Applying the Ohio Risk Assessment to Misdemeanants

Purpose of Risk Assessment

• To provide a consistent means to assess offenders

• To provide a valid measure of risk• To provide a measure of risk that can be

used in decision making

Treatment Effects for Low Risk Offenders

-36

-32

-29 -29

-21 -21 -21 -21

-16-15

-11 -11 -11

-7 -7-6

-5-4 -4 -4

-2 -2 -2-1

01 1 1

23 3

4 45

6

89

0

10

-10

-20

-30

-40

Pro

babi

lity

o f R

e in c

a rc e

r ati o

n

Treatment Effects for High Risk Offenders

-34

-18 -17-15 -14

-10-8

-6 -5

-2 -2

2 3 3 35

7 8 8 810 10

12 12 12 13 1315

1921 22

24 25 2527

3032 33 34

0

10

20

30

40

-10

-20

-30

-40

P ro b

a bil i

ty o

f R

e inc

arce

ratio

n

We have seen the Risk Principle with Females

Recidivism Rates by Risk Levels for Females: New Arrest (Felony or Misd).

Ohio ½ and CBCF House Study all treatment cases. N=1,340

Low Low/Moderate Moderate High 0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Experimental 0.19 0.28 0.39 0.52

Comparison 0.06 0.16 0.38 0.66

Recidivism Rates

We have seen the Risk Principle with Sex Offenders

Recidivism Rates by Risk Levels for Sex Offenders: New Arrest (Felony or Misd).

Ohio ½ and CBCF House Study: Successful terminations only. N=390

Low Low/Moderate Moderate High 0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Experimental 0.27 0.33 0.42 0.49

Comparison 0.15 0.29 0.47 0.66

Recidivism Rates

ORAS Overview

• Pre-trial Tool• Community Supervision Tool

– Community Supervision Screening Tool• Prison Intake Tool

– Prison Intake Screening Tool• Supplemental Reentry Tool• Reentry Tool

CASE STUDY

Who Is More Likely to Reoffend?

• 1st time DUI• Drinking at a bar with friends• Crossed the double yellow line• .12 BA• Employed• Has a driver’s license• States “The cop was just doing

their job”• “It is not ok to drink and drive”• Family that supports sober

lifestyle• Friends got a cab

• 1st time DUI• Drinking at a bar with friends• Crossed the double yellow line• .12 BA• Unemployed• Driving w/o a license• States “The cop was out to get me”• Everyone gets one DUI• Family who engages in alcohol use

on a regular basis• Friends played “who is the most

sober”

11

Multiple DUIs/Domestic Violence

Criminal History Family Education and Employment Neighborhoods Substance Abuse Peers Antisocial Attitudes

What Are the Barriers?

• Time

• High Demand

• Single Need Defendants/Offenders

Methods

• Identified individuals in the ORAS database that were assessed through Municipal Court

• Completed the full ORAS-CST• Minimum of 11 month follow-up

Recidivism • The Ohio Law Enforcement Gateway (OhLEG)

was used to examine recidivism for each offender in the sample– Minor traffic violations (e.g., speeding) were excluded

• Recidivism was measured as arrest for a new crime– Later measures (e.g., convictions) need a longer follow-

up period than 11 months– Arrests in the community allow CST to identify

criminogenic needs that are likely to result in danger to the community

Participating Municipal Courts

Court N (%)

Ashtabula Municipal Court 15 (.78)

Athens Co Municipal Court 7 (.37)

Bellefontaine Municipal Court 22 (1.1)

Bryan Municipal Court 7 (.37)

Canton Municipal Court 303 (15.8)

Champaign Co Municipal Court 40 (2.1)

Circleville Municipal Court 127 (6.6)

Clark Co Municipal Court 36 (1.9)

Clermont Co Municipal Court 42 (2.2)

Clinton Co Municipal Court 95 (5.0)

Court N (%)

Fairfield Municipal Court 74 (3.9)

Franklin Co Municipal Court 57 (3.0)

Fremont Municipal Court 92 (4.8)

Gallipolis Municipal Court 135 (7.1)

Greene Co Municipal Court 40 (2.1)

Licking Co Municipal Court 105 (5.5)

Mansfield Municipal Court 20 (1.0)

Marietta Municipal Court 53 (2.8)

Marion Municipal Court 145 (7.6)

Medina Municipal Court 16 (.84)

Participating Municipal Courts – ContinuedCourt N (%)

Mentor Municipal Court 1 (.05)

