RADAR-iTE 2.0: An Instrument of the German State Protection – Structure, Development and Current Stage of Evaluation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Friederike Sadowski ◽  
Hamta Meier ◽  
Celina Sonka ◽  
Rainer Witt ◽  
Juliane Malzacher
Keyword(s):  
Implementation Process ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Risk Assessment Instrument ◽  
Actuarial Risk Assessment ◽  
Version 2.0 ◽  
Actuarial Risk ◽  
One Year ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
State Protection

RADAR-iTE is an actuarial risk assessment instrument developed specifically for the German Police in the field of state protection. The purpose of the instrument is the prioritization of individuals of the Islamist spectrum known by the police in terms of their risk to commit politically motivated serious violence in Germany. The specific requirements of an instrument developed for the police and the adapted research process are outlined. This is followed by the description of the evaluation and revision of the instrument after one year of application by the German police. The result of this process, the current version 2.0 of RADAR-iTE is introduced and an insight into the implementation process of the instrument is also provided. Finally, the limitations of RADAR-iTE are discussed

The Influence of Risk Assessment Instrument Scores on Evaluators’ Risk Opinions and Sexual Offender Containment Recommendations

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (9) ◽  
pp. 1213-1235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine E. McCallum ◽  
Marcus T. Boccaccini ◽  
Claire N. Bryson
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Sex Offender ◽  
Sexual Offender ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Treatment Motivation ◽  
Management Board ◽  
Risk Assessment Instrument ◽  
Actuarial Risk

In Colorado, evaluators conducting sex offender risk assessments are required to assess 17 risk factors specified by the state’s Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB), in addition to scoring actuarial risk assessment instruments. This study examined the association between instrument scores, the 17 SOMB risk factors, and evaluator opinions concerning risk and need for containment in 302 Colorado cases. Evaluators’ ratings of risk indicated by noninstrument factors were often higher than their ratings of risk indicated by instrument results, but only their ratings of noninstrument factors were independently predictive of containment recommendations. Several of the most influential noninstrument factors (e.g., denial, treatment motivation) have been described by researchers as potentially misleading because they are not predictive of future offending. Findings highlight the need for more studies examining the validity of what risk assessment evaluators actually do, as opposed to what researchers think they should do.

Professional Discretion and the Predictive Validity of a Juvenile Risk Assessment Instrument

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
James T. McCafferty
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Adjusted Risk ◽  
Risk Levels ◽  
Risk Assessment Instrument ◽  
Actuarial Risk ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The Impact

The ability for professionals to override the results of an actuarial risk assessment tool is an essential part of effective correctional risk classification; however, little is known about how this important function affects the predictive validity of these tools. Using data from a statewide sample of juveniles from Ohio, this study examined the impact of professional adjustments on the predictive validity of a juvenile risk assessment instrument. This study found that the original and adjusted risk levels were significant predictors of recidivism, but the original risk levels were stronger predictors of recidivism than the adjusted risk levels that accounted for overrides.

The Measures of Criminal Attitudes and Associates (MCAA)

2004 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 717-733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy F. Mills ◽  
Daryl G. Kroner ◽  
Toni Hemmati
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Male Offenders ◽  
Risk Assessment Instrument ◽  
Violent Recidivism ◽  
Actuarial Risk ◽  
Antisocial Attitudes ◽  
Adult Male Offenders

Recent research has demonstrated that antisocial attitudes and antisocial associates are among the better predictors of antisocial behavior. This study tests the predictive validity of the Measures of Criminal Attitudes and Associates (MCAA) in a sample of adult male offenders. The MCAA comprises two parts: Part A is a quantified self-report measure of criminal friends, and Part B contains four attitude scales: Violence, Entitlement, Antisocial Intent, and Associates. The MCAA scales showed predictive validity for the outcomes of general and violent recidivism. In addition, the MCAA significantly improved the prediction of violent recidivism over an actuarial risk assessment instrument alone. Discussion centers on the contribution that antisocial attitudes and associates make to risk assessment.

An Examination of Changes in LSI-R Scores Over Time: Making the Case for Needs-Based Case Management

2011 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 541-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melinda D. Schlager ◽  
Daniel Pacheco
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Case Management ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Community Corrections ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Level Of Service ◽  
Change Scores ◽  
Risk Assessment Instrument ◽  
Over Time

The Level of Service Inventory—Revised (LSI-R) is an actuarially derived risk assessment instrument with a demonstrated reputation and record of supportive research. It has shown predictive validity on several offender populations. Although a significant literature has emerged on the validity and use of the LSI-R, no research has specifically examined change scores or the dynamics of reassessment and its importance with respect to case management. Flores, Lowenkamp, Holsinger, and Latessa and Lowenkamp and Bechtel, among others, specifically identify the importance and need to examine LSI-R reassessment scores. The present study uses a sample of parolees ( N = 179) from various community corrections programs that were administered the LSI-R at two different times. Results indicate that both mean composite and subcomponent LSI-R scores statistically significantly decreased between Time 1 and Time 2. The practical, theoretical, and policy implications of these results are discussed.

Comment on “The Influence of Risk Assessment Instrument Scores on Evaluators’ Risk Opinions and Sexual Offender Containment Recommendations”

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (9) ◽  
pp. 1236-1241
Author(s):  
Christopher Lobanov-Rostovsky
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Sex Offender ◽  
Sexual Offender ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Management Board ◽  
Risk Assessment Instrument ◽  
Potential Confounding Variable ◽  
Standards And Guidelines ◽  
And Behavior

The work of the Colorado Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB) has been called into question as a result of the manuscript “The Influence of Risk Assessment Instrument Scores on the Evaluators’ Risk Opinions and Sexual Offender Containment Recommendations” published in Criminal Justice and Behavior (2017). This response covers the following areas: significant nomenclature problems used to describe the Adult Standards and Guidelines, the dated nature of the SOMB citations in the manuscript, the flaws in the interpretation of the use of the 17 SOMB risk factors and the SOMB policy related to risk assessment, a potential confounding variable that may explain the results obtained, and finally the work of the SOMB to foster the use of validated risk assessment instruments and evidence-based policies and practices. The SOMB takes pride in providing up-to-date, research-supported practices for its providers and would never intentionally do otherwise, as suggested by the article.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document