Risk and Needs Assessments

No statewide mandate exists for a risk/needs assessment instrument to be used in juvenile probation, although some jurisdictions do use one.

The Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) is used in probation services statewide to assist in making intake, probation, and after-care/reentry decisions. Probation officers perform the YLS/CMI for youth referred to the formal court process, those who have been placed on informal probation, and those who have been referred to the Division repeatedly within a two-year timeframe.

Intake screens detention admissions. Most counties use a detention-screening tool, but it is not a uniform, statewide instrument.

In an attempt to provide some statewide uniformity and structure to decision-making for disposition, the Arkansas Administrative Office of the Courts developed a risk assessment instrument to guide recommendations for disposition presented with the predisposition study.

County probation departments vary in their use of risk/needs assessments or standardized assessment tools in making predisposition recommendations.

Effective June 2006, every youth committed to the Division is assessed for actuarial risk using the Colorado Juvenile Risk Assessment Instrument (CJRA), a fourth generation risk instrument development by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP).

The Court Support Services Division (CSSD) has implemented risk/needs assessment tools and mental health screening tools, including the Juvenile Assessment Generic (JAG) and the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument - Second Version (MAYSI-2).

Assessments are utilized in Delaware  in both  diversion and probation decisions, however no data was available on  the type  of assessments used or how uniformly they are applied.

By statute, DJJ must apply a standardized Florida Detention Risk Assessment Instrument (DJJ analyzes data from Florida’s standardized risk screening system and produces Quality Assurance and Program Reports).

The Department of Juvenile Justice assesses all youth committed to it using the Comprehensive Risk/Needs Assessment (CRN). The CRN is the assessment instrument used to classify youth and to determine risk, placement, and level of service.

There is no state mandated risk/needs assessment instrument used to determine levels of probation supervision. The Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory is used to identify juveniles' service needs and to measure their risk of recidivism when considering placement options.

Some counties utilize the Idaho Juvenile Risk Assessment to assist them in making diversion and probation supervision decisions. The Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections makes placement decisions using a risk/needs assessment tool.

Most detention decisions are guided by the use of a standard screening instrument from the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts, but each county may modify the instrument to fit its needs. Probation departments in 21 counties have adopted the Youth Assessment Screening Instrument (YASI) to determine levels of probation supervision.

No state mandate exists for the use of risk/needs assessments at detention screening. Use of assessments varies.

The court determines the level of probation supervision and does not currently use a classification tool. The court does not use a risk/needs instrument to make placement decisions. No data was available on the use of assessments in aftercare decisions.

Currently, no state mandate exists to guide detention decisions with a screening tool. Where structured decision-making exists for detention, it is developed and applied at the local level.

A risk assessment evaluation tool (Detention Risk Assessment) determines detention placement. Risk factors assessed include whether the juvenile is a danger to himself or others; whether he or she is likely to appear at subsequent hearings; severity of offense; risk of re-offending; and factors such as substance abuse, school achievement/behavior, history of court involvement, and family and peer relationships. 

At present, a statewide detention screening tool is not applied to detention decisions. Depending on the requirements of the local court, juvenile probation departments may add structure to the process by requiring the use of risk scaling instruments and needs assessments.

The Division of Juvenile Services uses the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory to assess risk of recidivism for all youth under supervision and in placement. The results of the assessment are used to determine supervision level in the community and to develop case plans.

Aftercare for youth is provided at high, medium, and low supervision levels as determined by a risk/needs assessment entitled Risk Assessment for Detained/Committed Populations (2001).The Classification Assessment Tool for Adjudicated Youth helps guide classification, out-of-home placement decisions, and case management decisions about adjudicated juveniles (prior to disposition).

Initial detention decisions are currently not guided by a uniform risk-scaling tool as they are in some states, rather the statute guidelines are applied and the juvenile court determines whether secure detention is warranted at a detention hearing.  Probation officers develop supervision plans after completing a detailed offender profile that includes a risk/need classification.

Michigan has implemented Structured Decision Making (SDM), a risk and needs assessment process that uses research-based criteria to place juveniles committed or referred to placement. SDM is intended to drive increased development of community-based resources. No data is available as to the use of assessments in probation or aftercare decisions.

Risk/Needs Assessments are not state mandated, therefore the use of risk assessments at detention screening varies from county to county. For example, the Dakota Juvenile Detention Center in Dakota County uses the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (MAYSI).

Currently, a statewide screening tool is not used to make detention decisions.  No data was available on the use of assessments in probation or aftercare decisions.

The Missouri Juvenile Offender Classification System  includes an empirically validated risk assessment for estimating a youthful offender’s relative likelihood of future delinquency, a classification matrix, which links the level of risk with offense severity to recommend graduated sanctions, and a needs assessment for identifying the underlying psychosocial needs of youth.

Pursuant to Montana's Juvenile Delinquency Intervention Act, which requires Youth Courts to use a risk assessment instrument, Montana’s Youth Court Officers have recently started using Back On Track. Similarly, the Act requires the Department of Corrections to use a risk assessment instrument and it has selected the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory.

Probation Intake Officers assess the juvenile using a standardized juvenile detention screening instrument to determine if detention is necessary.  To determine probation services, the Youth Level of Service Inventory (YLSI) is used.

