Offender Assessment System (OASys)
The Offender Assessment System (OASys) is a national system used by the NPS for assessing the risk and needs of an offender since 2002. It was designed jointly by the Prison and Probation Service and is designed to:
Assess how likely an offender is to be reconvicted
Identify and classify offending related needs
Assess risk of serious harm, risks to the individual and other risks
Assist with management of risk of harm
Link the assessment to the supervision or sentence plan
Indicate the need for further specialist assessments
Measure change during the period of supervision/sentence.
What is OASys?
OASys is a combination of both clinical and actuarial assessment methods.
Clinical assessment often involves the practitioner interviewing the offender, gathering and verifying information from a number of sources including the police, domestic abuse units, children services and community mental health services to name but a few. This information gathering process then enables the practitioner to make a professional judgement of the risk posed by the offender. However, professional judgement is based on the practitioner’s interpretation of the information and this in itself can be less reliable than the actuarial assessment method.
Actuarial approaches to risk assessment has its roots in the insurance industry and is a mathematically measured prediction of the potential and likelihood of a person to behave in risky way. Actuarial assessment is based on static factors such as age, sex, number of previous convictions. Section one of OASys requires the practitioner to input the relevant data to provide an Offender Group Reconviction Score (OGRS) which predicts the likelihood of reconviction within a 12 and 24 month period based on those static factors.
OASys provides a holistic approach to risk assessment through the combination of both clinical and actuarial risk assessment methods. OASys is considered to be efficient as a risk assessment tool as it combines the best aspects of previously existing assessment tools, which in theory should mean that it is accurate in its predictions and should beuser friendly (Robinson, 2003:118).
What are the components of OASys?
OASys consists of five main components that are as follows:
(1) Risk of reconviction and offending related factors.
This section includes offending information both past and current, social and economic factors and personal factors. All these sections are scored from zero to two. The higher the score the more likely the factor is related to the offending. There is also a section on health but this is not scored.
(2) Risk of serious harm to others, risks to the individual and other risks.
There are four levels of risk of serious harm within OASys these are; low, medium, high and very high.
(3) The OASys Summary sheet.
This component identifies the risks and needs relating to the offender. It also shows the main areas of work that need to be included in the sentence plan and risk management plan.
(4) The Sentence Plan.
This component draws all the elements of OASys together and looks ahead to the management of the offender throughout their sentence and leads to the preparation of a sentence plan. This plan is reviewed at regular intervals.
(5) Self-assessment.
The self assessment questionnaire gives the offender an opportunity to record their views. It gives the offender manager a clear insight into how offenders see their lives and their offending behaviour. The self assessment questionnaire also contributes to the sentence plan.
These 5 components enable the practitioner to take a systematic approach to identifying criminogenic needs, identify specific risk areas, formulate a risk management plan and develop a sentence plan aimed at addressing the criminogenic needs and ultimately reducing risk. The next section provides an over view of Sections 1 -12.
What are the sections of OASys?
Section 1: Offending Information
It is widely accepted that past behaviour is the best predictor future behaviour. This is true of criminal behaviour where every research study in this country and abroad has demonstrated that criminal history is a very good predictor of future reconviction (Nuttall,1996; Cornish and Clarke, 1975; Andrews, 1983; Copas et al, 1994,; May, 1999).
It is important to remember that this section is related to likelihood of reoffending and does not tell you the risk serious harm that an offender poses.
Example: An adult male, age 20 with 18 previous convictions for offences of theft is likely to have a medium to high likelihood of reoffending.
What must be taken in to account is that theft is unlikely to cause serious harm and it is therefore important that the practitioner uses the rest of OASys to determine more fully what the risk actually is that is posed by the offender.
In contrast, a 50 year old male with no previous convictions and an offence of rape is likely to have a low likelihood of reoffending based on static factors. However, the type of harm that he has the potential to cause is much more serious and further exploration of his offending behaviour through the completion of OASys is critical to determine his risk levels.
