Risk and Needs Assessments FAQs
Q: What is Cross-Tracking?
A: Cross-Tracking is the Commonwealth’s statewide data initiative to standardize criminal justice information. Conceived as part of the criminal justice reform law, the fully integrated data framework is designed to enhance transparency, improve access to criminal justice data, and facilitate high-level analysis for the public, stakeholders, and researchers to inform public policy and improve public safety.
Q: Why create this dashboard, and what impact will it have on justice involved individuals?
A: Criminal Justice Reform required the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS), in consultation with the Executive Office of Technology Services and Security (EOTSS), to create a data collection and Cross-Tracking system for criminal justice agencies and the Trial Court.
The system was designed to provide a streamlined, 360-degree view of an individual’s engagement with the criminal justice system following them from the point of arrest to entry into a custodial institution and eventual release to Parole/Probation Supervision when applicable.
The integrated data system has six primary goals:
- Drive operational efficiency and effectiveness
- Connect individual records across the criminal justice system
- Increase criminal justice data availability, quality, and public trust
- Empower data-driven decision making and monitoring
- Analyze disparities and evaluate effectiveness of reform programs
- Enable internal and independent studies of recidivism and other criminal justice research
Q: What steps has EOPSS taken thus far to develop the Cross-Tracking system?
A: EOPSS approached this complex process knowing that it required technological expertise 2 and consensus among public safety partners. The integrated Cross-Tracking system required state leaders to develop uniform data collection and reporting standards across a broad range of agencies and independent constitutional offices. EOPSS promulgated regulations to this end which established consistent data definitions, defined the governance framework, outlined integration requirements, and developed operational and implementation procedures. Additionally, EOPSS supported the Sheriffs’ Offices’ Offender Management System upgrade to allow for the collection of the consistent data elements. EOPSS further coordinated with various Sheriffs’ Offices in securing LiveScan devices to provide more fingerprinting capabilities during the booking procedure. EOPSS also secured a Data Use License Agreement from each phase one criminal justice partner agency.
Together, the partners strategized how to standardize data for presentation, moved data securely from agencies to the dashboard, and developed public-facing visualization designs. This is the sixth dashboard that EOPSS has created for Cross-Tracking and the first of its kind. EOPSS is excited for users to engage with this dashboard, review data trends, and provide feedback to EOPSS. As the first of its kind, EOPSS anticipates improvements throughout the development of Cross-Tracking.
Q: What agencies are referred to in the dashboard?
A: Three agencies are represented in the dashboard: Massachusetts Parole Board (Parole), Massachusetts Probation Service (Probation), and the Massachusetts Department of Correction (DOC). Future dashboards will also include other criminal justice agencies, including the Sheriffs’ Offices.
Q: Will the dashboard allow members of the public to access information about a specific person?
A: No, due to Criminal Offender Record Information Laws (CORI) which prohibit the dissemination of justice-involved individuals to the public, the public facing information does not include any personally identifiable information. While criminal justice agencies can access person-specific information to develop effective, personalized rehabilitation plans, the public facing dashboard should be used to understand trends across the larger system.
For more information about a specific individual, you may request access through the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS).
Q: Were any data exclusions made?
A: These population counts include individuals under Parole or Probation supervision or DOC custody. Excluded from these counts are:
- Civilly Committed Individuals
- Juveniles
- Individuals under the jurisdiction of the federal government, or another state’s jurisdiction through an Interstate Compact Agreement under supervision by Parole or DOC
- Any person sentenced in Massachusetts and serving custody or on parole in another jurisdiction via interstate compact
- Any individual booked by another criminal justice agency and held temporarily at a Jail or House of Correction under a Safe Keep Agreement. A person who was previously booked by another criminal justice agency and then transported to a Jail or House of Correction to be held for pre-arraignment or detention purposes. This is known as a “Safe Keep.” (not pre-trial or convicted)
Q: How does the dashboard display data that predates Criminal Justice Reform (CJR)?
