Post Conviction Risk Assessment Paper

The Evolution of Risk Instruments have been used since the early 1980’s. The Post Conviction Risk Assessment also known as “PCRA,” was developed by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The PCRA was created because 5 districts out of 16 chose to use a commercially available risk and needs tool. The AO got together with developers build the tool we call today PCRA specifically for federal probation. This tool was developed between October 1, 2005 and August 13, 2009. In the past few years social science has helped to discover a way to reduce the levels of recidivism. Using the method of PCRA, this greatly helps probation officers distinguish dangerous high risk offenders from low risk offenders. This assessment is done to keep communities
Through the reading we saw statistics on each table leaning towards the PCRA tool and showing us how useful it is. It’s effective without a doubt, as we can see from the statistics from from the Tables shown in the reading. In my opinion, I think this tool is effective and has the power to lower the levels of recidivism. This can also same the taxpayers money because it is less expensive than having someone in jail. Also, this makes probation officers work a little less complicated. As the officer sees improvement he will give the probationary more
The Post Conviction Risk Assessment also known as “PCRA,” was developed by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The PCRA was created because 5 districts out of 16 chose to use a commercially available risk and needs tool. The AO got together with developers build the tool we call today PCRA specifically for federal probation. This tool was developed between October 1, 2005 and August 13, 2009. In the past few years social science has helped to discover a way to reduce the levels of recidivism. Using the method of PCRA, this greatly helps probation officers distinguish dangerous high risk offenders from low risk offenders. This assessment is done to keep communities safer and to keep offerders away from those who are more likely to reoffend. In order to validate this tool, researchers devised, “ Three sample groups. A construction group was created for the construction of the instrument, and two validation groups were created for the validation of the instrument. These groups were created using an existing analysis file from PACTS data that contained 185,297 offenders on probation or supervised release.” With overall results this tool has show to have effects in the short term effects as well as in the long