Examining the Utility of the Texas Risk Assessment System to Predict Community Supervision Compliance and Recidivism

Abstract

Although most risk assessment research has examined tools in the prediction of recidivism, there is a growing body of literature that investigates risk assessment in the prediction of successful community supervision. The Texas Risk Assessment System–Community Supervision Tool (TRAS-CST) was developed from the Ohio Risk Assessment System–Community Supervision Tool (ORAS-CST) but has not been examined to predict recidivism or probation compliance. The current study investigates the predictive validity of the TRAS screener and full versions when examining supervision compliance and recidivism among a sample of 462 individuals on probation. Findings support predictive validity of incarceration due to rule violations and new offenses during supervision using the TRAS versions, along with the domains of the TRAS-CST version, although the effect sizes were small to moderate. Results also indicate that the domain scores on the full TRAS may provide important intervention focus for officers supervising individuals on community supervision.

Keywords

risk probation supervision compliance

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andrews

D. A.

Bonta

(2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 16(1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018362

Desmarais

S. L.

Johnson

K. L.

Singh

J. P.

(2016). Performance of recidivism risk assessment instruments in US correctional settings. Psychological Services, 13(3), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000075

Desmarais

S. L.

Singh

J. P.

(2013). Risk assessment instruments validated and implemented in correctional settings in the United States. Council of State Governments.

Kaeble

(2023). Probation and parole in the United States, 2021. Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Latessa

Lemke

Makarios

Smith

Lowenkamp

(2009). The creation and validation of the Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS). Federal Probation, 74(1), 16–22.

Latessa

Lovins

Makarios

(2013, June 17). Validation of the Indiana Risk Assessment System: Final report [Unpublished technical report]. https://www.in.gov/courts/iocs/files/prob-risk-iras-final.pdf

Latessa

Lovins

B. K.

(2018). Development of the Texas Risk Assessment System (TRAS). Texas Probation, 6(4), 4–7.

Latessa

Smith

Lemke

Makarios

Lowenkamp

(2010). The creation and validation of the Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS). Federal Probation, 74(1), 16–22.

Latessa

E. J.

Manchak

Lux

Newsome

Lugo

Papp

(2017). The Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS): A re-validation & inter-rater reliability study. The University of Cincinnati Corrections Institute.

10.

Lovins

B. K.

Latessa

E. J.

May

Lux

(2018). Validating the Ohio Risk Assessment System Community Supervision Tool with a diverse sample from Texas. Corrections, 3(3), 186–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/23774657.2017.1361798

11.

Lowenkamp

C. T.

Lemke

Latessa

(2008). The development and validation of a pretrial screening tool. Federal Probation, 72(3), 2–9.

12.

Mai

Subramanian

(2017). The price of prisons: Examining state spending trends, 2010-2015. Vera Institute of Justice.

13.

Minton

T. D.

Beatty

L. G.

Zeng

(2021). Correctional populations in the United States, 2019. Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/correctional-populations-united-states-2019-statistical-tables

14.

Muller

C. J.

MacLehose

R. F.

(2014). Estimating predicted probabilities from logistic regression: Different methods correspond to different target populations. International Journal of Epidemiology, 43(3), 962–970.

15.

National Archive of Criminal Justice Data. (2020). National incident-based reporting system, 2020. Federal Bureau of Investigation.

16.

Ormachea

P. A.

Lovins

B. K.

Eagleman

D. M.

Davenport

Jarman

Haarsma

(2017). The role of tablet-based psychological tasks in risk assessment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 44(8), 993–1008. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854817714018

17.

Oudekerk

Kaeble

(2021). Probation and parole in the United States, 2019. Bureau of Justice Statistics.

18.

Pederson

K. M.

Toman

E. L.

Miller

H. A.

(2022). The relationship between mental health, risk, and community supervision outcomes. Journal of Criminal Justice, 82, 101985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2022.101985

19.

Rice

M. E.

Harris

G. T.

(2005). Comparing effect sizes in follow-up studies: ROC Area, Cohen’s d, and r. Law and Human Behavior, 29(5), 615–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-6832-7

20.

Texas Department of Criminal Justice. (2015). The Texas Risk Assessment System: A new direction in supervision planning. Agency News:. Criminal Justice Connections, 22(3), 1–2.

21.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2020). Financial characteristics. American Community Survey, ACS 5-Year estimates subject tables, Table S2503. https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST5Y2020.S2503?q=S2503&y=2020

22.

Wagner

Rabuy

(2017). Following the money of mass incarceration. Prison Policy Initiative. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/money.html

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.07 MB