Case Assessment Mon 810159001500 Individual Project 4 Length

Case Assessmentmon 810159001500individual Project 4length9001500

Research assessment tools to help you determine how you will weed out high-risk offenders.

Present 2 types of clients that will be accepted by the home. State how you plan to screen potential clients of your facility to ensure that the correct types of clients are chosen. State what type of assessment the group home will expect the potential resident to complete and at least 2 reasons why this is important. This assignment is in the form of a report. You should cite sources using APA format, and include a reference section at the end of your submission.

Paper For Above instruction

The effective screening of potential residents in juvenile correctional facilities is crucial for ensuring safety, rehabilitation, and appropriate placement. Particularly in low- and medium-risk settings, the challenge lies in accurately assessing the risk levels of offenders and selecting suitable candidates. This paper explores assessment tools to distinguish high-risk offenders from those appropriate for placements. It also identifies two types of clients suitable for such a facility, delineates screening procedures, and discusses appropriate assessment methods and their importance.

Assessment Tools for Screening High-Risk Offenders

Assessing offenders for placement involves using standardized risk assessment instruments. Two prominent tools are the Static-99 and the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI). The Static-99 is widely used in evaluating sexual offenders’ risk levels by analyzing static risk factors such as criminal history and age at first offense (Hanson & Thornton, 2000). Its primary advantage lies in its empirical foundation and predictability concerning sexual offender recidivism. The YLS/CMI, designed for juvenile offenders, evaluates criminogenic needs, competencies, and risk factors across various domains like family, school, peers, and substance abuse (Hoge et al., 2012). Using both tools can help practitioners develop a comprehensive risk profile and behavioral assessment, facilitating the selection of appropriate residents while filtering out high-risk individuals.

Types of Clients Accepted

Given the facility's guidelines, the home will accept low- to medium-risk juvenile offenders who demonstrate rehabilitative potential and conform to the safety parameters of the environment. For example, one accepted client type could be juveniles with minor delinquent behaviors, such as petty theft or vandalism, who have shown a willingness to change and adhere to rules. A second client type may include juveniles involved in drug offenses but without a history of violence or severe criminal behavior. These clients are suitable due to their lower risk profiles and potential for positive community reintegration, provided they are adequately assessed and monitored.

Screening Procedures

Screening potential residents involves a multi-phase process. Initially, a comprehensive review of the applicant’s criminal record, behavioral history, and referral documentation is conducted. Next, structured interviews with the juvenile, family members, and prior supervisors help gauge behavioral patterns and motivation for change. Importantly, psychological assessments should be administered to evaluate mental health and underlying issues that might affect community living. For example, tools such as the Youth Self-Report (YSR) can provide insights into emotional and behavioral problems (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001). Additionally, background checks and collateral contacts ensure that the information provided is accurate.

Type of Assessment and Its Importance

The group home will expect residents to complete a standardized behavioral and psychological assessment, such as the YLS/CMI or the Suicide Risk Screening Tool. Conducting these assessments is vital for several reasons. First, they identify criminogenic needs and behavioral risks, guiding tailored intervention plans (Van Voorhis et al., 2013). Second, assessments inform staff about mental health issues, facilitating safety measures and appropriate support. For instance, detecting suicidal ideation or emotional instability allows proactive intervention, reducing risk for the resident and staff.

In conclusion, the success of juvenile placement hinges on utilizing validated assessment tools like the Static-99 and YLS/CMI to distinguish between low- and high-risk offenders. Candidates suited for the home are those demonstrating rehabilitative potential with manageable risks. Effective screening, including comprehensive behavioral assessments and background checks, ensures that only appropriate residents are admitted, promoting a safe and constructive environment. Proper assessment not only aligns with safety protocols but also enhances the effectiveness of rehabilitative efforts, fostering better outcomes for at-risk youth.

References

• Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA school-age forms & profiles. University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
• Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (2000). Improving risk assessments for sex offenders: A comparison of three actuarial scales. Law and Human Behavior, 24(5), 469–486.
• Hoge, R. D., Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2012). The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI): Validity and utility. In L. E. Hirschi & R. F. Vito (Eds.), Juvenile justice: An evaluation of programs (pp. 43–66).
• Van Voorhis, P., Burrell, W. D., & Mailloux, D. (2013). Assessment of criminal risk: A manual for practitioners. Routledge.
• Hanson, R., & Milligan, G. (2007). Static-99 Update: User’s guide for the electronic version. Victims’ Services, Alberta.
• Lipsey, M. W., & Cullen, F. T. (2007). The effectiveness of juvenile justice programs: A meta-analytic review. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3(1), 297-320.
• Poulin, J. A., & Buvens, S. (2008). Juvenile assessment tools and their applications: A review. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 8(4), 255–272.
• Schwalbe, C. S., Gearing, R. E., MacKenzie, M. J., et al. (2012). Wraparound suitability in youth mental health: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(7), 1114-1123.
• Ward, T., & Stewart, L. (2003). The clinical assessment of dangerousness in offenders. Legal and Criminal Psychology, 8(2), 229–245.
• Wong, S. C. P., & Yuen, P. Y. (2017). Juvenile assessment and intervention: Critical practices to improve youth outcomes. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 11(1), 1-10.