JCP Risk
Reassessment Local and Technical
Decision Guidelines
August, 2006
The JCP Risk
Reassessment has been integrated into the JCP Risk Assessment 2006. l (the JCP
Reassessment 1.0 was a separate instrument).
Like the original reassessment (Version 1.0), the JCP 2006.1 risk reassessment
sections take into account a youth’s response to supervision, sanctions, and
treatment. A full risk reassessment
requires an update of the initial assessment, plus completion of Sections 14
through 22. The risk reassessment should
generally be built and based on a previous JCP assessment. However, if your agency has been doing
regular Interim Reviews, you can base the risk reassessment off of the Interim
Review[1][1].
Local
Decisions & Actions
The
risk reassessment instrument was designed to be somewhat flexible in its use.
This flexibility, however, means that county programs must first make several
decisions before having their staff implement and use the risk reassessment. These decisions (made by your Juvenile
Director) should include:
How often and when a risk reassessment
should be conducted by your agency (for examples see items 14.3 and 14.4)
Which of the two categories of risk
levels the department wishes to use (options are defined in the table below).
No action is needed if you choose the default. You must submit
a help request to JJIS to use the alternative scoring. NOTE: Counties that were using the JCP Reassessment V1.0 will need to carefully review
the new scoring categories and notify
JJIS of any desired change.
|
Default Scoring |
Alternative Scoring |
||
|
Low Risk |
5 or fewer risks |
Low Risk |
5 or fewer risks |
|
Medium |
6-13 risks |
Medium Risk |
6-13 risks |
|
High Risk |
14 or more risks |
Medium-High Risk |
14-17 risks |
|
|
|
High Risk |
18 or more |
Your agency must decide how
it will define accountability “sanctions” (item 17.1)
Your agency must decide how
it will define skill development activities (item 18.1).
Your agency must decide what
to include as treatment options (18.2)
NOTE: Examples of Pilot
County Definitions to 17.1, 18.1, and 18.2 are below.
Examples
of Pilot
|
County 1 |
Accountability Sanctions |
Skill Development |
Treatment |
|
|
Community services, restitution, Project Payback
work crew, Forest Camp, |
Save Our Youth Program (Conflict Resolution),
Anger Management, Gender Specific skill-building groups, employment training
program, |
Drug and Alcohol Inpatient/Outpatient, MST, SRTP
(Secure Residential Treatment Program for sex offenders), etc. |
|
County 2 |
community services,
restitution, house arrest, fines/fees |
Anger Management, Gender Specific skill-building
groups, Cognitive Restructuring |
Drug and Alcohol Inpatient/Outpatient, DBT,
Mental Health Inpatient/ Outpatient, Juvenile Risk Reduction Treatment
program (sex offender outpatient) |
|
County 3 |
Community
service work crews, restitution, theft talk, detention |
Girl's
group, Young Men's Work, Life skills groups
|
Outpatient
and inpatient D & A treatment, Mental health counseling, |
Accessing
the JCP Risk Reassessment (Quick Steps)
1.
Search for a youth or work
from your caseload
2.
Bring up available
assessments
a. Select “JCP Risk Assessment – 2006.1”
b. Select
a completed assessment to “Build and Base On”
3.
Select “Build and Base On”
(see “Build and Base Assessment on a Previous Assessment” from JJIS)
4.
Link to the new assessment
to the most recent prior assessment (see JJIS User Guide Instructions “Link
Assessments to Prior Assessments”)
5.
Review/Update the original assessment
6.
Complete the risk reassessment
addendum (sections 14.0 – 22.0)
[1][1] Because not all risk indicators on the JCP risk screen/assessment are asked on the Interim Review; you should fill in responses to these indicators when completing the risk reassessment in order to get an accurate measure of risk to re-offend.