Adult/
Tool Authors Domains youth Problems Benefits
Andrews and (1) Criminal history both
LSI-R (2) Leisure/Recreation
Bonta (1995) (3) Education/Employment
(4) Companions
(5) Financial
(6) Alcohol/Drug problem
(7) Family/Marital
(8) Emotional/Personal (9)
Accommodation (10)
Attitudes/Orientation
Hare (1) Selfish, callous, and - not actually a risk
PCL-R (1991,2003) remorseless use of assessment tool
others
(2) Chronically unstable
and antisocial lifestyle
Quinsey, n/a
SORAG Harris,
Rice, and
Cormier
(1998, 2006)
Harris, Static factors adult - cannot inform - empirically-based
Static-99/ Phenix, treatment
- easy to score
Static Hanson
and Thornton
cover 14 key areas
- does not measure
- norm to rank offenders
2002R (2003) change
- good predictor
, Quinsey, n/a
VRAG Harris, Rice,
and
Cormier
(1998, 2006)
Webster, (1) Historical risk factors - includes case formulation
HCR-20 Eaves, (2) Clinical risk factors
Douglas, and (3) Risk management factors - allows for flexibility
Wintrup - aims at informing risk
(1995) management/treatment
Webster,
Douglas, - version 3 improved for 6 key reasons
Eaves, and
Hart (1997)
Spreen et al., (1) Historical adult - Not yet validated for - Validated for male TBS violence
HKT-R 2014 (2) Clinical other criminal offenders (including sex offenders
(3) Future detention orders with adult victims)
- Women in general and male sex
offenders with juvenile victims do
not re-offend with violence:
validation impossible
- Answers questions from the
temporary release assessment
framework
- Sensitive to measuring change
(ROM)
Boer, Hart, (1) Historical risk factors Adult - some items are
SVR-20 Kropp, and (2) Social/Contextual risk overinclusive (e.g.,
Webster factors psychopathy, mental ● empirically related to future sexual
(1997) (3) Individual/Clinical risk illness) violence
factors ● useful in making decisions about the
(4) Protective factors - some items lack evidence
(e.g., past non-violent management of sex offenders
offences)
, - some redundancy in the ● non-discriminatory
items
● reasonably comprehensive but not
- no clear distinction static/ redundant
dynamic
● rate presence/absence + recent
changes
as a result:
- uncertain factor structure
- sub-optimal validity
- professional judgement
outperforms scoring
- does not include many
important factors (but
can be combined with
other measures)
they are revising it to address
limitations
Kropp & hart (1) General violence Adult
SARA (1994, 1995, (2) Spousal violence
1999)
Borum, (1) Historical risk factors Youth • Improve precision - Seems to be applicable to males and
SAVRY Bartel, & (2) Social/Contextual females
Forth (2002, risk factors • Understand utility of
2003) (3) Individual/Clinical summary risk rating - Good inter-rater reliability and
risk factors (esp. Because it is SPJ internal consistency
(4) Protective factors and not actuarial tool)
***** - AUC of .74 - .80 for violent and
general recidivism
- Allows planning of interventions and
, Static and dynamic factors treatment
- Monitoring
- Planning of release/ dismissal
- Formulate conditions for supervision
Wong & (1) Static adult Linear relationship between dynamic items
VRS Gordon, (2) dynamic and recidivism
2006
- Dynamic items have slightly higher
correlation (r=0.34) with violent
reconviction than static items (r=
0.27)
- ROC AUC at 4-year follow up =
0.75
Youth not all measures provide - expands to cover females
VRS- YV directions for treatments and
focus specifically on violence - substantial continuity between risk
risk factors for youth/adults
- sensitive to developmental issues
- good inter-rater reliability and internal
consistency
- AUC. 78-81 for violent and general
recidivism
can measure change
youth - not actually a risk - focused on youth
PCL:YV assessment tool
stable dynamic factors adult - does not capture - Works for either initial or
Stable200 reassessment
