Validating the Ohio Risk Assessment System Community Supervision Tool with a Diverse Sample from Texas

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe use of risk assessment to assist in determine the criminogenic needs of an offender has become accepted practice in the field of corrections. While many agencies continue to use off-the-shelf assessments and forgo local validation and norming of the instrument, a body of literature has begun to emerge suggesting that fourth generation tools, while robust in nature, are susceptible to threats to validity when applied to new populations. The results from this study support this growing body of literature and suggest that it is important to validate and norm and instrument on the local population. Specifically, this study examined the Ohio Risk Assessment System-Community Supervision Tool and the applicability to a Texas population. While the Ohio version of the ORAS was still predictive of reoffending for the Texas population, adjustments made to the instrument for Texas specific legal factors as well as addressing sociopolitical differences in the two states provided for a significantly stronger instrument. Moreover, this study found that the revalidation of the ORAS provided a valid measure of risk based on gender, race, and ethnicity differences in the two populations. In light of these findings, the article provides several suggestions to influence both practice and policy moving forward regarding the adoption of risk assessment instruments.