Section 2: Analysis of Offences
This section provides the practitioner with an opportunity to explore the circumstances surrounding the offence.
It often involves using the facts from the Crown Prosecution Service in combination with the information gathered from interviewing the offender about their own interpretation of what happened.
It is important in this section to explore the factors leading up to the offence and analyse the offender’s triggers (consideration is given to disinhibitors such as alcohol, pornography, non-compliance with medication, psychiatric problems, emotional state, drugs, traumatic life event) and motivation for the offence (i.e. evidence of sexual motivation, financial motivation, addiction/perceived needs, emotional state of the offender, racial motivation, thrill seeking or any other types of motivation).
This section also asks the practitioner for details of the victim in terms of approximate age, gender, race and ethnicity and what the impact of the offence was on them. The practitioner is asked to identify if the offender recognises the impact and consequences of their offence on the victim and the wider community. This section also prompts the practitioner to look at patterns of offending behaviour and whether the current offence is an escalation in seriousness from previous offending. Scott’s Model (1977) provides an excellent framework for the practitioner to contextualise the factors linked to this section.
Section 3: Accommodation
There is clear evidence that a lack of permanent accommodation is related to re-offending.
Those of no fixed abode or who are living in hostels, especially hostels with other offenders, are more likely to reoffend.
A sudden change of accommodation status can have a significant impact on an offender’s likelihood of reoffending.
This section enables the practitioner to consider the offender’s current accommodation status and the suitability of their housing situation.
Home visits are particularly important for this aspect in terms of considering the environment that the individual is living in. Whilst an offender may have stable accommodation, the practitioner is asked to consider the suitability of it in relation to quality of residence, appropriateness of living arrangements, overcrowding, relationships with rest of household. They are also asked to consider the suitability of the location of the accommodation i.e. is it close to the victim, do they have access to criminal contacts and the local level of criminal activity.
These questions start to assist the practitioner in considering how their offending behaviour is linked to accommodation issues.
Examples may include domestic abuse perpetrators who have stable accommodation but continue to live with their partners; child sex offenders who have stable accommodation but reside close to a school; drug users who have no accommodation and are sofa surfing; members of gangs who live in a known area for gang violence.
What these examples evidence is the need to look more closely at how an offender’s accommodation may be linked to their offending behaviour and risk of serious harm.
Section 4: Education, Training and Employment:
Research demonstrates that offenders are less well educated and less well trained than other groups in society (Palmer & Hollin, 1995).
This section aims to identify the offender’s experience of education and it is important that the practitioner identifies whether or not there have been any behavioural issues during the educational period and whether any qualifications were gained.
It is equally important to consider what skills the offender has and their attitude towards gaining employment in the future.
In order to complete this section it is essential that a basic skills screening is completed which will help to identify if a referral is required for further support.
Whilst there are no specific questions related to the offender’s offence being linked to their employment, it is still an important area for the practitioner to consider.
For example, the practitioner may want to consider the suitability of an offender who commits numerous burglaries being employed in door-to-door sales.
Therefore, whilst employment is generally seen as a protective factor, the practitioner must consider the evidence in relation to the type of employment and offending behaviour.
Section 5: Financial Management and Income:
This section deals not only with the amount of income but also the way in which income is managed.
In 2002, the Social Exclusion Unit published the report ‘Reducing Re-offending by Ex-prisoners’. It listed seven fundamental issues that contribute to re-offending. Personal finance was cited as an undeniable thread that linked those issues that included debt and lack of access to benefits.
It is therefore important that financial management and income is explored by the practitioner and that an offender’s main source of income is considered. This will include wages, state benefits, offending and loans.
Consideration should also be given to an individual’s outgoings to see that they are able to maintain their standard of living through legitimate means.
It is also important to think about the source of loans that an offender has i.e. a bank loan or from loan sharks. If an offender has perceived addictions to drugs or alcohol, are they able to manage their income to support this addiction or do they need to access money through other sources i.e. drug dealing or committing fraud?