A: Given that data submitted by the participating criminal justice agencies predates the CJR data reporting standards outlined in the new governing regulations, EOPSS has taken great care to review and match the records from the various agencies to consolidate the data seen in the dashboard. In doing so, some of the older data, known as legacy data, was not able to meet these matching criteria and therefore, is not shown in the dashboard. EOPSS will continue to work through the legacy data with its stakeholders to ensure accuracy to be able to display it on the dashboard.
Q: Will additional data become available in the future?
A: Information on risk and needs assessments from other criminal justice agencies, including the Sheriffs’ Offices, will be incorporated into the dashboard in 2025.
Q: What guidelines were used to protect the privacy of individual offenders?
A: The risk and needs assessment dashboards display information for offenders in custody in the DOC or under community supervision by Parole or Probation on January 1st for the years 2020 through 2024.
Q: Can offenders be included in the dashboard more than once?
A: Yes, if the offender was in custody or under community supervision on January 1st of different years, then they will be in the sample more than once. This can occur if the offender has a long sentence of incarceration or community supervision, so they are in custody or under supervision over multiple January 1st dates, or if the offender was released from custody and then reincarcerated or supervised in the community at some later point.
Q: How is the age of the offender determined?
A: Age is defined as the age of the offender at the snapshot date, that is the January 1st date when the offender was in custody or under community supervision. Ages will be assigned to the following groups consistent with the existing public dashboard:
- 18 to 24
- 25 to 29
- 30 to 39
- 40 to 49
- 50 to 59
- 60 and above
Q: How is the race and ethnicity of the Offender determined?
A: Race has six values and is self-reported by the Offender. If the records management system indicated multiple races were reported, or the race was not properly identified that selection appears in the “other / unknown” category. If an Offender’s race was recorded as Hispanic that Offender’s race is displayed as “unavailable”. The displayed values are as follows:
• American Indian / Alaska Native
• Asian / Pacific Islander
• Black / African American
• Other / Unknown
• Unavailable
• White
Ethnicity as three values:
• Hispanic / Latino
• Not Hispanic / Latino
• Unavailable
Q: What additional filters are available on the dashboard?
A: Additional filters are available for Probation and Parole:
For Probation, users can filter by the court department and county of the court responsible for the supervision of the offender.
For Parole, users can filter by the regional office responsible for the supervision of the offender. The name of the regional office represents the location of that office. Labels may change over time reflecting the relocation of offices or the reallocation of regions.
Q: Are classification instruments included in the dashboard?
A: No. Classification instruments are widely used by custodial agencies to assess factors such as age, gender, and legal reasons for detention to determine security and housing placements. Examples include Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) screening, Booking questionnaires, initial classification screening, 60-day general reviews, or internal housing risk factors. Scores on classification instruments are not ingested into the platform and will not be included in the public dashboard.
Q: Is the level of supervision shown in the dashboard?
A: No. Level of supervision refers to the amount and type of oversight that a parolee or probationer receives in the community. This may include the number of visits with the supervising officer, restrictions on movement in the community, and other oversight mechanisms. The level of supervision is informed by the results of risk and needs assessments.
Q: If offenders have more than one risk and need assessment, which one is shown in the dashboard?
A: The dashboard will display the risk and need assessment information with the date closest to and preceding the snapshot date. The date the risk and needs assessment instrument was completed is the assessment date. It is expected that risk and needs assessments will be administered at an initial date when the offender begins a period of custodial or community placement. Offenders may be reassessed to capture any changes in dynamic factors that impact the assessment of risk and needs or to reflect breaks in periods of incarceration. Updates will often occur at regular intervals. In the subcomponents dashboard, the DOC Identified Needs Assessment – Academic is updated dynamically and the most recent value is shown and may not be prior to the snapshot date.
Q: What risk and needs assessment tools are used?
