Remarks concerning the importance of evaluating actuarial risk assessment models: A rejoinder to Will Johnson

Abstract

In a series of studies Baumann, Law, Sheets, Reid, & Graham (2005) [Baumann, D.J., Law, J.R., Sheets, J., Reid, G., & Graham, J.C. (2005). Evaluating the effectiveness of actuarial risk assessment models. Children and Youth Services Review, 27, 465–490] provide evaluative evidence on actuarial models of risk assessment in child welfare using both scientific and practical criteria. Johnson (2006) has taken issue with part of our findings. Though this was not the point of our paper, his concern appears to be that in two of nine instances clinical judgment supported by actuarially based assessment was found to be superior to our actuarial models alone. This involved the use of an actuarial model without numeric feedback. He believes that problems with our research procedures invalidate our results and that our results are not generalizable. We believe he is wrong on both counts. The present paper discusses the importance of evaluating and testing actuarial models of risk assessment in child welfare and rebuts all of Johnson's claims.