A Second Proof of Concept Investigation of Strengths Using the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth Tool With Justice-Involved Youth: Item Level Risk-Based Effects and Interactions.

Despite efforts to incorporate protective factors or 'strengths' in applied risk assessments for criminal reoffending, there has been limited progress towards a consensus regarding what is meant by such terms, what effects predictors can exert, or how to describe such effects. This proof of concept study was undertaken to address those issues. A structured professional judgment tool was used to create lower and higher historical/static risk groups with a sample of 273 justice-involved male youth with sexual offenses followed over a fixed 3-year period.

A proof of concept study of promotive, mixed, and risk effects using the SAVRY assessment tool items with youth with sexual offenses.

There is currently a lack of consensus about the nature of strengths in forensic assessments. With 273 justice-involved male youth and a fixed 3-year follow-up, this study adopted the approach of Farrington and colleagues to investigating the nature of associations between trichotomized variables, representing risks and strengths, and outcomes using pairs of odds ratios (s) and percentage point changes from base rates. Items from the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), a structured professional judgment tool used to assess risk and protective factors in justice-involved youth, were employed for this purpose.

Promotive, Mixed, and Risk Effects of Individual Items Comprising the SAPROF Assessment Tool With Justice-Involved Youth.

The Structured Assessment of PROtective Factors for violence risk (SAPROF) is a widely used structured professional judgment (SPJ) tool. Its indices have predictive validity regarding desistance from future violence in adult correctional/forensic psychiatric populations. Although not intended for applied use with youth, SAPROF items lend themselves to an investigation of whether their operationalizations capture only strengths or also risks.

Protective factors in the prediction of criminal outcomes for youth with sexual offenses using tools developed for adults and adolescents: Tests of direct effects and moderation of risk.

Interest in protective factors in risk assessment work with adjudicated populations is increasing and evidence suggests that protective factors in structured professional judgment (SPJ) tools predict the absence of one or more types of recidivism with some evidence also of incremental validity in recidivism-desistance prediction models with risk scales. But, there is little evidence of interactions, demonstrated using formal tests of moderation, between scores on risk- and protective factor-focused applied assessment tools, despite the documentation of interactive protective effects with nonadjudicated populations. In this study, with 273 justice-involved male youth and a fixed 3-year follow-up, direct effects of medium size were found for sexual recidivism, violent (including sexual) recidivism, and any new offense with totals for tools developed for adult offending populations (modified versions of the actuarial risk-focused Static-99 and the SPJ protective factor-focused Structured Assessment of PROtective Factor [SAPROF]) and tools developed for adolescent offending populations (the actuarial risk-focused Juvenile Sexual Offense Recidivism Risk Assessment Tool-II [JSORRAT-II] and the SPJ protective factor-focused DASH-13).