A: There are many risk and need assessment instruments that are used in Massachusetts custodial and community supervision agencies. Each assessment tool uses a unique set of questions and scoring criteria as to assess risk levels. Probation uses two instruments – the ORAS-CSST and the ORAS-CST. Instruments and agencies that utilize each instrument are set forth below:
| Instrument | Agency Utilizing the Instrument |
|---|---|
| COMPAS – Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions | Massachusetts Department of Correction |
| LS/CMI – Level of Service/Case Management Inventory | Massachusetts Parole Board |
| ORAS – CSST – Ohio Risk Assessment Community Supervision Screen Tool | Massachusetts Probation Service |
| ORAS – CST – Ohio Risk Assessment Community Supervision Tool | Massachusetts Probation Service |
Q: How are risk and need instruments scored?
A: Each assessment tool uses a unique scoring criterion to assess risk levels and generate final scores. The ORAS – CSST was changed from a 4-item scale to a 9-item scale in 2019. The tools generate final scores as follows
| Instrument | Total Risk Score |
|---|---|
| COMPAS – Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions | IMS is providing High, Medium, and Low values |
| LS/CMI – Level of Service/Case Management Inventory | Very High: 30-43, High: 20-29, Medium: 11-19, Low: 5-10, Very Low: 0-4 |
| ORAS – CSST – 4 Item Ohio Risk Assessment Community Supervision Screen Tool | Male: High: 3+, Low: 0-2 Female: High: 4+, Low: 0-3 |
| ORAS – CSST – 9 Item Ohio Risk Assessment Community Supervision Screen Tool | Male: High: 3+, Low: 0-2 Female: High: 3+, Low: 0-2 |
| ORAS – CST – Ohio Risk Assessment Community Supervision Tool | Male: Very High: 34+, High: 24-33, Moderate: 15-23, Low: 0-14 Female: High: 29+, Moderate: 22-28, Low Moderate: 15-21, Low: 0-1 |
Subcomponents and Scales for Assessments
| Assessment Type | Component | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| COMPAS - Male | Anger | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS - Male | Criminal Thinking | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS - Male | Substance Abuse | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS – Male | Vocational | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS - Female | Neg_Social_Cognition | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS - Female | Parental_Stress | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS - Female | Reentry Housing | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS - Female | Relationship Dysfunction | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS - Female | Substance Abuse | High, Medium, Low |
| COMPAS - Female | Vocational | High, Medium, Low |
| Identified Assessment | Academic | Yes, No |
| Identified Assessment | MA_Sex_Offender | Yes, No |
| ORAS CSST – 4 Item | Criminal Friends | Majority Criminal Friend (2); Some Criminal Friends (1); No Criminal Friends (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 4 Item | Currently Employed | Not Employed or Employed Part-time (1); Yes, Full-time, Disabled, Retired (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 4 Item | Drugs Readily Available in Neighborhood | Yes, Easily Available (2); Yes, Somewhat Available (1); No, Generally Not Available (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 4 Item | Number of Prior Adult Felony Convictions | Three or More Felony Convictions (2); One or Two Felony Convictions (1); No Felony Convictions (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Current Financial Situation | Problems (1); Stable/Minimal Problems (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Currently Employed | Not Employed or Employed Part-time (1); Yes, Full-time, Disabled or Retired (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Drug Use Caused Problems | Current Problems (2); Past Problems (1); No Problems (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Highest Education | Less than High School or GED (1); High School Graduate or Higher (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Most Serious Offense Underage 18 | Yes, Felony (2); Yes, Misdemeanor (1); None (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Number of Prior Adult Felony Convictions | Three or More Felony Convictions (2); One or Two Felony Convictions (1); No Felony Convictions (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Prior Sentence to Community Supervision as an Adult | Yes (1); No (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Received Official Misconduct while Incarcerated as an Adult | Yes (1); No (0) |
