Correctional Intake Assessment and Case Planning: Application Development and Validation

• Date: 01 April 2021
• DOI: 10.1177/0093854820974403
• Published date: 01 April 2021
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2021, Vol. 48, No. 4, April 2021, 556 –570.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820974403

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2020 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

556

CORRECTIONAL INTAKE ASSESSMENT AND

CASE PLANNING

Application Development and Validation

LAURENCE L. MOTIUK

LESLIE ANNE KEOWN

Correctional Service Canada

The Intake Assessment (IA) process in the Canadian federal correctional system results in an individualized treatment and

supervision plan throughout the sentence. Two components, Static and Dynamic Factors Assessment, were examined to

determine whether a streamlined version could be tailored for a hand-held mobile application and remain reliable and valid

for correctional planning purposes. An Information Management System database was used to identify all first releases from

federal custody over a 2-year period who had IA data available (N = 6,946). Analyses revealed statistically significant rela-

tionships and AUCs (area under receiver operating characteristic curves) for both the Static and Dynamic Factors components

of IA with respect to reincarceration. Additional analyses revealed that the strongest predictors for returns to federal custody

were criminal history as a youth or adult, substance misuse, and unemployment. A combined Static and Dynamic Factors

score also yielded a simplified, robust, and incremental predictor of reincarceration for both men and women.

Keywords: Static and Dynamic Factors; correctional planning; community supervision; recidivism

INTRODUCTION

Penological research has well established that static factors such as younger age or crimi-

nal history assessed upon admission to custody are strongly related to reoffending on release

from incarceration (Bonta & Andrews, 2017; Gendreau et al., 1996; Glaser, 1964; Glueck

& Glueck, 1930; Schnur, 1949; Waller, 1974). Specifically in relation to official criminal

records, the number and variety of convictions (Gendreau et al., 1979), juvenile or youth

arrests (Pritchard, 1979), prior prison terms (Gottfredson, 1967), prison misconducts

(Gottfredson & Gottfredson, 1980), and previous failures on community supervision

(Wormith & Goldstone, 1984) have been found to be predictors of postrelease outcome.

AUTHORS’ NOTE: The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of

the Correctional Service of Canada. We would like to thank Stephanie Biro, Geoff Wilton, and Jesse Rylett

who were very helpful in providing analytic support and for assisting with the management of data.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Laurence L. Motiuk, Correctional Service of

Canada, 340 Laurier Ave. W., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0P9; e-mail: larry.motiuk@csc-scc.gc.ca; lar-

rymotiuk5@gmail.com.

974403CJBXXX10.1177/0093854820974403Criminal Justice and BehaviorMotiuk, Keown / Correctional Intake Assessment and Case Planning<

research-article2020