Monroe Municipal Court 16 (.84)

Morgan Co Municipal Court 64 (3.3)

Muskingum Co Municipal Court 2 (.01)

Newton Falls Municipal Court 9 (.47)

Norwalk Municipal Court 51 (2.7)

Painesville Municipal Court 5 (.26)

Sidney Municipal Court 2 (.01)

Steubenville Municipal Court 6 (.31)

Toledo Municipal Court 34 (1.8)

Washington CH Municipal Court 213 (11.1)

Willoughby Municipal Court 70 (3.7)

Zanesville Municipal Court 10 (.52)

Counties Included in ORAS-MAT Validation*County N (%)

Ashtabula 27 (1.6)

Champaign 30 (1.7)

Clark 33 (1.9)

Clermont 32 (1.9)

Clinton 76 (4.4)

Fairfield 57 (3.3)

Fayette 157 (9.1)

Franklin 78 (4.5)

Gallia 106 (6.2)

Greene 29 (1.7)

Huron 40 (2.3)

County N (%)

Lake 55 (3.2)

Licking 67 (3.9)

Logan 23 (1.3)

Lucas 31 (1.8)

Marion 118 (6.9)

Morgan 56 (3.3)

Out of State 23 (1.3)

Pickaway 123 (7.1)

Sandusky 81 (4.7)

Stark 260 (15.1)

Washington 43 (2.5)

*Counties contributing < 20 cases: Adams, Allen, Athens, Belmont, Brown, Carroll, Crawford, Cuyahoga, Erie, Geauga, Hamilton, Henry, Highland, Hocking, Jackson, Jefferson, Knox, Lawrence, Madison, Medina, Meigs, Monroe, Montgomery, Morrow, Muskingum, Noble, Ottawa, Perry, Pike, Portage, Richland, Ross, Seneca, Shelby, Summit, Trumbull, Tuscarawas, Union, Wayne, Williams, Wyandot

Courts were also Asked the Following Follow-Up Questions:

• What was the offender charged with (i.e., what brought the offender to your court)?

• Was the offender’s charge related to any of the following offenses:– DUI, Domestic Violence, Violence, Substance

Abuse / Drugs

• If offender’s charge was related to substance use / drugs, identify type of drug:– Cocaine, Marijuana, Heroin, Prescription, Other

(specify)

* Some variables do not total 1,722 due to missing data

* Some variables do not total 1,722 due to missing data

Current Community Supervision Assessment (CST) Instrument

• 35 items across 7 domains• Takes 45 minutes to complete (on average)• Provides overall level of risk to reoffend• Level of risk by domain (criminogenic needs)• Developed on a range of offenders including

misdemeanor and felony offenders

Current ORAS-CST Domains

1. Criminal History (6 items)

2. Education, Employment, and Finances (6 items)

3. Family and Social Support (5 items)

4. Neighborhood Problems (2 items)

5. Substance Use (5 items)

6. Peer Associations (4 items)

7. Criminal Attitudes and Behavioral Problems (7 items)

Validating the CST for Misdemeanor Offenders Only

• Examined the validity of full CST on a misdemeanor only population

• Modified cutoffs to best fit population

Overall CSTMisdemeanor Offenders Only

LOW MOD HIGH VERY HIGH0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

AUC = .613; r2 = .194

ORAS-CST Intake Assessment

ORAS-CST Re-assessmentEducation and Employment

ORAS-CST Re-assessmentPeer Association

ORAS-CST Re-assessmentSubstance Abuse

THE OHIO RISK ASSESSMENT SYSTEM-MISDEMEANANTS

Criminal History

Low Moderate/High0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

EDUCATION

Education/Employment/Finance

Low Mod High0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

FAMILY AND SOCIAL SUPPORT

Family and Social Support

Low Mod High0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

NEIGHBORHOOD

Neighborhood

No crime Some Crime A lot of Crime0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

SUBSTANCE ABUSE

Substance Abuse

Low Mod High0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

PEERS

Peers

Low Mod High0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

ATTITUDES, VALUES, AND BELIEFS

Attitudes, Values, and Beliefs

Low Mod/High0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

OVERALL RISK LEVEL

Overall Risk Levels

Low Mod High Very High0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Misdemeanor Assessment Tool

• New tool has 11 items• Strongest predictors from CST • Primary Factors:

– Criminal History– Employment and Education– Drug use– Criminal Peers– Criminal Attitudes

