The following program was produced by the United States Courts. Assisting the federal courts and the administration of justice, protecting the community and fostering long-term positive change in those under supervision, for U.S. probation officers the responsibilities are great. There's a lot at stake. Enter the Post-Conviction Risk Assessment Tool. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts develop P.C.R.A. to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of post-conviction supervision. It's part of a new philosophy called evidence-based practices. Evidence-based practices is using the best available evidence to guide your decisions in deciding what level of risk an offender poses and also what the best interventions would be for that offender in trying to reduce the recidivism rate. I think judges need to understand that evidence-based practices in the probation and pretrial setting is a new way of doing business and that all of our decisions, both in pretrial as well as judicially, decisions about pretrial release. Detention, supervision are going to be informed based on the research. You don't treat every case the same. Not everybody has a substance abuse problem, not everyone's criminal activity has been related to who they're associating with. We use these actuarial tools like insurance companies do to figure out levels of risk to figure out exactly what is the problem. And then you have these evidence-based practices related to what interventions to work best with that type of risk. The best data on offenders under supervision is found in the probation pretrial services automated case tracking system known as P.A.C.T.S. P.C.R.A. was built by tapping into the system to assess information on each individual. There are a lot of risk assessment tools available, but none of them have comparable offender data like P.C.R.A. does. The instrument itself is based on data that spans about five—five years that includes data on 170,000 offenders It makes common sense in addition to having support from the actuarial risk assessment tool research that if a probation officer can spend his or her time on the offender who really needs the help that's the best use of that of their time. The very presence of having a risk assessment tool is often better than no tool at all if it's used appropriately. Research shows that data-driven instruments provide a more accurate, consistent and value-neutral method for making decisions rather than relying solely on a probation officers experience and intuition. So if you've got say a probation officer or any decision-maker who's looking at a client, who's looking at an individual, and trying to make an assessment about what that person's needs are, what that person's likelihood of recidivism might be. Being able to make that decision using actual evidence using studies that have been peer reviewed using empirical facts will often lead to a stronger more reliable and more consistent result than using stereotypes or biases or even just gut instincts as good as those gut instincts might be. The officer's judgment is good make no mistake about that, but the Risk Assessment Tool based upon all these empirical studies helps the officer approach the individual in a larger context where there is more predictability. That being said though the use of actuarial risk assessment tools doesn't throw out the experience in the use of sort of the professional discretion of probation officers. We need both, research is unequivocal that when professional judgment is guided and informed by the use of a validated risk assessment tool we get the best results. Social science research shows that effective interventions in community corrections adhere to three principles: risk, meet, and responsivity. P.C.R.A. incorporates each of these principles. The risk principle is simply that the higher the risk of recidivism or reoffending, the greater, or more, resources go towards intensive supervision. The opposite that then is that the lower risk of recidivism, the less need for supervision. And they might even be harmed by intense supervision in that it takes them out of their normal support network and the things that make them a low-risk offender. The needs principle basically says that we should expand our efforts on those characteristics of offenders which are associated with the likelihood of criminality and not be intervening to try to address characteristics of offenders which even if we are successful in addressing will not reduce the likelihood of criminality. Some of the top criminogenic needs are pro-criminal attitudes, pro-criminal associates, and substance abuse as well as deficits in educational, vocational, and employment skills. According to the responsivity principle, Intervention should involve treatment most capable of changing known predictors of recidivism. So this is called a cognitive model skin and I'm going to walk you through the basics on the illustration here, okay? Research shows that cognitive behavioral strategies are the most effective way to influence change. The primary intervention to address criminal thinking, anti-social values, attitudes, and beliefs is through cognitive behavioral type interventions. Cognitive behavioral principles can be incorporated into whatever kinds of treatment are going on. Federal probation officials have used risk assessment tools for decades, but P.C.R.A. is most consistent with modern risk assessment tools. P.C.R.A. is dynamic and informs case planning. The probation officer can check in periodically and look at whether the targeted interventions that they're using are actually being effective and so an offender's risk can go up over time or it can decrease over time. By increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of post-conviction supervision the P.C.R.A. has potential benefits for all parties in the justice system To help an offender address those things about his or her own attitudes, values, beliefs, behaviors that get them into trouble, so from a defense perspective evidence-based practice is a path to success for their client. It's a management tool that will help individual probation offices decide how best to allocate their time and to do that in ways that have been proven by empirical evidence that are demonstrably more reliable than the ways that they've been allocating their time. We do have limited resources, so a good, actuarial risk assessment tool that helps measure recidivism, and more importantly, helps us figure out the best way to address rates of recidivism and reoffending ultimately does help save resources for us. Meaning that we're spending less time in the courts for people that are on violation or they're supervised release terms. If a risk needs assessment tool can help the probation office better predict the level of risk that an offender poses so that they can appropriately target their supervision that's going to reduce recidivism and that's going to advance our goal of protecting the public. To ensure correct application of P.C.R.A. only probation officers who successfully complete training and pass a certification test can access P.C.R.A. This is consistent with the practice of other well known risk assessment instruments such as the level of service inventory. The research has shown that risk assessment tools aided by professional judgment improves estimates of recidivism risk. However, it's important to remember that it is impossible to predict with certainty what will happen in each individual case. These instruments are not individualized; they're not made to determine exactly what a particular individual is going to do in the future The intent of risk assessment tools like P.C.R.A. is not to replace probation officer decision making rather they are designed to help officers make more informed decisions. This tool has real potential to change the culture of the way that we consider supervision and to change the culture of probation offices as well as courts when they think about risk assessment, and they think about individuals and to move from a direction where the assumption is that most ex-offenders are high risk to a much more clear understanding of what percentage is high risk and what percentage is moderate risk on what percentage is low risk and to move the culture in a way in which what officers are trying to do is assess the needs that individuals have and meet those needs. In a growing number of districts nationwide, P.C.R.A. is already proving to be a successful tool in overcoming the long term challenges of the post-conviction population.
