Executives Of Probation-parole

EXECUTIVES OF PROBATION-PAROLE

SEX OFFENDER MANAGEMENT POLICY BRIEF

JANUARY 1, 2008

I.

Preface...............................................................................1 II. Introduction....................................................................2

III.

Guidelines...........................................................................3

IV.

The Comprehensive Approach to Sex Offender Management. .4 A. Investigation, Prosecution and Disposition B. Assessment C. Treatment D. Reentry E. Registration and Community Notification F. Supervision Five Fundamental Principles.................................................8

V.

VI. Sex Offender Supervision Case Planning and Management.....................................................................11

.

Specialized Conditions of Supervision.........................................12

I.

Other Supervision Strategies......................................................13 IX.

Adjunctive Use of Surveillance and Monitoring Strategies....14

X.

Guiding Principles for the Transfer of Sex Offenders (ICAOS)14

Preface The Executives of Probation and Parole is a formalized group of administrators who meet bi-annually to network and address critical issues surrounding the profession of Probation, Parole and Community Corrections. This group is sponsored by the National Institute of Corrections which hosts the meetings and facilitates the discussions. The Executives of Probation and Parole is comprised of administrators from twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia, all of which represent a unified probation and parole system within their respective jurisdictions. The primary goal of the group is to discuss challenges of the profession, share both common and unique ideas and examine best practices based on evidence based research. Over the past twelve years the Executives of Probation and Parole has continuously met and accomplished their objectives as previously outlined. In more recent meetings there has been unanimous agreement that the management of sex offenders has evolved into one of the most controversial and “hot” topics to challenge the profession. Due to this consensus, the Executives of Probation and Parole requested and NIC and the Bureau of Justice Assistance provided technical assistance from Madeline Carter of the Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) to provide better education regarding emerging practices, if they exist, and assistance in developing a foundation for implementing sound public policy. The following brief on sex offender management is the end result of the group’s work in conjunction with the tremendous research and assistance from Madeline Carter and CSOM. This is not a blueprint for success but a policy brief containing facts and strategies supported by research, data and emerging practices. It is just a beginning; a framework for individual jurisdictions to build upon. It is important to note that all jurisdictions in this group are members of the Interstate Compact for Adult Offenders (ICAOS) with many serving as their state’s commissioner. The brief includes “Guiding Principles for the Transfer of Sex Offenders” across jurisdictions. These principles were developed by the ICAOS Sex Offender Ad Hoc Committee with the assistance of CSOM and NIC and served as the foundation for a sex offender specific definition and rule passed by the full commission at its annual meeting in the fall of 2007. Robert Lee Guy, Director North Carolina Division of Community Corrections Madeline Carter, Center for Sex Offender Management Paul A. Quander, Jr., Director, Court Service & Offender Supervision Agency, Washington, DC Acknowledgements: Kermit Humphries, NIC

1

Sex Offender Management Policy Brief for the Executives of Probation and Parole

Introduction Sexual victimization remains a significant and pervasive problem throughout the United States. It is estimated that one in every five girls and one in every seven boys are sexually abused by the time they reach adulthood.1 Moreover, one in six adult women and one in every 33 adult men experience an attempted or completed sexual assault in their lifetime.2 While it is commonly believed that sexual assaults are committed by strangers, in actuality, the overwhelming majority of sexually abusive individuals victimize children, adolescents, and adults who are known to them.3 Because of the intensely personal nature of sexual victimization and the unique dynamics involved in these cases, these crimes tend to be underreported. Indeed, victims – and in particular child victims – report rape, sexual assaults, and other types of sexual abuse to authorities at an exceptionally low rate.4 Additionally, victimization studies reflect that in the rare event that a victim who knows his or her perpetrator does report their victimization, they are significantly less likely to report subsequent victimizations.5 Thus, it cannot be assumed that the absence of new allegations translates to the absence of additional sexually abusive behavior. Taken together, these reporting trends serve as an important reminder to stakeholders involved in sex offender management efforts: sex offenders who come to the attention of authorities represent only a fraction of all sexually abusive individuals. Who are Sex Offenders? A commonly held myth by members of the public, some policymakers, and even some practitioners in the field is that there is a finite set of characteristics that can identify “the sex offender.” In reality, however, experts in the field have long argued that this is not the case, and that no such profile exists.6 Rather, sex offenders are a heterogeneous group; they can be male or female, adult or juvenile. Their crimes range from “hands off” offenses (e.g., exhibitionism, voyeurism) to “hands on” offenses (e.g., sexual molestation, forcible rape). Moreover, their pathways to offending, intervention needs, level of risk, and recidivism risk are varied.