| ORAS CSST – 9 Item | Walks Away from a fight | Rarely (2); Sometimes (1); Yes (0) |
| ORAS - CST | Criminal Attitudes and Behavioral Patterns | High (9-13), Moderate (4-8), Low (0- 3) |
| ORAS - CST | Criminal History | High (7-8), Moderate (4-6), Low (0-3) |
| ORAS - CST | Education, Employment and Financial Situation | High (5-6), Moderate (2-4), Low (0-1) |
| ORAS - CST | Family and Social Support | High (4-5), Moderate (2-3), Low (0-1) |
| ORAS - CST | Neighborhood Problems | High (2-3), Moderate (1), Low (0) |
| ORAS - CST | Peer Associations | High (5-8), Moderate (2-4), Low (0-1) |
| ORAS - CST | Substance Use | High (5-6), Moderate (3-4), Low (0-2) |
| LS/CMI | Alcohol/Drug Problem | Very High (7-8), High (5-6), Medium (3-4), Low (1-2), Very Low (0) |
| LS/CMI | Antisocial Pattern | Very High (4), High (3), Medium (2), Low (1), Very Low (0) |
| LS/CMI | Companions | Very High (4), High (3), Medium (2), Low (1), Very Low (0) |
| LS/CMI | Criminal History | Very High (8), High (6-7), Medium (4-5), Low (2-3), Very Low (0-1) |
| LS/CMI | Education/Employment | Very High (8-9), High (6-7), Medium (4-5), Low (2-3), Very Low (0-1) |
| LS/CMI | Family/Marital | Very High (4), High (3), Medium (2), Low (1), Very Low (0) |
| LS/CMI | Leisure/Recreation | High (2), Medium (1), Very Low (0) |
| LS/CMI | Pro criminal Attitude/Orientation | Very High (4), High (3), Medium (2), Low (1), Very Low (0) |
Q: Why are some offenders not assessed?
A: Risk and need assessments are not generally conducted for every offender under the supervision of a custodial or community supervision agency with one exception: Parole. Parole performs a risk and needs assessment on all incarcerated individuals before they are released on parole supervision. Conducting a risk and needs assessment uses substantial agency resources and the results are most useful when they inform placement into programming in preparation for success in the community.
It is estimated that conducting a risk and needs assessment takes a minimum of 40 minutes to administrate and additional time to enter the data into the records management system. The CST takes upwards of 5-6 hours to complete: The assessment includes a series of visits that take place initially, one being a scheduled home visit, in which individuals are interviewed and asked to fill out a self-report. Both the interview, the self-report, and the Probation Officer’s additional efforts reviewing collateral information (criminal records, DOC/HOC disciplinary reports, previous 8 probation notes which would include treatment history, information from family and friends, etc.) help in scoring out the actual tool. If there are questions on scoring throughout the process, Probation Officers also reference an ORAS scoring guide to help. Probation Officers must also prepare a case plan based off the assessment results.
For DOC and Probation, examples of offenders for whom risk and need assessments may not be available include:
- Offenders on Pre-Trial status
- Offenders recently sentenced to a custodial or community supervision placement
- Offenders with short custodial sentences (e.g., under 30 days)
- Offenders with a first-degree life sentence
- Offenders who refuse or are unable to participate due to medical reasons
- Offenders placed on Administrative, Driving Under the Influence of Liquor, Pre-Trial Probation or Pre-Trial Conditions of Release
- If an alternative risk assessment evaluation is conducted by an expert chosen by the attorney representing the client
Q: What is the difference between risk and need?
A: “In many justice contexts, risk is discussed in conjunction with needs. Needs commonly refer to changeable criminogenic factors that are related to the likelihood of reoffending, such as substance dependence… risk is the likelihood of re-offense, and it tells the justice system who to focus on, whether for detention or release, level of supervision, or intervention. Need factors provide targets for programming and services intended to change behavior and thereby reduce risk. They can also be used to predict risk along with other risk factors, but their use in risk assessment (i.e., prediction) is not the same as their role in needs assessment (i.e., problem identification).”
Source: Bureau of Justice Assistance, Public Safety Risk Assessment Clearing House (https://bja.ojp.gov/program/psrac)
Q: Why is the number of cases measuring need sometimes less than the number of cases for measures of risk?
A: At the DOC, if an offender is assessed as medium or high risk, then the offender is subsequently administered the need assessment to identify one’s specific criminogenic need areas.