Assessing Risk in Adolescent Offenders: A Comparison of Risk Profiles versus Summed Risk Factors

Research supports interventions for high-risk juvenile offenders to reduce recidivism. Methods for assessing delinquent risk vary, however. Aggregate risk scores (i.e. number of risk factors) and specific risk profiles (i.e. types of risk factors) are both empirically supported techniques. This study compared aggregate scores versus profiles for predicting measures of criminal severity among detained adolescents (n=292). Twenty-four risk factors from the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) were summed to calculate aggregate scores. Using latent class analysis (LCA), profiles were identified based on scores from the following theoretically important SAVRY risk factors: Risk Taking/Impulsivity, Anger Management Problems, Low Empathy/Remorse (CU traits), and Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Difficulties. LCA identified one low-risk profile, plus two high-risk profiles differentiated by levels of CU traits. Aggregate scores significantly predicted four out of six criminal severity indicators, while profiles failed to predict any measures. Results support aggregate scores over profiles for assessing delinquent severity. Chronic criminal involvement, beginning with childhood and adolescent delinquency, is a costly problem in contemporary society. Over 10 years ago, an economist calculated that every career criminal costs the United States legal system approximately $40,000 per year (Cohen, 1998). Projected rates of delinquent recidivism suggest that more than half of juvenile offenders released in a given period will reoffend within 12 months of leaving custody (http://www.ojjdp.gov/). Taken together, these figures imply a significant ongoing social and financial burden, beginning with delinquency in childhood and culminating in a persistent criminal lifestyle. To counterbalance such bleak statistics, there is a growing body of evidence indicating that specifically targeted treatment programs can help reduce recidivism in delinquent populations. For instance, several studies involving multi-component and individualized treatment have generated positive results, including significantly reduced participation in substance abuse treatment is associated with significantly lower rates of findings all affirm the value of initiating targeted treatments to disrupt delinquent involvement in youth, before a criminal lifestyle has been established. 2 In order to implement these specialized treatments, however, the offenders most at risk for recidivism and, as a result, most in need of intervention, must first be identified. Further, these treatments typically are tailored to the individual needs of the juvenile offender, which necessitates an accurate assessment of these individual needs. By predicting overall risk and specific patterns of risk, juvenile delinquents can be selected and appropriately placed for early intervention efforts to reduce rates of repeat offending. Thus, it is important to establish …