Date of Submission

5-2024

Document Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science in Criminal Justice

Department

Criminal Justice

Advisor

David Myers, Ph.D.

Committee Member

Maria Tcherni-Buzzeo, Ph.D.

Committee Member

John DeCarlo, Ph.D.

Keywords

Federal Risk Assessment, Risk Factors, Risk-Needs-Responsivity, PCRA, RPI, Recidivism

LCSH

Prisoners--Deinstitutionalization, Recidivism

Abstract

The use of risk assessment instruments has become an increasingly pertinent issue in the realm of reentry. Though sometimes controversial, risk assessment tools provide local, state, and federal governments with actuarial techniques focused on providing unbiased and accurate risk assessments for individuals returning to the community. The present study was focused on the further evaluation of two risk assessment instruments utilized by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC)—the Post-Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA) and the Risk Prediction Index (RPI). A mixed-methods approach was taken in order to investigate the associations between these tools, general risk factors, criminogenic outcomes, and more riskspecific populations. Utilizing data from a study previously focused on examining a federal reentry program, the results showcased several notable findings. This included the discovery of statistically valid associations between the PCRA and all diverse criminogenic outcomes examined. Among the various risk factors, housing instability stood out due to its association with outcomes, but not with risk assessment instruments. This finding suggests that housing instability may not be adequately integrated within the PCRA or RPI. Furthermore, based on qualitative interviews, federal probation officers possessed a noticeable degree of trust in the PCRA, but they also still believed there was potential for improvement. There were less favorable views of the RPI. Overall, the results of this study suggest the PCRA is a useful tool for federal reentry programming. Despite the progress made in this area of study, there remains ample room for continuing the validation process and expanding the comprehension of complex assessment, supervision, and treatment processes.

Share

COinS