|
Avery Simmons (ODVSOM Intern) - My name is Avery Simmons and I am interning with the ODVSOM this summer. I am a 4th year undergraduate at the University of Denver double majoring in Socio-Legal Studies and Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies. I currently run a gender-based violence prevention organization on my campus called the Do Better Campaign. I am originally from Virginia. Outside of work I love to stay busy with rock climbing, crocheting, and other crafty hobbies!
Rachel Morton (ODVSOM Intern) - Rachel is a proud Navy veteran and Skillbridge Intern at the Colorado Department of Public Safety’s Office of Domestic Violence and Sex Offender Management. Rachel is passionate about victim advocacy and has experience as a Victim Advocate for the Navy. She also has experience leading watch teams in a high-stress environment as her ship’s Combat Information Center Watch Supervisor. She received her bachelor’s degree in international relations from Marymount Manhattan College in 2017. When she’s not working Rachel enjoys spending time with her fiancé, running, reading, and watching baseball.
It's that time of the year again when we kindly ask Approved Providers to participate in a quick survey about Lifetime Supervision. This is part of our commitment to update the Colorado legislature on the costs of sex offender treatment and provision of services. The survey was sent out on August 1 and will be open until August 19.
We really appreciate the participation of all providers. For agencies with multiple providers, we kindly request that you coordinate so that only 1 provider responds on behalf of the agency. The information collected will be included in the Annual Lifetime Supervision of Sex Offenders Report. It will only take about 5 minutes to complete the survey. Thank you so much for your participation!
Section 3.200 of the Adult Standards were recently revised regarding Discharge from Treatment and Summaries. Significant changes to this Standard included the requirement for providers to list the Type and Reason separately to clearly communicate the circumstances of the discharge for each client. The three types are Successful, Unsuccessful and Administrative. The “non compliance” discharge was changed to “Unsuccessful” to be more consistent with existing research. Due to confusion around discharges, additional context is now provided for the reasons for each type of discharge. Specifically, the Administrative Discharge section revisions included additional details and examples for providers based information collected through Provider Data Management System.
Additionally, both the Adult and Juvenile Standards have been revised to include guidance on clients being discharged based on achieving "Maximum Benefit" in treatment. The language in both sets of Standards define it as “A discharge, for this reason, is an indication that the client has made sufficient progress on treatment goals related to sexually abusive behavior, has addressed their risk of sexually offending, does not present with an active or acute risk of sexual harm, and is unlikely to make additional progress with continued treatment at this time”.
Clients should only be considered to have achieved Maximum Therapeutic Benefit when they meet the definition in the Standards and when further intervention is unlikely to result in change for the foreseeable future. Members of both Standards Revisions Committees and the Best Practices Committee gained consensus that this should be a rare occurrence as most clients who are compliant progress enough for a successful discharge. If a client has met all treatment goals, and made enough progress on the Core Treatment Concepts, a successful discharge should be considered by the provider.
All discharge summaries should conform with the standards outlined within Section 3 of the Adult and Juvenile Standards. A discharge for maximum benefit requires that the client has been compliant and engaged in treatment but due to other factors is unlikely to gain any future benefit with continued intervention. In most cases, this will lead to an administrative discharge. This is different from a client who lacks compliance or engagement in treatment for which further interventions aimed at addressing the lack of compliance or engagement could lead to future therapeutic benefit.
The staff of the SOMB recognize the importance of ongoing Implementation in addition to the existing training and technical assistance available for all professionals working in the field of Sex Offense Management. What is the difference between training and implementation you ask?
The goal of training is to communicate information. The goal of implementation is to support the use and practical application of the information communicated within training.
In addition to providing training on SOMB Standards and related offense specific topics, we will be adding Round Table Discussions to support providers in their every day use of the Standards and Guidelines. Professional members of CST and MDTs are invited to attend these sessions which will focus on the ongoing implementation of all existing and recently revised Standards. SOMB Implementation Specialists, Erin Austin and Paige Brown will facilitate conversations between members of teams on how they are using the Standards with clients in real time. Providers are encouraged to come, ready to discuss Issues, Concerns, Opportunities and Sustainable practices with members of their professional community.
Following the passing of the Sunset Bill in 2023, the SOMB is now required to complete Standards Compliance Reviews on 10% of providers within 2 years. The main purpose of these reviews will be used to ensure providers are compliant with existing standards. Staff's goal is to gain insight on areas where additional training and implementation assistance is needed regarding the Standards and offense specific work. Outcomes of the Standards Compliance Reviews will be used to assess the need for training, round table discussions and possible standards revisions.
The Juvenile Standards Revisions Committee discussed the need to update the Reference Guide for School Personnel that the SOMB published in 2015, noting that things have changed in the past 10 years that are due to be revisited and revised. The committee decided this task would best be pursued by a special workgroup to dedicate their time, energy, and resources into updating this document. JSR Chair, Theresa Weiss, will also chair this workgroup which plans to meet monthly on the first Friday of each month from 1pm-2pm beginning August 2nd. If you are interested in participating in this work group please contact Paige Brown - CDPS. Please feel free to send this information with any school personnel that you work with and who may be interested!
The Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB) governing statute states, “The board shall develop, implement, and revise, as appropriate, guidelines and standards to treat adult sex offenders…incorporating in the guidelines and standards the concepts of the risk-need-responsivity…” (16-11.7-103 (4) (b) C.R.S.). As a result, the SOMB has done significant work to incorporate the Risk, Need, Responsivity (RNR) model into the Adult Standards and Guidelines. However, there are certain clients that may require modification of the Adult Standards and Guidelines based on their RNR factors.
For example, adults convicted of a sexual offense who have well below-average (very low) levels of risk and need factors may not require all of the treatment, supervision, and monitoring components required by the Adult Standards and Guidelines. Similarly, certain adults convicted of a sexual offense may have well above-average (very high) levels of risk and need factors requiring additional components of treatment, supervision, and monitoring not contained in the Adult Standards and Guidelines.
The SOMB is currently considering these case conceptualization profiles as it seeks to modify the Adult Standards and Guidelines. As part of this process, the SOMB has reviewed the literature related to the application of RNR with adults convicted of a sexual offense. For a nice summary, please see A Five Level Risk and Needs System Maximizing Assessment Results in Corrections through the Development of a Common Language/ by Hanson and colleagues (2017).
In addition, the SOMB has reviewed the evaluation and treatment data submitted by approved providers for a forthcoming policy brief on this topic. There is only limited data submitted by providers that encompass clients with well below-average levels of risk and needs who may be receiving treatment modifications outside of the Adult Standards and Guidelines, as this data may not have been entered into the data collection system. It is the hope of the SOMB that by bringing these clients under the Adult Standards and Guidelines and allowing treatment to be modified based on RNR, there will be a better understanding of their treatment needs. On the other hand, there is a significant amount of data regarding clients with well above-average levels of risk and needs. The data entered in the data collection system has provided a good understanding of how providers are addressing this risk and needs both within and in addition to the Adult Standards and Guidelines.
Please stay tuned for more information from the SOMB about how to work with these clients under the Adult Standards and Guidelines, and in the publication of the upcoming policy brief.
Description:
The Sex Offending Needs Integrated Classification System (SONICS) is a five-level system designed to provide an overall clinical profile based on individual risk, need, protective, and responsivity factors. This system creates a mechanism for providers using different validated instruments and assessments to communicate their findings with standard terminology and provide structured, organized communication across all stakeholders with improved consistency and accuracy. The SONICS is not a risk assessment instrument. The system is based on the instruments evaluators already use to assess these factors.
This training is designed to be for all stakeholders associated with the legal process, treatment, evaluation, and monitoring of individuals who have committed sexual offenses. In this session, we will review the research that provided the framework for the SONICS and discuss the benefits of a common-language system that applies to Colorado’s legislative and policy requirements. Additionally, the presentation will review the guidelines for changing a client’s SONICS level and how to use the SONICS with noncontact offense populations.
WHEN: September 12, 2024
WHERE: Mesa County Workforce Center
512 29 1/2 Road
Grand Junction, CO 81504
TIME: 8:30 AM - 10:30 AM
FORMAT: In Person Only
COST: Free
CEU: 2 hours
AUDIENCE: Open for all stakeholders
The Sex Offending Needs Integrated Classification System (SONICS) is a five-level system designed to provide an overall clinical profile based on individual risk, need, protective, and responsivity factors. This system creates a mechanism for providers using different validated instruments and assessments to communicate their findings with standard terminology and provide structured, organized communication across all stakeholders with improved consistency and accuracy. The SONICS is not a risk assessment instrument. The system is based on the instruments evaluators already use to assess these factors.
In this session, we will review the research that provided the framework for the SONICS and discuss the benefits of a common-language system that applies to Colorado’s legislative and policy requirements. We will explain the steps for making a SONICS designation or “level” within SOMB Evaluations and provide profile descriptions to help illustrate its use. Additionally, the presentation will review the guidelines for changing a client’s SONICS level and how to use the SONICS with noncontact offense populations. Participants will be given an opportunity to ask questions about the SONICS, designate a SONICS score through practice examples, and discuss the application of the SONICS
WHEN: September 12, 2024
WHERE: Mesa County Workforce Center
512 29 1/2 Road
Grand Junction, CO 81504
TIME: 12:00 PM - 4:00 PM
FORMAT: In Person Only
COST: Free
CEU: 4 hours
AUDIENCE: Open for all Evaluators.
The SOMB has updated the questions related to treatment discharge in the Provider Data Management System (PDMS) to match the recent revisions in the Sex Offender Management Board Standards. The updates were made live on July 19th. If you experience any issues, please try ctrl + F5 first to clear the cache. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Yuanting Zhang.
|