This is where consideration can also be given to the type of offending that is committed for financial gain and its link to the risk of the serious harm posed by an offender i.e. the difference between committing a Robbery to committing an offence of Theft.
Section 6: Relationships
Evidence has existed for many years that for male offenders at least, a strong relationship with a partner is a protective factor against reoffending and that also, particularly for young offenders, supportive families can act as a protective factor.
Exploration of relationships throughout an offender’s life history is a particularly important component in beginning to identify core beliefs and attitudes.
Thinking about an offender’s early childhood experiences and the impact they may have had on the way that they learnt to deal with social situations, the impact of family relationships breaking down, being witness to domestic abuse between parents and how this behaviour may have been normalised.
What messages were being given by key role models in their life growing up and how have they impacted on their view of relationships today?
Do close family members have criminal convictions and what impact has this had on the offender’s view of criminal activity?
Beginning to understand past relationships helps the practitioner to consider how the offender deals with current relationships and the way in which an intervention may be required to break down some of these learnt behaviours in order for the offender to take a more positive role in developing appropriate relationships.
Section 7: Lifestyle and Associates
The differential association theory of criminality (Sutherland and Cressey, 1970), states that offenders who spend an excessive amount of time with other offenders are themselves encouraged to offend.
Research has demonstrated that offenders who spend more time with other offenders and less time with non-offenders are most likely to reoffend (Raynor et al, 1999).
This section considers where offenders spend their time, who they spend it with, what they do, and how these factors link to reoffending.
It also includes questions that may lead to consideration of risk of serious harm and additional personality assessment.
Section 8: Drug Misuse
There is a clear link between misuse of drugs and reoffending. May’s (1999) research suggests that drug misuse is a key predictor of reconviction, and drug use is illegal in most case anyway.
Section 8 identifies the extent and type of drug misuse and its apparent effects on the offender’s life.
Monahan and Steadman (1996) have shown that drug misuse, when associated with other risk factors such as personality disorder, often increases the risk of serious harm to others and self.
Scoring of this section will help to determine the need for specialist intervention.
Types of drug are listed in this section and the practitioner may want to take a list of these to the interview to ensure that they are all covered.
Importantly this section asks the practitioner if there is an official record or self report of violent behaviour being linked to drug use. It is therefore important when discussing drug use with an offender that previous convictions are not simply used as the only forum for identifying violent behaviour but an inquisitive approach is taking with the offender to consider their experiences of being on drugs.
Motivation for tackling drug use is also addressed in this section and this is something that needs to be explored fully with the offender.
At pre-sentence report stage the offender may well be saying that they are motivated to address their drug use but what is the evidence of the offender actually doing this? The practitioner may want to verify the level of motivation by looking at previous convictions and considering previous opportunities to address drug misuse or by contacting local drug agencies to verify if the offender is attending and engaging.
Section 9: Alcohol Use
Alcohol Misuse has long been associated with offending, particularly violent offending. In OASys, alcohol misuse is rated as a significant but less important factor than drug misuse in the likelihood of reconviction.
This does not mean it will not be a very important factor for some offenders, or extremely important in identifying risk of serious harm.
However, the structuring of questions in this section is systematic of those for drug misuse and consideration is given to motivation to tackle alcohol use and whether or not violent behaviour has been related to alcohol use at any time. Particular consideration should be given as to whether or not alcohol was a causal factor or a disinhibitor at the time of the offence.
Alcohol use is often used to justify behaviour and the practitioner will need to explore further the thoughts and feelings of the offender at the time of the offence.
This will assist in identifying the core attitudes and beliefs and consequently whether or not alcohol was acting as a disinhibitor.
Section 10: Emotional Well Being
There are a whole range of psychological and emotional factors which are moderately correlated with re-offending.
For example, lack of ability to cope with stress, depression and mental health problems (Gendreau, Little and Coggin, 1996; Samble and Quinsey, 1999).
