There is a strong movement toward juvenile justice agencies' use of risk assessment and risk-need-responsivity approaches to improve case management decisions for young offenders. However, little is known about whether adoption of risk assessment actually effectuates any changes in the way young offenders are handled. This was a multisite study of the impact on case processing of implementation of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) or Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory in 6 juvenile probation offices using a prepost design and 1,694 propensity score-matched young offenders. Consistent with the risk principle, there were significant changes to at least some areas of case processing in all but 1 site, most notably with respect to decreases in the amount of supervision youth received and in rates of out-of-home placement. The nature and extent of the impact varied as a function of sites' characteristics and implementation quality, not as a function of the risk assessment used. No increases in recidivism were observed in any site, and there was a significant reduction in recidivism in 1 site. The key benefits of implementation of valid risk assessment and case management procedures were improved resource allocation and fewer instances of inappropriate interference in youths' lives without an apparent increased risk to public safety. (PsycINFO Database Record

Two complimentary studies were conducted to investigate the inter-rater reliability and performance of juvenile justice personnel when conducting the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk for Youth (SAVRY). Study 1 reports the performance on four standardized vignettes of 408 juvenile probation officers (JPOs) and social workers rating the SAVRY as part of their training. JPOs had high agreement with the expert consensus on the SAVRY rating of overall risk and total scores, but those trained by a peer master trainer outperformed those trained by an expert. Study 2 examined the field reliability of the SAVRY on 80 young offender cases rated by a JPO and a trained research assistant. In the field, intra-class correlation coefficients were 'excellent' for SAVRY total and most domain scores, and were 'good' for overall risk ratings. Results suggest that the SAVRY and structured professional judgment can be used reliably in the field by juvenile justice personnel and is comparable to reliability indices reported in more lab-like research studies; however, replication is essential.

No abstract

An effective approach to reducing recidivism is, first, to identify a youth's risk of reoffending and then to match the intensity of interventions to that risk level. This pre–post quasi‐experimental, prospective study compared 247 (pre) with 217 (post) adjudicated youths to examine the implementation of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and its effects on case management practices in Louisiana's Caddo parish probation office. The results indicated that placement rates dropped by 50%, use of maximum levels of supervision dropped by almost 30%, and use of community services decreased except for high‐risk youths, but only after the SAVRY was properly implemented. This shift towards more appropriate allocation of resources that are matched to risk level occurred without a significant increase in reoffending. The implications for implementation and for use of risk/needs assessment in juvenile probation are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Innovative study design and analytic strategies are required to build the evidence base and promote rapid dissemination of effective interventions. Findings from this study will assist purveyors in refining the intervention, and will lay the groundwork for further replication and testing to build the evidence base for parents with serious mental illnesses and their families.