• Approximately 15 minutes

ORAS-MAT• Most Serious Arrest Under Age 18

– 0 = None– 1 = Yes, Misdemeanor– 2 = Yes, Felony

• Number of Prior Adult Felony Convictions– 0 = None– 1 = One or Two– 2 = Three or More

• Highest Education– 0 = High School Graduate or Higher– 1 = Less than High School or GED

• Ever Suspended or Expelled From School– 0 = No– 1 = Yes

• Currently Employed– 0 = Yes, Full-time, Disabled, or Retired– 1 = Not Employed, or Employed Part-

Time

• Better Use of Time– 0 = No, Most Time Structured– 1 = Yes, Lots of Free Time

• Drug Use Caused Problems– 0 = None– 1 = Past– 2 = Current

• Drug Use Caused Problems with Employment– 0 = No– 1 = Yes

ORAS-MAT• Criminal Friends

– 0 = None– 1 = Some– 2 = Majority

• Contact with Past Criminal Peers– 0 = No Contact with Criminal Peers– 1 = At Risk of Contacting Criminal Peers– 2 = Contact or Actively Seeks Out Criminal Peers

• Criminal Attitudes – 0 = No/Limited Criminal Attitudes– 1 = Some Criminal Attitudes – 2 = Significant Criminal Attitudes

Misdemeanor Tool

LOW (0 to 2) MOD (3 to 7) HIGH (8 to 17)0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

AUC = .620; r2 = .208

ORAS-MAT: Males

LOW (0 to 2) MOD (3 to 7) HIGH (8 to 17)0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

AUC =.628; r2 = .226

ORAS-MAT: Females

LOW (0 to 3) MOD (4 to 9) HIGH (10 to 17)0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

AUC = .600; r2 = .181

ORAS MAT for DUI Drivers

LOW (0 to 2) MOD (3 to 7) HIGH (8 to 17)0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

AUC = .597Recidivism rate: Any re-arrest

ORAS MAT for DV Offenders

LOW (0 to 2) MOD/HIGH (3+)0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

AUC = .598Re-Arrest for any reason

Misdemeanor Screening Tool

• 5 items– Criminal History (2 items)– Education– Drug Use– Criminal Attitudes

• Provides low and mod/high classification• 7% False Negative rate

Misdemeanor Screening Tool Items

• Most Serious Arrest Under Age 18– 0 = None– 1 = Yes, Misdemeanor– 2 = Yes, Felony

• Number of Prior Adult Felony Convictions– 0 = None– 1 = One or Two– 2 = Three or More

• Currently Employed– 0 = Yes, Full-time,

Disabled, or Retired– 1 = Not Employed, or

Employed Part-Time

• Drug Use Caused Problems– 0 = None– 1 = Past– 2 = Current

• Criminal Attitudes – 0 = No/Limited Criminal

Attitudes– 1 = Some Criminal Attitudes – 2 = Significant Criminal

Attitudes

Misdemeanor Screening Tool

LOW (0 to 1) MOD/HIGH (2 to 9)0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

AUC = .631; r2 = .210

Accuracy of Screener

SCREENER

Low Moderate/High

MISDEMEANOR TOOL

Low 93.1% 6.9%

Moderate 32.3% 67.8%

High 0 100%

EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF HEROIN AND OTHER DRUGS

Additional Data Collected

• Clermont• Champaign• Clark• Fairfield• Gallipolis• Mansfield

• Marietta• Marion• Morgan• Norwalk• Toledo

Supplemental Data

• Additional data on 568 offenders• Percentage of Offenders by Drug Type

– Cocaine 7%– Heroin/Rx Pills 33%– Marijuana 5%– Alcohol/Other 25%– None 31%

Percent of Heroin/Prescription Users by Risk Level

LOW (0 to 2) MOD (3 to 7) HIGH (8 to 17)0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Re-Arrest Rates by Risk Level for Heroin/Prescription Users

LOW (0 to 2) MOD/HIGH (3+)0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

ORAS-MAT + Heroin/Rx Abuse for Males

LOW (0 TO 2) MOD (3 TO 7) HIGH (8+0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

R2 = .230; AUC = .620

ORAS-MAT + Heroin/Rx Abuse for Females

LOW (0 TO 3) MOD (4 TO 8) HIGH (9+)0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

R2 = .185; AUC = .600

Next Steps

• Select tools to be utilized– MAT-Screener– MAT– CST

• Develop process for when/who completes assessment• Train Staff• Implement continuum of services based on

assessment results• Monitor/Quality Improvement