It is not the case that most people who suffer from anxiety, depression, or mental health problems are likely to become offenders but that these problems can become offender related factors for specific individuals or certain groups of offenders.
There is a low threshold for indicating a problem and this section identifies those who may be at risk of self-harm and possibly risk of serious harm to others. Severe problems in this section would indicate the need for a specialist psychiatric or psychological assessment.
Section 11: Thinking and Behaviour
Research has demonstrated that many offenders cope poorly with life because they exhibit various cognitive deficits (Ross & Fabiano, 1985).
This section looks at how the offender thinks and their general style of behaviour. It is not so much concerned with what the offender thinks but how they apply reasoning, especially to social problems.
Therefore, the practitioner not only needs to explore areas such as impulsivity, aggressive/controlling behaviour and temper control but also their approach to tackling situations which consequently lead them to acting impulsively or losing their temper and acting in an aggressive/controlling manner.
This section links in to questions in this section about problem solving skills and the offender’s ability to achieve goals. Are they aware of the consequences of their behaviour and if not, work can be focused on addressing this deficit? Equally if they are, how do they justify their actions and what work can be completed to break this down to reduce the chances of acting impulsively?
Often the phrase ‘I just did it’ is associated with this section and it is important for the practitioner to consider the underlying reasons behind the action and exploring with the offender the build up to the action rather than simply considering the exact period of time related to the offence.
Section 12: Attitudes
This section assess pro-criminal attitudes, attitudes towards supervision and attitudes to the offender’s own offending behaviour. Andrews (1996) considered that attitudes are the one of the most important factors that need to be addressed in order to reduce the rate of reconviction.
Attitudes are particularly difficult to assess and practitioners also need to be careful that their own experiences and prejudices do not impact on their assessment of the offender. It is helpful that this section is preceded by a number of other sections that will have already helped the practitioner begin to contextualise the offender’s behaviour and their attitudes towards themselves and others.
This is where the importance of the relationship section is evident in to trying to understand attitudes and behaviour and how the sections of OASys help the practitioner to make a holistic assessment of the individual.
Section 13: Health and Other considerations
This section enables diversity issues to be considered and how these may impact on the delivery of Community Orders, Electronic Monitoring and Programme Requirements.
With regards to Electronic Monitoring, consideration should be given to the impact of this in domestic abuse situations both positively (restricting the offender’s ability to go a partner/ex-partner’s address) and negatively (keeping an offender at home and unable to leave a situation that could lead to causing serious harm).
Self Assessment:
The self assessment questionnaire enable the offender to identify what they see as their problem areas.
It provides a means to evidence their awareness of their situation and whether or not they consider themselves to have a problem.
It also aids sentence planning and is a means to engage offenders in the process.
How to score sections fo OASys
Scoring the individual sections 1-12 of OASys is fairly straight-forward:
The range of scores for all individual items is 0, 1 or 2, or 0 = No, 2 = Yes
The items in each section are totalled to produce an overall score
The score is recorded in the box provided at the end of each section.
The scores are known as the raw scores to differentiate them from the weighted scored that are used in the profile of risk needs summary table.
It is the scoring of the OASys sections 1-12 that relies on the clinical assessment of the practitioner and therefore this is where scoring is open to interpretation. A completed OASys assessment is only as good as the quality of the information on which it is based. It must therefore be completed following an interview with the offender using both collateral and file information. Collateral information will help evaluate the credibility of the information gained during the interview with the offender, determine whether the interactional style of the offender during the interview was representative of their usual behaviour and provide primary information for scoring the items.
The benefits of this scoring system are that, unlike actuarial assessments, it can cater for change through the ability to review the OASys assessment when there are significant changes. Such changes may include accommodation status, employment status, relationship status, drug and alcohol use, completion of programmes that may have impacted on thinking and behaviour and attitudes. Reviewing these changes will then prompt the assessor to consider how these factors impact on the likelihood of reoffending and the risk of serious harm posed by the offender.