2

Sex Offender Recidivism Many people believe that most sex offenders will commit new sex crimes at some point in time. Although the measurement of sex offender recidivism poses some challenges,1 the documented recidivism rate in highly regarded meta-analytical studies is considerably lower than most assume to be the case. In a recent analysis conducted by Hanson and Harris (2004)7, found the following: •

When averaging together all sex offenders, recidivism rates are 14% after 5 years, 20% after 10 years and 24% after 15 years.

•

Among sub-types of sex offenders: o The rate of recidivism among rapists was 14% after 5 years, 21% after 10 years, and 24% after 15 years. o The rate of recidivism for child molesters who offended against extrafamilial boys is the highest among all sex offender sub-types, (35% after 15 years) while the lowest observed rates were for incest offenders (13% after 15 years).

Other important research points to the fact that when sex offenders do re-offend, they are most likely to commit a non-sex offense. This points to the critical need for assessment and interventions that address both sexual and non-sexual offending behavior. Finally, important research, addressed later in this document, underscores the effectiveness of some treatment interventions in reducing the likelihood of sexual and general offending. Who are the Victims of Sexual Assault? Just as the individuals who commit sex offenses are diverse, so are the victims they target. Beyond their varied demographics, victims differ in terms of the impact that victimization has on them, their needs for intervention, and their desires to participate in the justice process. As such, efforts to prevent sexual victimization and ensure community safety must be multifaceted – a “one size fits all” strategy will be both inefficient and ineffective. Guidelines for the Development of Methods to Assess the Effectiveness of Efforts to Manage Sex Offenders

1

Measurement problems include the rate of underreporting of sexual assault; variations in the definition of recidivism (i.e., arrest vs. conviction); variations in the quality of research studies; and varying lengths of follow-up periods.

3

Methods employed to assess the effectiveness of sex offender management strategies, or those being contemplated, should be subject to review based on questions such as the following. Does the strategy: • • • • •

Increase community safety? Reduce or mitigate the impact of sexual assault? Hold offenders accountable in meaningful ways? Reduce the likelihood of reoffending? Make effective use of limited public funds?

Sex offender management strategies undertaken by any community should be based on an understanding of current research and information about the nature of sex offenses and sex offenders. For example: •

•

While laws and monitoring strategies are often designed to address situations in which the sex offender is presumed to be a stranger to the victim, sexual abuse of children and youth is far more likely to be perpetrated by adults they know and have an ongoing trusting relationship with than by strangers. While treatment professionals do not generally refer to a “cure” for sex offenders, specialized sex offender treatment combined with close community supervision can result in “containment” and management of risk.

Acknowledging that that no single agency or entity can adequately address the complexities of managing sex offenders, experts have long emphasized the imperative need to develop coordinated, integrated, and multi-disciplinary responses to sex offender management.8 The Comprehensive Approach to Sex Offender Management The “Comprehensive Approach to Sex Offender Management” was developed by the Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) in an effort to expand current thinking about how to most effectively manage this challenging offender population. The Comprehensive Approach recognizes the complex nature of sex offending and the need for key system components to facilitate accountability, rehabilitation, and victim and community safety throughout all phases of the justice system. The Comprehensive Approach addresses three basic questions: • • •

What should be done to manage sex offenders effectively? Who should be involved in sex offender management? How should we approach this work?

Specifically, The Comprehensive Approach highlights the importance of six core components of sex offender management: 4

• • • • • •

Investigation, Prosecution, and Disposition Assessment Supervision Treatment Reentry Registration and Community Notification

However, none of these components – in and of themselves – is sufficient in scope to address the magnitude and complexity of the problem. The Comprehensive Approach is therefore designed to represent the synergy created by a wide range of stakeholders, all of whom share the common goal of reducing sexual victimization. Key Components of the Comprehensive Approach to Sex Offender Management INVESTIGATION, PROSECUTION, AND DISPOSITION Law enforcement and child welfare investigators require specialized knowledge about these types of cases and must collaborate with other key professionals involved in the investigative process. Prosecutors must be committed to assuring victim-centeredness, considering carefully the potential implications of plea negotiations, and promoting accountability – all while balancing due process issues for defendants.9 In addition, by receiving specialized assessment information about individual offenders, judges are better positioned to make informed disposition decisions that can enhance the system’s overall ability to effectively manage sex offenders.10 ASSESSMENT The diversity of sex offenders requires that management decisions throughout the system and across agencies are informed by comprehensive assessment information. Because sex offenders are a heterogeneous population, the use of specialized and empirically-supported tools to identify an individual’s level of risk and unique risk factors is essential. Through collaboration and sharing of essential information, stakeholders are able to make assessment-driven decisions at specific points in time and on an ongoing basis that will enhance sex offender management efforts.11 TREATMENT Recent research indicates a significant difference between “treated” and “untreated” groups of sex offenders, with better outcomes for those who received treatment – particularly current approaches to treatment.12 To be most effective, the nature, intensity and targets of treatment should be assessment-driven, developmentally appropriate, and guided by the research about “what works.” Further, treatment cannot occur in isolation; providers must collaborate with other stakeholders to make sure that 5

