An Analysis of Young Offender Case Management Factor Items in Saskatchewan
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Level of Service Inventory Saskatchewan Youth Ed. (LSI SK Youth Ed.) is a risk assessment tool designed to be used with young offenders to determine the level of service necessary to reduce offending and inform case planning. There are eight vulnerable areas known to be criminogenic identified in the assessment that inform key areas for intervention and treatment in each offender’s case plan. The assessment also appends three sections of supplementary information (case management factor items) that might assist or affect case planning in the eight areas. The three sections consist of: 1) attributes or personal characteristics of the offender, such as anger management deficits or poor social skills; 2) static items that may play a prominent role in case management such as a history of fire-setting or gang involvement; and 3) social, economic and health issues such as homelessness or depression. The case management factors might indicate additional psychological or psychiatric assessment for the offender, or alert case managers of potential safety precautions for the young person (i.e. history of suicide attempts) or for those working with the offender (i.e. violence). Minimally, case management factors are an indication of the need to adapt or supplement treatment strategies and/or programming determined by the risk/need areas identified in the assessment. The case management factors are the subject of this research. Forty-two supplementary case management factors in the three subset categories of the risk assessment tool (LSI SK Youth Ed.) were analyzed. These variables were identified from 540 risk assessments of young offenders in Saskatchewan. The validity of the assessment tool was first established by finding a statistically significant relationship between recidivism and risk level. Results suggest that the risk assessment tool is a valid tool to measure the likelihood of recidivism in young offenders. Next forty-two case management factors were surveyed for frequency to see how often the factor occurs in the young offender sample (range) to assist justice agencies by identifying the ‘macro-needs’ of a young offender group in terms of program or intervention services. The scope or depth of the factors was tested for association to recidivism and risk level placement. Results determined that ten of those 42 factors were statistically significant in relation to recidivism and are considered criminogenic. Twenty-five of the case management factors had a statistically significant relationship to risk level placement. Ten of the 25 factors associated with risk level placement were those associated with recidivism. Those ten factors are more criminogenic than the remaining 15 of the twenty five factors associated with risk level placement because recidivism is actually re-offending and risk level placement is a prediction of re-offending. Nevertheless, statistically significant associations for the 15 factors associated with risk level placement that were not also associated with recidivism are criminogenic (though less so than associations to recidivism). Variables not associated to either recidivism or risk level placement, might be considered a non-criminogenic need, and would still be important considerations in a case plan and would require multi-agency intervention. This is the first study of its kind to discover the range and scope of case management factors. Further research is needed to corroborate findings and to understand how programs can be individualized, and then to study the effectiveness those interventions and programs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».