**5. Assessment measures for youth violence**

There have been several assessments created for clinicians and researchers to predict future acts of violence within the youth. Prominent assessment tools include the ability to weigh strengths/weaknesses with multicultural factors considered, including age, culture, and gender, along with proven reliability and validity. While evaluating several risk assessments, the Child and Adolescent Risk/Needs Evaluation (CARE-2) is the strongest predictive tool, when comparing reliability/validity rates [4]. The following will discuss an overview of the more prominent risk assessments, that are currently available for predicting future acts of violence.

### **5.1 The child and adolescent risk/needs evaluation (CARE-2)**

The child and adolescent risk/need evaluation (CARE-2) examines risk factors that may impact a child or adolescent's development and assists in developing a

plan for youth to grow into becoming pro-social members of society. The CARE-2 assessment model is based on an atheoretical risk-resilience model. Additionally, for a risk assessment tool to have validity, it should present a range between 75 and 85% Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC). The CARE-2 assessment predictive validity has been reported at 75–94% (ROC) for males and 67–97% (ROC) for females, which is above the SAVRY, PCL-YV (male), PACT, and LS-CMI assessments predictive validity rate [4]. This assessment tool can assess by age group and gender while predicting chronic violence. The limitation behind this assessment is that it does not have a strong statistical foundation and does not address specific ethnic risk or resilience factors.

#### **5.2 Youth level of service/case management inventory (YLS/CMI)**

Youth Level of service/case management inventory (YLS/CMI) is a tool based on the atheoretical risk-resilience interaction model. It combines a risk/needs assessment and a case management tool into a system derived from the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) tool. The YLS/CMI is often utilized by probation officers, youth workers, psychologists, and social workers, as it identifies the youth's needs, strengths, barriers, and incentives, allowing the professional to select appropriate goals for the individual, producing an effective case management plan (Hoge & Andrews, 2016). While the YLS/CMI system is a risk reduction tool based on research. However, the assessment does not assess by age or gender or incorporate ethnic risk or resilience factors. With the limitations in mind, the YLS/CMI would not be appropriate for predicting or assessing violent patterns [45]. The assessment does have moderate validity for recidivism.

### **5.3 Structured assessment of violence in youth (SAVRY)**

The SAVRY is based on the Structured Professional Judgment model, and is not designed to be a formal test, but more a structured interview without statistical designation or scores. The SAVRY consists of three risk domains broken into 24 items, the domains include Historical Risk Factors, Social/Contextual Risk Factors, and Individual/Clinical Factors. The SAVRY assessment follows clear definitions of risk and protective factors, addressing the primary domains. Within the assessment, each risk factor is rated with a three-level structure, while the six protective factors are rated by present or absent, all of which have specific rating guidelines. Additionally, reactive, and proactive aggression is theoretically supported and emphasized [46]. Childs et al. [47], suggested that the SAVRY shows appropriate measures of reliability and validity; however, it does not take into account cultural considerations in youth. Another limitation is that SAVRY excludes children and young adolescents and focuses on risk and resilience in adolescents.

## **5.4 Psychopathy checklist: youth version (PCL:YV)**

The Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) was created by Robert Hare in the 1970s and has been revised into the PCL-R, which was published in 2003 and is often used as a tool to measure psychopathy that is used in research [48]. The PCL:YV assists with identifying patterns of cheating, fighting, bullying, and antisocial behaviors in adolescents/youth. Determining the patterns of traits can be crucial for the individuals developing into adulthood (Forth et al., 2016). The PCL:YV can be

utilized to understand contributing factors to antisocial behavior and psychopathy in adulthood. Within the PCL:YV follows an expert-rater that emphasizes the need for multidomain and multisource information (Forth et al., 2016). While the PCL:YV tests high on validity standards, the focus is on predicting antisocial or sociopathic behaviors, assisting in predicting violent behavior in the future. However, there is a limit on youth age groups.

### **5.5 Screening tool for the assessment of young sexual offenders' risk (STAYSOR)**

The STAYSOR consists of 11 dichotomous and static-historical items and is considered a self-constructed risk assessment tool. The research emphasized that there is the relevance of psychological abnormalities in juvenile sexual offenders [49]. There are four items included in the assessment such as prior sexual offenses, current convictions of any offense, any stranger victim, and any male victim, which are adaptions from the STATIC-99 [50]. While the STRAYSOR has proven to be a useful tool for predicting sexual violence, however, it would not be a reliable tool for predicting nonsexual violent acts. This instrument relies on behaviors without considering risk or resilience factors, limiting the predictive ability of youth without previous convictions or offenses.

### **5.6 Structured assessment of protective factors for violence risk (SAPROF)**

The SAPROF was developed specifically for assessing protective factors in adult offenders and is often used in addition to a risk-focused Structured Professional Judgment (SPJ) tool, such as the HCR-20 or HCR-20 V3. Included in the SAPROF are 17 protective factors, 15 of which are dynamic factors making them important treatment evaluation and target measures that are rated on a three-point scale. The SAPROF is suitable for previous violent and sexual offenders [51]. While the SAPROF assessment has shown to be inappropriate for children or youth, it proves to be a reliable predicting tool for adult offenses. However, the assessment has shown to have more validation when used on male offenders, as the research completed on the use with females lacks strong empirical evidence. Additionally, it focuses primarily on protective factors excluding many risk factors beneficial in predicting violence.

#### **5.7 Reynolds adolescent adjustment screening inventory (RAASI)**

The RAASI is a self-reported measuring tool indicating the clinical severity of domains of psychological adjustment problems and assessing the frequency and symptom of adjustment problems. 32 items within this assessment tool are derived from the Adolescent Psychopathology Scale (APS) [52]. The RAASI provides an Adjustment tool along with four factorial-derived scales that provide specificity to an adolescent's Adjustment problem. The scales include antisocial behavior, anger control, emotional distress, and positive self. Generally, the RAASI is utilized in residential settings and has shown inappropriate for predicting violence in a community, home, or school setting.

### **5.8 The strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ )**

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire measures emotional symptoms, conduct problems, attention/hyperactivity, peer relationship concerns, and prosocial behaviors, in youth ages 3–16 years old. The questionnaire can be used for screening, assessment, and evaluation, and can be completed and scored online [53]. This assessment tool is appropriate for screening violent behavior; however, it lacks multicultural considerations.