interventions are informed by a more complete “picture” of these individuals who are involved in the treatment process.13 REENTRY For sex offenders who are placed in correctional facilities, planning for release must begin at the point of entry.14 This ensures that strategies to address any assessed needs and identified barriers to effective community reintegration can be developed well in advance of release. Collaboration within and between the key stakeholders involved within facilities and those in the community provides important opportunities to promote continuity of interventions and a seamless and effective transition to the community. REGISTRATION AND COMMUNITY NOTIFICATION Sex offender registries serve the important purpose of providing law enforcement and parole and probation officers a means of monitoring sex offenders and as an additional tool for investigating sex crimes. The primary goal of community notification is to provide a mechanism through which citizens can become more aware of the sex offenders who are residing in their communities. Jurisdictions are encouraged to consider different levels of notification based on level of risk, and to incorporate multidisciplinary public education efforts into notification practices in an effort to reduce unintended consequences.15 Potential unintended consequences that should be taken into consideration include: •

• •

Public notification can have the effect of driving the most feared – and most high risk – sex offenders into hiding, thwarting the efforts of probation/ parole and police to monitor their activities, and possibly contributing to their risk to re-offend by disrupting treatment, employment, residence, and other elements of stability. The cost of registration and notification is generally borne by the local police departments with no supplemental funding. Community notification measures sometimes reinforce the myth that strangers pose the greatest risk, inadvertently creating a false sense of security. Victims may be discouraged from reporting sexual abuse and assault by family members for fear that community notification could implicitly reveal the victims’ identity.

These and other unintended consequences may suggest a limited application of tehse approaches. For example, jurisdictions might consider focusing community notification efforts to the highest risk, most dangerous offenders, preferably determined through the use of evidence-based risk assessment instruments designed specifically for sex offenders. SUPERVISION 6

When working to promote the effective supervision of sex offenders in the community, jurisdictions should explore the extent to which agency policies, procedures, and practices reflect and include:  Specialized caseloads that are managed by supervision officers or case managers who possess specialized knowledge;  Individualized supervision case plans that contain information from multiple stakeholders, address the dynamic risk factors of sex offenders, and include specialized conditions of supervision; and  Supervision strategies that are designed to balance monitoring and surveillance with the importance of rehabilitative efforts. Specialization In jurisdictions throughout the country, therefore, supervision agencies have taken active steps to create specialization among supervision officers to manage sex offender caseloads more effectively, either by establishing specialized sex offender supervision units within existing agency structures or by designating officers or case managers who are specially trained to manage such cases.16 The development of specialized caseloads affords supervision agencies and officers the expertise and dedicated personnel necessary to address the unique needs of sex offenders, and to formulate differentiated supervision strategies based on assessed levels of risk and identified needs.  Specialized Caseloads. Selecting officers for specialized sex offender caseloads and establishing caseload limits are fundamental to the success of sex offender supervision. In addition, specialized caseloads should be limited in size to maximize the effectiveness of supervision, and should include routine monitoring of offenders in their natural environments (e.g., home, work, school, leisure time).17 Recognizing that exposure to potential risks in a variety of settings is ongoing, supervision officers must be consistently vigilant regarding offenders’ day-to-day activities, behaviors, and community adjustment. While in larger jurisdictions the ability to create specialized units or caseloads may be more easily accomplished, such an approach may not be practical or feasible in areas in which resources are limited.  Specialized Knowledge and Training. It is essential that all supervision officers who are responsible for working with sex offenders receive training regarding a variety of topics related to sex offender management.18 The most vital training topics for officers are the following:  Dynamics of sex offending;  Diversity of sex offenders;  Balancing monitoring and surveillance activities with a focus on promoting offenders’ engagement in programming and services; 7

