An Evaluation of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory in an Australian Community Corrections EnvironmentFootnote

1. This paper was based on a conference presentation, titled “Prediction of recidivism in a Tasmanian population: Evaluation of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory’, which outlined the preliminary findings to this work. The presentation was given at the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychology, Psychiatry and Law (ANZAPPL) 32nd Annual Congress, November 2012, Melbourne.

References

• Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (1995). The Level of Service Inventory – Revised. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New Providence, NJ: Anderson.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R. D. (1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 19–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2004). The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI): User's manual. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 7–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, D. A., Guzzo, L., Raynor, P., Rowe, R. C., Rettinger, L. J., Brews, A., Wormith, J. S. (2011). Are the major risk/need factors predictive of both female and male reoffending?: A test with the eight domains of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56, 113–133.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2009). National Offence Index. Melbourne, Victoria: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Institute of Criminology. (2012). Australian crime: Facts and figures. Canberra, ACT: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Institute of Criminology. (2013). Australian crime: Facts and figures 2012. Canberra, ACT: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, K. S., Yeomans, M., & Boer, D. P. (2005). Comparative validity analysis of multiple measures of violence risk in a sample of criminal offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 479–510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Girard, L., & Wormith, J. S. (2004). The predictive validity of the Level of Service Inventory – Ontario Revision on general and violent recidivism among various offender groups. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 150–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glazebrook, S. (2010). Risky business: predicting recidivism. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 17, 88–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, V., & Davis, B. (2011). Crime families: gender and the intergenerational transfer of criminal tendencies. In Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice (pp. 1–6). Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Criminology.
   Google Scholar
• Guay, J. (2012). Predicting recidivism with street gang members. Montreal: School of Criminology, University of Montreal.
   Google Scholar
• Hannah-Moffat, K. (2005). Criminogenic needs and the transformative risk subject. Punishment and Society, 7, 29–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannah-Moffat, K. (2006). Pandora's box: risk/need and gender-responsive corrections. Criminology and Public Policy, 5, 183–192.
   Google Scholar
• Hannah-Moffat, K. (2009). Gridlock or mutability: reconsidering “gender” and risk assessment. Criminology and Public Policy, 8, 209–219.
   Google Scholar
• Hannah-Moffat, K., & Maurutto, P. (2010). Re-contextualizing pre-sentence reports: risk and race. Punishment and Society, 12, 262–286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, C. (2010). The Level of Service Inventory–Revised: An evaluation and its utility for Australian offenders. University of Wollongong, Wollongong.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, C., Caputi, P., & Byrne, M. K. (2009). The Level of Service Inventory–Revised (LSI‑R): A useful risk assessment measure for Australian offenders? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 728–740.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinson, R. (1974). What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest, 35, 22–54.
   Google Scholar
• Maurutto, P., & Hannah-Moffat, K. (2007). Understanding risk in the context of the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 49, 465–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayhew, P. (2003). Counting the costs of crime in Australia. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 247.
   Google Scholar
• McCoy, L. A., & Miller, H. A. (2013). Comparing gender across risk and recidivism in nonviolent offenders. Women & Criminal Justice, 23, 143–162.
   Google Scholar
• Meehl, P. E. (1954). Clinical vs. statistical prediction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Metz, C. E. (2006). Receiver operating characteristic analysis: a tool for the quantitative evaluation of observer performance and imaging systems. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 3, 413–422.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mihailides, S., Jude, B., & Bossche, E. v. d. (2005). The LSI‑R in an Australian setting: implications for risk/needs decision-making in forensic contexts. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 12, 207–217.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, B. (Ed.). (2000) The Australian pocket Oxford dictionary (4th ed.). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ogloff, J. R. P., & Davis, M. R. (2004). Advances in offender assessment and rehabilitation: contributions of the risk–needs–responsivity approach. Psychology, Crime and Law, 10, 229–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, S. H., Goo, J. M., & Jo, C. H. (2004). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: practical review for radiologists. Korean Journal of Radiology, 5, 11–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Payne, J. (2008). Recidivism in Australia: Findings and future research. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Criminology.
   Google Scholar
• Poledna, S., Andreica, C. L., & Gusan, A. (2011). Social space of criminal vulnerability. A risk factors’ perspective. Revista de Asistenta Sociala, 163–174.
   Google Scholar
• Rettinger, L. J., & Andrews, D. A. (2010). General risk and need, gender specificity, and the recidivism of female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37, 29–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richards, K. (2011). Technical and background paper: Measuring juvenile recidivism in Australia. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Criminology.
   Google Scholar
• Ringland, C. (2011a). Improving the efficiency and effeciveness of the risk/needs assessment process for community-based offenders. Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, 154, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Ringland, C. (2011b). The predictive value of the LSI‑R in models of reoffending for offenders given non-custodial penalties. Paper presented at the The Australian & New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law (ANZAPPL New Zealand) and The Royal Australian & New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (Faculty of Forensic Psychiatry) Joint Conference: Crime and Punishment: The Rising Punitiveness.
   Google Scholar
• Rollings, K. (2008). Counting the costs of crime in Australia: A 2005 update. Canberra, ACT: Australian Institute of Criminology.
   Google Scholar
• Storey, J. E., Gibas, A. L., Reeves, K. A., & Hart, S. D. (2011). Evaluation of a violence risk (threat) assessment training program for police and other criminal justice professionals. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 554–564.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watkins, I. (2011, January). The utility of Level of Service Inventory – Revised (LSI‑R) assessments within NSW correctional environments. Research Bulletin (Corrective Services NSW), 29, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Wormith, J. S., Olver, M. E., Stevenson, H. E., & Girard, L. (2007). The long-term prediction of offender recidivism using diagnostic, personality, and risk/need approaches to offender assessment. Psychological Services, 4, 287–305.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, M., Wong, S. C. P., & Coid, J. (2010). The efficacy of violence prediction: a meta-analytic comparison of nine risk assessment tools. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 740–767.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar