Protective Factor Assessments: What Are We Measuring?—An Investigation of the Internal Validity of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-398
Author(s):  
Milena Abbiati ◽  
Philippe Golay ◽  
Jacques Gasser ◽  
Valerie Moulin
Keyword(s):  
Protective Factors ◽  
Protective Factor ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Theoretical Research ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Violent Offenses ◽  
Forensic Risk

The use of instruments measuring protective factors is on the rise in risk evaluation, management, and treatment planning. Although assessment tools must have good internal validity to be generalizable and reproducible, little is known about the internal validity of protective factor instruments. The present study evaluated the factor structure of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk (SAPROF) via confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses of forensic risk assessments of 143 individuals convicted of violent and sexual violent offenses in Switzerland. The SAPROF did not show any differences by type of offenses. Although our confirmatory factor analysis did not confirm the classic SAPROF scale’s structure, the results of the exploratory analysis were in line with previous theoretical research as it revealed a four-factor model comprising Resilience, Reintegration, Treatability, and Living Conditions. These results have implications for the use of the SAPROF in forensic risk assessments and treatment management plans.

scholarly journals Assessing Protective Factors for Adolescent Offending: A Conceptually Informed Examination of the SAVRY and YLS/CMI

Assessment ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 959-975 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jodi L. Viljoen ◽  
Aisha K. Bhanwer ◽  
Catherine S. Shaffer ◽  
Kevin S. Douglas
Keyword(s):  
Protective Factors ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Protective Effects ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Relevant Role ◽  
Research Assistants

Although the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) are among the most widely used adolescent risk assessment tools, they conceptualize and measure strengths differently. As such, in this study, we compared the predictive validity of SAVRY Protective Total and YLS/CMI Strength Total, and tested conceptual models of how these measures operate (i.e., risk vs. protective effects, direct vs. buffering effects, causal models). Research assistants conducted 624 risk assessments with 156 youth on probation. They rated protective factors at baseline, and again at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-up periods. The SAVRY Protective Total and YLS/CMI Strength Total inversely predicted any charges in the subsequent 2 years (area under the curve scores = 0.61 and 0.60, respectively, p < .05). Furthermore, when adolescents’ protective total scores increased, their self-reported violence decreased, thus providing evidence that these factors might play a causally relevant role in reducing violence. However, protective factors did not provide incremental validity over risk factors. In addition, because these measures are brief and use a dichotomous rating system, they primarily captured deficits in protective factors (i.e., low scores). This suggests a need for more comprehensive measures.

scholarly journals Clinicians’ Perceptions of the Implementation of the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk (SAPROF) on an Inpatient Forensic Unit

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Domjancic ◽  
Treena Wilkie ◽  
Shaheen Darani ◽  
Brittney Williams ◽  
Bandhana Maheru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Exploratory Research ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Consensus Scoring ◽  
Additional Value

The Structured Assessment of PROtective Factors for Violence Risk (SAPROF) is an assessment tool that examines protective factors when assessing for violence risk. There is limited research on clinicians’ perceptions of the use and implementation of risk assessment tools, and this study aimed to examine the experiences of clinicians using the SAPROF in a low secure forensic rehabilitation inpatient unit in Canada. An exploratory research design was used, and five clinicians participated in semi-structured interviews. Data was analyzed using a thematic approach and three central themes were identified: understanding of the patient from a strengths-based point of view, providing clinicians with a focus on how to help the patient, and bringing in opportunities to collaborate as a team. The findings highlight the additional value of the SAPROF as tool in helping forensic teams to adopt strengths based approaches to risk assessment, enhancing treatment planning and inter-professional collaboration.   Keywords: strengths, risk assessment, SAPROF, consensus scoring, recovery

scholarly journals Improving Case Plans and Interventions for Adolescents on Probation: The Implementation of the SAVRY and a Structured Case Planning Form

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jodi L. Viljoen ◽  
Catherine S. Shaffer ◽  
Nicole M. Muir ◽  
Dana M. Cochrane ◽  
Etta M. Brodersen
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Propensity Scores ◽  
Probation Officers ◽  
Level Of Detail ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Case Planning ◽  
Local Tool

Even when probation officers use risk assessment tools, many of their clients’ needs remain unaddressed. As such, we examined whether the implementation of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and a structured case planning form resulted in better case plans as compared with prior practices (i.e., a nonvalidated local tool and an unstructured plan). Our sample comprised 216 adolescents on probation who were matched via propensity scores. Adolescents in the SAVRY/Structured Plan condition had significantly better case plans than those in the preimplementation condition. Specifically, following implementation, adolescents’ high need domains were more likely to be targeted in plans. Plans also scored higher on other quality indicators (e.g., level of detail). These improvements appeared to be due primarily to the structured plan rather than the SAVRY. Overall, our findings highlight that, just as structure can improve risk assessments, so too might structure improve case plans.

scholarly journals Measuring intimate partner violence risk: A national survey of Canadian police officers

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 103-109
Author(s):  
Michael D. Saxton ◽  
Peter G. Jaffe ◽  
Anne-Lee Straatman ◽  
Laura Olszowy ◽  
Myrna Dawson
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Violence Risk

This study examined the role of police in addressing intimate partner violence (IPV) and the type of strategies they apply across Canada based on a national survey of officers. The focus was on an examination of the types of structured tools Canadian police officers report using in their risk assessment strategies. The results suggest that Canadian police officers are reporting frequent engagement in risk assessments across jurisdictions. The survey findings indicate variability across provinces in the types of risk assessment tools police officers are using. Implications for future research include exploring specific provincial and territorial police risk assessment processes and the challenges in engaging in risk assessments.