 Principles of sex offender treatment;  Involvement of community support networks;  Assessment of sex offender risk and needs, with a specific focus on the factors that are unique for each offender and associated with sexual recidivism;  Collaboration to enhance sex offender supervision;  Development and adjustment of specialized conditions; and  Using a continuum of responses to address violations or risk factors. Overall, focused training and job specialization for supervision officers and case managers promotes expertise, maximizes limited resources, and improves consistency. Five Fundamental Principles The Comprehensive Approach is grounded by five fundamental principles: • • • • •

Victim-Centeredness Specialized Knowledge/Training Public Education Monitoring and Evaluation Collaboration

VICTIM-CENTEREDNESS Increasingly, professionals involved in sex offender management have made dedicated efforts toward addressing the risk and needs of offenders while concurrently prioritizing the needs and interests of victims.19 Criminal justice systems that value a victimcentered approach are responsive to victims’ needs, provide requested information to victims and families, promote healing, ensure victim input in critical decision-making at all phases of the management process, and strive to ensure that the impact is neither minimized nor exacerbated by policies or practices within the system. SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE The sex offender management field is ever-evolving. Without a doubt, sex offender management has emerged as a highly specialized area within the criminal justice field. As such, all professionals who have a role in the process must possess specialized knowledge about sex offenders, victims, and effective interventions, and should make ongoing efforts to remain abreast of emerging research and promising practice in the field of sex offender management. Effective sex offender management is contingent upon the collective expertise of the various professionals involved in the process. 8

•

Law enforcement agents and other investigators require specialized knowledge about offenders and victims to ensure that – from the point of victims’ disclosures – the investigative process is conducted in a manner that reflects victim sensitivity, promotes the thorough collection of evidence, and facilitates the successful prosecution of cases.

•

Prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges need specialized knowledge to make informed decisions relative to the prosecution, adjudication, and sentencing/disposition phases in order to understand the impact of sex offenses on victims and to provide support for the interventions necessary for offender accountability, rehabilitation, and community safety.

•

Supervision officers and mental health professionals require specialized knowledge to conduct appropriate and comprehensive assessments of offenders and to ensure that the strategies and interventions utilized will maximize the likelihood of reducing recidivism and ensuring safe communities.

•

Community support networks, victim advocates, and other professionals must be specially trained about sex offender management strategies in order to ensure more effective and responsive participation in the offender management process.

•

Policymakers and key decision makers need specialized knowledge in order to effectuate consistent and appropriate laws and policies that will afford practitioners the ability to balance offender accountability, rehabilitation, victim needs and interests, and public safety.

PUBLIC EDUCATION Through their ability to inform, guide, and influence community leaders and policymakers, an educated public can have an important impact on effective sex offender management.20 Moreover, from a public health perspective, an educated public can expand traditional offender management efforts through an emphasis on primary prevention in the community. MONITORING AND EVALUATION The goals of effective sex offender management efforts are to reduce recidivism and promote the positive outcomes for victims and offenders. If successful, the result will be safer communities. If unsuccessful, community safety may be compromised, which in turn can translate into additional victims. The very nature of this work, therefore, demands the incorporation of formalized monitoring and evaluative processes to ensure the integrity, quality, and efficacy of current interventions and strategies.21 Program monitoring and evaluation are perhaps best accomplished through the utilization of process and outcome examinations. 9

• Process reviews focus on the integrity of the service delivery system by examining the type of interventions and strategies delivered, population(s) served, and manner in which services are provided, including adherence to philosophies, policies, and procedures. • Outcome evaluations provide important information about the efficacy of the programming, thus guiding potentially necessary program modifications. Put simply, process evaluations examine what is delivered, how it is delivered, and how well it is implemented, whereas outcome evaluations assess whether and how much the services impact the overall program goals (e.g., enhanced functioning, reduced recidivism). Funding decisions, resource deployment, legislative and policy decisions, offender success, public support, and community safety are all reliant on sound programming and services – and the data which demonstrates that they “work.” The stakeholders responsible for the core components of the Comprehensive Approach must ensure that policies and practices are informed by, measured against, and adjusted in accordance with the contemporary research and practice literature. COLLABORATION To ensure a more comprehensive, consistent, efficient, and effective approach to sex offender management, collaboration is vital.22 Collaboration requires agencies and individuals to recognize the importance of diverse perspectives, share resources, and make a commitment to work together to enhance capacity toward attainment of a common goal.

10

These principles reflect both a driving philosophy and a method of practice.

I nvestig Prosecut Dispos

Sex Offender Supervision Case Planning and Management •

Assessment-Driven Case Planning. The effective supervision of sex offenders is Registration and contingent upon the timely (e.g., 14 to 30 days after offenders are assigned to Community supervision) development and Notification implementation of individualized case plans that are responsive to their differing risk levels, diverse needs, and circumstances.

Fundamenta

Agency policies and procedures should require the inclusion of a formal risk1. Victim-Ce assessment in the development of all sex offender supervision case plans. The use of empirically-based, actuarial assessments enable staff to determine offenders’ 2. Specialize level of risk for sexual recidivism, as well as identify the unique dynamic (changeable) characteristics that should be the target of sex offender supervision Knowledg and treatment. Ideally, for adult sex offenders, one or more empirically-validated risk assessment tools are used. Examples include the Rapid Risk Assessment 3. for Public Edu 23 24 Sexual Offense Recidivism (RRASOR) and the STATIC-99.

4. Monitorin

Supervision plans should also be generated with active and explicit consideration of victim safety needs. Sex offenders themselves are also essential stakeholders in Evaluation the case planning process. Their active involvement promotes investment and ownership, and ensures that they are fully aware of and clearly understand 5. the Collaborat imposed expectations and restrictions.25

Reentry

11

•

Assessment-Driven Case Management. In addition to establishing risk levels and providing guidance about the intensity of supervision at the outset of the process, assessments are important in identifying specific supervision targets – the dynamic risk factors that are present and require attention in the case plan and must be monitored by officers or case managers over time. In addition to utilizing researchsupport assessment instruments to guide supervision practices and the ongoing case management process, information from other sources is essential. It is, therefore, essential that agency policies and procedures define the stakeholders from different agencies and disciplines whose perspectives are important in the ongoing case management process.

•

Specialized Conditions of Supervision. Standard conditions and restrictions of supervision (e.g., scheduled office visits, periodic phone contact, employment and community service requirements, drug and alcohol testing, prohibitions against associating with negative peers or associates) are necessary but not sufficient to monitor and intervene effectively with the areas of risk that are unique to adult sex offenders.26 Therefore, specialized conditions of supervision have become commonplace in many jurisdictions. Agency policies and procedures should support the selective application of specialized conditions such as: Prohibiting contact with victims; Prohibiting or limiting contact with minors; Participating in sex offender-specific treatment; Close monitoring of and limiting access to the Internet; Establishing employment and residence restrictions that limit access to potential victims;  Restricting movement within and outside of the community (including through the use of electronic monitoring and Global Positioning System equipment); and  Submitting to polygraph examinations (when appropriate).     

Because sex offenders are diverse and “one size fits all” approaches to supervision are not effective, the development and application of specialized supervision conditions should reflect the varying levels of risk posed – and the dynamic risk factors that are presented – by each offender. When selectively applying conditions, it is necessary for supervision officers and case managers to think beyond prohibitions and placing restrictions on the behavior and activities of sex offenders. It is also important for officers to remember the importance of balancing surveillance and monitoring activities with a focus on treatment to reduce recidivism.

12

Other Supervision Strategies •

Multi-Disciplinary Collaboration. Collaboration is a particularly important component of effective sex offender management practice. The development of external controls and supports to assist in monitoring and accountability, and multidisciplinary collaboration to ensure offender accountability and victim safety is crucial. A comprehensive approach to sex offender management has a primary emphasis on victim and community safety, accomplished through multidisciplinary collaboration and the use of various external supports and controls. While collaboration is a fundamental principle of sex offender management – and the working relationship between the treatment provider and the supervision officer is of particular importance – co-facilitation of groups by officers can be controversial. As such, policies and procedures should clearly define the roles and responsibilities of supervision officers, treatment providers, and others in the context of the collaborative working relationships.

•

Community Support Networks. Central to the sex offender management process is creating a diverse network of responsible and informed individuals who serve as the “eyes and ears” of parole and probation officers in the community on a regular basis while promoting the stability and adjustment of sex offenders. To maximize the value of community support networks, supervision agency policies should require officers to address community support networks as part of the supervision planning process. Employers can be particularly important members of the community support networks. Routine contacts by supervision officers with employers are needed to verify offenders’ attendance and conduct in the workplace.27 A particularly promising approach to utilizing community support networks involves recruiting and training volunteers.28 This model, known as Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA), is unique in that it is designed to target high risk sex offenders who are being released from prison following the expiration of their full sentence and who do not have existing natural supports or accountability structures in the communities to which they are returning.

•

Polygraph. Supervision officers and treatment providers have begun to use the polygraph as one component of an overall sex offender management strategy, primarily to assess compliance with supervision and treatment.29 The polygraph can be particularly useful because it has been found to be an effective means of gathering information to assess sex offenders’ compliance with supervision conditions and treatment expectations.30 It should be noted, however, that the polygraph remains somewhat controversial. Therefore, stakeholders should be fully aware of the limitations, caveats, and potential risks and benefits of its use before making decisions about implementing such technology, and should not make supervision-related decisions exclusively based on polygraph examinations.31 13

Adjunctive Use of Surveillance and Monitoring Strategies The following adjunctive strategies should be used to enhance, not replace, other components of a comprehensive approach to sex offender management. The imposition of surveillance and monitoring conditions should be guided strategically by the use of comprehensive assessment information that indicates that an offender is at higher risk to recidivate. •

Surveillance Officers. The utilization of specialized surveillance officers can augment and support sex offender supervision efforts considerably. Specifically, through intensive field work, surveillance officers can provide routine monitoring of sex offenders’ activities and adherence to case plans and specialized conditions, subsequently increasing the amount of time assigned supervision officers can dedicate to other case management responsibilities and collaborative activities.32

•

Electronic Monitoring. The use of surveillance technologies such as electronic monitoring (including global positioning systems) has become increasingly popular to enhance the risk management efforts of supervision officers with sex offenders.33 More than half the states have created policies or passed legislation which stipulate that electronic monitoring can be used to manage these offenders.34 However, more research is needed to examine the impact of electronic monitoring with sex offenders. In the meantime, if it is implemented, jurisdictions would be well served to utilize the technology as a part of a larger, multi-disciplinary, and comprehensive approach to managing sex offenders in the community that focuses both on monitoring their behavior and supporting their successful participation in treatment.

Guiding Principles for the Transfer of Sex Offenders (ICAOS) ICAOS has developed the following principles that should guide the interstate transfer of sex offenders. •

Sending state. The goal of the transfer of a sex offender under the Interstate Compact is to enhance accountability and reduce the likelihood that an offender will recidivate. To this end, it is the responsibility of the sending state to determine the appropriateness of the transfer of the offender under the Interstate Compact.  Determine if the offender is required to register as a sex offender in the sending state.  Gather all pertinent background information; for example: socio-economic history, criminal history any and all assessments, pre-sentence investigation report, elements of the crime (police report, crime version).  To the extent resources permit, conduct a sex offender specific assessment to determine the level of risk posed by the offender and the accountability and treatment strategies most likely to reduce the risk of recidivism. 14

 Determine whether the transfer will result in an appropriate accountability plan based on the offender’s level of risk.  If a determination is made to proceed with the application for transfer, all pertinent information (refer to bullets 3 and 4 above) regarding the offender will be provided to the receiving state. •

Receiving state. It is the responsibility of the receiving state to determine the appropriateness of the transfer of the offender under the Interstate Compact.  Determine if the offender is required to register in the receiving state.  Review the offender specific information provided by the sending state and any local information available regarding the offender.  Assess the ability of the receiving state to provide an appropriate accountability and risk reduction strategy relative to the level of risk posed by the offender.

All sex offender transfers will require the offender to abide by the laws of the receiving state. Conclusion The problem of sexual victimization and sex offending is multifaceted and crosses a wide range of disciplines and agencies. As such, strategies to address this issue must be multifaceted and must include the key agencies, organizations, entities, and individuals who have a stake and role in sex offender management. The Comprehensive Approach addresses a wide spectrum of important issues, both in terms of principles and practices. Moving beyond more traditional and sometimes fragmented and inconsistent responses, it connects each of the essential components of a multi-disciplinary, collaborative, systemic model. This approach offers a promising and well-grounded framework upon which jurisdictions can consider the informed integration of policies and practice to promote the shared goal of ensuring victim and community safety.

The information contained in this document is the result of a synthesis of materials from several sources including: •

Rhode Island Sex Offender Management Task Force Policy Report, April, 2006, Providence, Rhode Island

•

The Comprehensive Assessment Protocol: A Systemwide Review of Adult and Juvenile Sex Offender Management Strategies, July, 2007, Center for Sex Offender Management, Silver Spring, MD 15

This material has been used with permission from the Center for Sex Offender Management and the Rhode Island Sex Offender Management Task Force. Contact information: Kermit Humphries, NIC Community Corrections, 320 First St., N.W., Washington, DC 20534