The Nevada Association of Juvenile Justice Administrators' standardized instrument guides staff in recommending appropriate levels of correctional care. Youth facilities use the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (MAYSI) and the Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers (POSIT) as part of the institutional treatment plan that is developed for each juvenile.

On a statewide basis since October 2008, New Hampshire has been utilizing a detention risk-screening instrument (Risk Assessment Instrument or RAI) to ensure that only appropriate youth are detained. JPPOs currently use standardized assessment tools to assist in making appropriate dispositional recommendations to the courts and for case planning. 

All committed adolescents are received by the JJC at the Juvenile Reception and Assessment Center, where they undergo a comprehensive physical, psychological, educational, vocational, and risk assessment.  No data is available as to the use of assessments in probation or detention decisions.

In compliance with the new Children's Code, the Detention Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI) is now in use statewide. Detention facilities also use the MAYSI-2 mental health screening instrument and the V-Disk mental health assessment tool.

The State of New York, outside of New York City, utilizes the Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument (YASI) which was customized and enhanced for New York State's use during juvenile intake, investigation, and supervision in juvenile delinquency and Persons in Need of Supervision (PINS) cases.  

Assessments are used for disposition, detention, and probation.  However, no specific information was available regarding the name or type of assessments used.  

Several system-wide planning and assessment tools are utilized by DJS to determine the appropriate placement and treatment for each youth.  No specific data is available on the name or type of assessments.

The Ohio Department of Youth Services uses an Ohio-specific juvenile justice assessment system, consisting of 5 assessment tools.

By statute, Oklahoma is required to have a court intake risk-assessment for children alleged or adjudicated to be delinquent and structured decision-making instruments utilizing risk-assessment, offense, needs-assessment, and other appropriate criteria for determining the imposition of appropriate specific sanctions for youth adjudicated delinquent or youth who have violated a condition of probation or parole.

Counties may use a screening tool to make detention decisions at both intake and preliminary hearings. An example of an intake screening tool used in Oregon is the Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI). The RAI determines uses a point system to assess youths’ risk of re-offending and/or failing to appear for a hearing. The RAI is also used in determining detention decisions at both intake and preliminary hearings.

The Juvenile Detention Centers Association of Pennsylvania (JDCAP) has implemented the MAYSI-2, a mental health screening inventory, as part of the standard intake procedure at secure detention facilities across the state. Most detention centers are participating in the Mental Health Assessment Project and are administering the MAYSI-2 screening instrument to all new admissions.

Rhode Island does not currently use a detention screening instrument and has not established statutory guidelines regarding who can be detained. Rhode Island uses a statewide risk assessment instrument to assist in determining probation supervision guidelines.  No data was available on the use of assessments during aftercare.

A Department of Juvenile Justice -developed risk/needs assessment  is used for placement decisions. No data was available on the use of assessments during detention, probation., or aftercare decisions. 

Court Services Officers use the Youth Level of Service Inventory to determine levels of juvenile probation supervision. DOC uses the Youth Level of Service Inventory when making release decisions, but release decisions may or may not be based on the risk level. No data is available on the use of assessments for detention decisions.

Intake officers performs a detention screening to determine if there is probable cause (legal sufficiency) that the youth committed the alleged offense and is subject to detention in accordance with statute. DCS does not have a risk assessment to determine levels of probation supervision.

No statewide risk/needs assessment instruments are used to screen youth for detention. Some counties may use assessments, but this may vary by county. Juveniles referred to  detention are offered the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument – 2nd Version (MAYSI-2).

Admissions to secure detention in Utah are based upon statute guidelines ( 78A-6-113) and administrative regulations, but currently are not managed with a detention risk assessment tool. .A full protective and risk assessment guides the probation plan, which outlines expectations of the minor and parents to successfully complete probation.

Vermont does not use a risk assessment instrument at screening for detention. Currently, Vermont has not yet mandated a risk/needs assessment instrument for determining levels of probation supervision, but such an assessment is in development . No data was available as to the use of assessments during aftercare.

According to statute, Court Services Unit personnel must use a uniform risk assessment instrument to guide detention decisions.  Virginia has a mandatory risk assessment instrument to classify juveniles according to their risk for probation purposes.  DJJ policies and procedures require a risk assessment instrument be completed and submitted when making release decisions.

The District of Columbia Superior Court Social Services Central Processing Unit administers a risk assessment tool on all youth who are arrested and transported to Court Social Services.

There is no statewide risk assessment used at detention screening. For those juveniles screened into detention, a Detention Risk Assessment Instrument (D-RAI) is administered. The D-RAI results are provided to the court at the first appearance hearing to recommend a detention placement option.

Juvenile probation currently employs a standardized statewide risk assessment instrument as a component of the Juvenile Justice Database maintained by the Statistical Analysis Center of the Division of Juvenile Services. The assessment is performed on those youth for whom the Court has ordered a written pre-disposition report.

Statute requires the Department of Corrections to provide the Wisconsin Juvenile Delinquency Classification System to all counties for risk assessment in detention decisions ( 938.549). However, counties may develop their own assessment tools.

There is no state-mandated risk assessment instrument that is used at detention screening. Juvenile probation officers in some counties use the Youth and Family Services Screening Instrument (a risk/needs assessment created in Wyoming) to prepare predisposition reports on juvenile delinquents and children in need of supervision (CHINS) who are supervised by the Department of Family Services.