Are Protective Factors Valid Constructs? Interrater Reliability And Construct Validity Of Proposed Protective Factors Against Sexual Reoffending

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (11) ◽  
pp. 1448-1467
Author(s):  
Gwenda M. Willis ◽  
Sharon M. Kelley ◽  
David Thornton
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Sexual Offence ◽  
Sexual Recidivism ◽  
Dynamic Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

Most sexual recidivism risk assessment tools focus primarily on risk factors and deficits without consideration for strengths or protective factors which might mitigate reoffense risk. The current study is the first in a research program designed to develop and validate the Structured Assessment of PROtective Factors for violence risk—Sexual Offence version (SAPROF-SO), a measure of protective factors against sexual reoffending. The study aimed to test interrater reliability and construct validity of the SAPROF-SO with a high-risk ( n = 40) and routine ( n = 40) sample. Interrater reliability between three independent raters was generally good to excellent for the SAPROF-SO domain and Total scores across both samples and compared favorably with validated measures of dynamic risk. Moreover, the SAPROF-SO demonstrated construct validity and was moderately independent of existing measures of risk. Findings open the door for a more balanced, strengths-based, and accurate approach to recidivism risk assessment.

The Role of Protective Factors in Forensic Risk Assessments

2017 ◽  
pp. 179-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Viljoen ◽  
Jodi L. Viljoen ◽  
Tonia L. Nicholls ◽  
Michiel de Vries Robbé
Keyword(s):  
Protective Factors ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Forensic Risk

scholarly journals Risk Assessment in Juvenile and Young Adult Offenders: Predictive Validity of the SAVRY and SAPROF-YV

Assessment ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 107319112095974
Author(s):  
Anneke T. H. Kleeven ◽  
Michiel de Vries Robbé ◽  
Eva A. Mulder ◽  
Arne Popma
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Young Adult ◽  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Developmental Differences ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools ◽  
Dutch Sample

Most juvenile risk assessment tools heavily rely on a risk-focused approach. Less attention has been devoted to protective factors. This study examines the predictive validity of protective factors in addition to risk factors, and developmental differences in psychometric properties of juvenile risk assessment. For a national Dutch sample of 354 juvenile and young adult offenders (16-26 years) risk and protective factors were retrospectively assessed at discharge from seven juvenile justice institutions, using the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk – Youth Version (SAPROF-YV). Results show moderate validity for both tools predicting general, violent, and nonviolent offending at different follow-up times. The SAPROF-YV provided incremental predictive validity over the SAVRY, and predictive validity was stronger for younger offenders. Evidently both the SAVRY and SAPROF-YV seem valid tools for the assessment of recidivism risk in juvenile and young adult offenders. Results highlight the importance of protective factors, especially in juvenile offenders, emphasizing the need for a balanced risk assessment.

scholarly journals The Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk (SAPROF): A Meta-Analysis of its Reliability and Predictive Validity

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Burghart ◽  
Corine de Ruiter ◽  
Sophia E. Hynes ◽  
Nishant Krishnan ◽  
Yara Levtova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Protective Factors ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Predictive Performance ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Random Effects Models

Although the inclusion of protective factors in risk assessment is believed to improve prediction, most risk assessment tools emphasize risk factors. One tool that attempts to balance risk factors with protective factors is the Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for Violence Risk (SAPROF). The SAPROF focuses exclusively on protective factors and is used in conjunction with a structured risk assessment tool. It has received increasing attention from both researchers and forensic mental health practitioners in recent years. To assess its psychometric performance, we conducted a meta-analysis of validation studies using random effects models. Our final sample included 22 studies with 3,216 subjects from 12 countries. Overall, the SAPROF showed good interrater reliability and moderate to good predictive performance for desistance from violence in terms of institutional misconduct and community recidivism. The instrument also exhibited incremental validity when used in conjunction with the Historical Clinical Risk Management-20 (HCR-20). Despite these promising results, this meta-analysis also uncovered several shortcomings in current research on the SAPROF. Studies did not report data on calibration, thus failing to capture the full picture of the SAPROF’s predictive performance. Moreover, risk of bias across studies was high and findings are mostly restricted to male samples. Directions for future research and recommendations for the use of the SAPROF are offered.

scholarly journals MANAGEMENT OF INTANGIBLE ASSETSS OF THE ENTERPRISE INNOVATIVE PERFORMANCE WITH REFERENCE TO RISKS

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 49-68
Author(s):  
Irina Vladimirovna Elokhova ◽  
Lyubov Alexandrovna Nazarova
Keyword(s):  
Discount Rate ◽  
Risk Premium ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Cash Flows ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Theoretical Research ◽  
Expert Assessment ◽  
Innovative Performance ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Estimated Risk

The article is devoted to the analysis of existing assessment tools of intangible results of innovative performance that are used to manage the innovative development of the enterprise. The authors consider the most common methods for determining the risk premium when calculating the discount rate. The study shows that existing methods take into account intangible results to a different extent. At the same time, not all intangible results of innovative performance and not in all methods are taken into account properly, this proves that accounting of intangible results can change the discount rate and affect the future cash flows of the enterprise and, as a consequence, the value of the enterprise. Purpose: analysis of existing methods of estimated risk correction development of «factor model for calculating the risk premium» taking into account intangible results of innovative performance. Methods and Methodology: complex of methods of theoretical research (description, comparison, analysis and synthesis), empirical research (expert assessment). Results: development of “factor model for calculating the risk premium taking into account the intangible results of innovation”, which allows more reliable calculation of the risk premium, and as a consequence of the discount rate, which makes it possible to make management decisions reasonably and promptly. Practical implications: It is advisable for economic entities to use the obtained results. That can help them expand the number of analyzed intangible results of innovative activity within the framework of a particular risk factor in order to increase the reliability of calculating the risk premium and, as a result, the discount rate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document