Endnotes

16

1

Finkelhor, D. & Russell, D. (1984). Women as perpetrators: Review of the evidence. In D. Finkelhor (Ed.), Child Sexual Abuse: New Theory and Research, 171-187. New York: Free Press. 2 Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2006). Extent, nature, and consequences of rape victimization: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, special report. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 3 Catalano, S. (2005). National crime victimization survey: Criminal Victimization, 2004. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics; Kilpatrick, D. G., Edmunds, C. N., & Seymour, A. K. (1992). Rape in America: A report to the nation. Arlington, VA: National Victim Center; Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2006). Extent, nature, and Consequences of rape victimization: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, special report. Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 4 Ibid. 5 Kilpatrick et al., 1992. 6 Marshall, W. L. (1996). The sexual offender: Monster, victim, or everyman? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 8, 317-335. 7 Harris, A. J., & Hanson, R. (2004). Sex Offender Recidivism: A Simple Question, 04-03. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada. 8 Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (2005). Practice standards and guidelines for the evaluation, treatment, and management of adult male sexual abusers. Beaverton, OR: Author; English, K., Pullen, S., & Jones, L. (1996). Managing adult sex offenders: A Containment Approach. Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association. 9 Strate, D. C., Jones, L., Pullen, S., & English, K. (1996). Criminal justice policies and sex offender denial. In K. English, S. Pullen, & L. Jones (Eds.), Managing adult sex offenders: A Containment Approach (pp. 4.1-4.15). Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association; Holmgren, B. K. (1999). Forging new alliances: Proposals for change in managing sex offenders within the criminal justice system. In B. K. Schwartz (Ed.), The sex offender: Theoretical advances, treating special populations, and legal developments (pp. 37.1-37.20). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute. 10 Holmgren, B. K. (1999). Forging new alliances: Proposals for change in managing sex offenders within the criminal justice system. In B. K. Schwartz (Ed.), The sex offender: Theoretical advances, treating special populations, and legal developments (pp. 37.1–37.20). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute. 11 Hanson, R. K., & Harris, A. J. R. (2000). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sexual offense recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 6-35; Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Criminal Psychology, 73, 1154-1163. 12 Hanson, R. K., Gordon, A., Harris, A. J. R., Marques, J. K., Murphy, W., Quinsey, V. L., & Seto, M. C. (2002). First report of the collaborative outcome data project on the effectiveness of psychological treatment for sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14, 169–194. 13 Carter, M., Bumby, K., & Talbot, T. (2004). Promoting offender accountability and community safety through the Comprehensive Approach to Sex Offender Management. Seton Hall Law Review, 34, 1273-1297; Cumming, G., & McGrath, R. (2005). Supervision of the sex offender: Community management, risk assessment, and treatment. Brandon, VT: Safer Society Press; English et al., 1996. 14 Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2007). Managing the challenges of sex offender reentry. Silver Spring, MD: Author. 15 Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (2005). Practice standards and guidelines for the evaluation, treatment, and management of adult male sexual abusers. Beaverton, OR: Author.; Carter et al., 2004; Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2001). Community notification and education. Silver Spring, MD: Author. 16 Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (1999). Sex offender registration: Policy overview and comprehensive practices. Silver Spring, MD: Author; Cumming, G. F., & McGrath, R. J. (2000). External supervision: How can it increase the effectiveness of relapse prevention? In D. R. Laws, S. M. Hudson, & T. Ward (Eds.), Remaking relapse prevention with sex offenders: A sourcebook (pp. 236-253). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Cumming & McGrath, 2005; English et al., 1996; English, K., Jones, L., & Patrick, D. (2003). Community containment of sex offender risk: A promising approach. In B. J. Winick & J. Q. LaFond (Eds.), Protecting society from sexually dangerous offenders: Law, justice, and therapy (pp. 265–279). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association; Green, R. (1995). Community management of sex offenders. In B. K.

Schwartz & H. R. Cellini (Eds.), The sex offender: Corrections, treatment, and legal practice (pp. 21.1-21.8). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute; Scott, L. K. (1997). Community management of sex offenders. In B. K. Schwartz & H. R. Cellini (Eds.), The sex offender: New insights, treatment innovations, and legal developments (pp.16.1-16.12). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute. 17 Cumming & McGrath, 2005; English et al., 1996, 2003. 18 Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2000a), Community supervision of the sex offender: An overview of current and promising practices. Silver Spring, MD: Author; Cumming & McGrath, 2000, 2005; English, K. (1998). The Containment Approach: An aggressive strategy for the community management of adult sex offenders. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4, 18-235; Green, 1995; Greer, 1997; Scott, 1997. 19 Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2000b). Engaging advocates and other victim service providers in the community management of sex offenders. Silver Spring, MD: Author; D’Amora, D., & Burns-Smith, G. (1999). Partnering in response to sexual violence: How offender treatment and victim advocacy can work together in response to sexual violence. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 11, 293-304; English, et al., 1996. 20 Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2000c). Public opinion and the criminal justice system: Building support for sex offender management programs. Silver Spring, MD: Author; Petersilia, J. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 21 English et al., 1996, 2003; McGrath, R. J., Cumming, G. F., & Burchard, B. L. (2003). Current practices and trends in sexual abuser management: The Safer Society 2002 nationwide survey. Brandon, VT: Safer Society. 22 Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA) (2001). Practice standards and guidelines for members of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. Beaverton, OR: Author; Berlin, F. S. (2000). The etiology and treatment of sexual offending. In D. H. Fishbein (Ed.), The science, treatment, and prevention of antisocial behaviors: Application to the criminal justice system (pp. 21.1-21.15). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute; CSOM, (2000a), Community supervision of the sex offender: An overview of current and promising practices. Silver Spring, MD: Author; Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2000d), The collaborative approach to sex offender management. Silver Spring, MD: Author; Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2002). An overview of sex offender management. Silver Spring, MD: Author; D’Amora & Burns-Smith, 1999; English et al., 1996, 2003; McGrath et al., 2003. 23 Hanson, R. K. (1997). The development of a brief actuarial scale for sexual offense recidivism, 97-04. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada. 24 Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (1999). Static-99: Improving actuarial risk assessments for sex offenders, 199902. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of the Solicitor General of Canada. 25 Cumming & McGrath, 2000, 2005. 26 CSOM, 2000a; Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2002a). An overview of sex offender management. Silver Spring, MD: Author; Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) (2002b). Time to work: Managing the employment of sex offenders under community supervision. Silver Spring, MD: Author; Cumming & McGrath, 2000, 2005; English et al., 1996, 2003; Scott, 1997. 27 Bumby, K. M., Talbot, T. B., & Carter, M. M. (in press). Sex offender reentry: Facilitating public safety through successful transition and community reintegration. Criminal Justice and Behavior; CSOM, 2002; Cumming & McGrath, 2005; English et al., 2003. 28 Wilson, R. J., & Picheca, J. E. (2005). Circles of support and accountability: Engaging the community in sexual offender management. In B. K. Schwartz (Ed.), The sex offender: Issues in assessment, treatment, and supervision of adult and juvenile populations (pp. 13.1-13.21). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute. 29 Blasingame, G. D. (1998). Suggested clinical uses of polygraphy in community-based sexual offender treatment programs. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 10, 37-45; CSOM, 2000a; Cumming & McGrath, 2000; English, 1998; English et al., 1996, 2003; McGrath, Cumming, & Burchard, 2003; Madsen, L., Parsons, S., & Grubin, D. (2004). A preliminary study of the contribution of periodic polygraph testing to the treatment and supervision of sex offenders. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 15, 682-695; O’ Connell, M. A. (2000). Polygraphy: Assessment and community monitoring. In D. R. Laws, S. M. Hudson, & T. Ward (Eds.), Remaking relapse prevention with sex offenders: A sourcebook (pp. 285-302). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; Scott, 1997. 30 Blasingame, 1998; English et al., 1996a, 2003; Madsen et al., 2004; O’Connell, M. (2000). Polygraphy: Assessment and community monitoring. In D. R. Laws, S. M. Hudson, & T. Ward (Eds.), Remaking relapse prevention with sex offenders: A sourcebook (pp. 285–302). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 31 ATSA, 2005; Blasingame, 1998; CSOM, 2000a, 2002a. 32 Cumming & McGrath, 2005; English et al., 1996, 2003; Pettett, J., & Weirman, D. (1996). Monitoring with surveillance officers. In K. English, S. Pullen, & L. Jones (Eds.), Managing adult sex offenders: A Containment Approach (pp. 11.1-

11.11). Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association; Scott, 1997. 33 DeMichele, M., Payne, B., & Button, D. (2007). Sex offender electronic monitoring has advantages, problems. State News: The Council of State Governments, 50, 26-29; English et al., 2003; Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision (ICAOS) (2007). GPS update survey. Lexington, KY: Author; Lyons, D. (2006). Where on earth are sex offenders? State Legislatures Magazine Denver, CO: National Council of State Legislatures; Schlank, A., & Bidelman, P. (2001). Transition – Challenges for the offender and the community. In A. Schlank (Ed.), The sexual predator: Legal issues, clinical issues, special populations (pp. 10.1-10.13). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute. 34 DeMichele et al., 2007; ICAOS, 2007.