Correctional Service Canada
Symbol of the Government of Canada

Common menu bar links

Research Reports

Warning This Web page has been archived on the Web.

Preliminary Results of National Sex Offender Census

1991, No. R-29

by

Frank J. Porporino      Laurence L. Motiuk

Research and Statistics Branch
Correctional Service Canada

May, 1991

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

I. INTRODUCTION

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE SEX OFFENDER CENSUS

IV. FINDINGS

A. Sex Offender Admission Rates

B. Distribution of Sex Offenders

C. Sexual Offence History and Treatment

D. Selected Characteristics of Sex Offenders and Treatment

E. Sex Offender Treatment and Parole Eligibility

V. DISCUSSION

VI. REFERENCES


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Percent of New Admissions for Sex Offenses (1986/87 - 1990/91)

Table 2. Relative Distribution of Sex Offenders by Location

Table 3. Regional Distribution of Incarcerated Sex Offenders by Security Level

Table 4. Regional Distribution of Sex Offenders on Conditional Release by Status

Table 5. Distribution of Sex Offenders by Sexual Offence History and Treatment

Table 6. Distribution of Sex Offenders by Selected Characteristics and Treatment

Table 7. Distribution of Sex Offenders by Region and Treatment

Table 8. Proportion of Sex Offenders Treated or In-progress by Parole Eligibility


LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: Census on Sex Offenders: Checklist for Case Management Officers

Appendix B: Instructions for Completing the Sex Offenders Census Checklist

Appendix C: Sex Offender Distribution by Institution and Parole Offices

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to express our sincere thanks to all those who had assisted us in the execution of this study. At National Headquarters, Joe Beltempo and Bessie Pang provided considerable support, especially in regards to the timely collection and entry of data. Verne Quinsey was also very helpful in providing guidance for this study, and deserves considerable thanks. We would also like to extend our appreciation for the efforts of those in the regions, namely, the case management staff.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This research arose from a series of reviews by the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) on programs and services for sex offenders. These reviews had underscored the fact that a more co-ordinated sex offender programming and service strategy was needed in Canadian federal corrections. In addition, it was recommended that further research on sex offenders be pursued. Therefore, a nationwide 'Sex Offender Population Study' was initiated which had two components: 1) a census identification of all sex offenders and 2) an extensive case file review of a large sample of sex offenders from across the country. This preliminary report describes, in detail, the 'Sex Offender Census' that was conducted to accurately identify the number, types and characteristics of sex offenders under the jurisdiction of the CSC - both in institutions and under community supervision.

The research began with the design and development of a structured survey instrument and a set of instructions for completing a 'Sex Offender Census Checklist'. The 'Census Checklist' gathered case-specific information on the following: status (i.e., current offenses or previous history), details of the current sex offence (i.e., nature of the offence, number of victims, age and gender of victims, degree of injury, degree of force, presence of alcohol or drugs), past history of sexual offenses (i.e., patterns, seriousness) and treatment history (i.e., dates, type/nature, location, sponsors).

The 'Sex Offender Census' was conducted with the assistance of the Correctional Programs and Operations Sector of the CSC, regional headquarters and operational units (i.e., penitentiaries and parole offices) across Canada. All sex offenders under federal supervision - both in institutions and in the community - were assessed during March 1991 using the structured 'Census Checklist'. The survey instrument was administered by case management officers who reviewed their current caseloads for sex offenders. In order to identify sex offenders the following criteria were to be applied - if the offender: 1) is currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence; 2) has been convicted in the past for one or more sexual offenses; 3) committed a sexually-related offence, but is not currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence; and 4) committed a sexual offence in the past but was never convicted for it.

Upon examination of CSC's automated offender information system, it was discovered that over the past five years that there had been a steady growth (20.4%) in the admission rate of offenders whose major admitting offence was a sex offence. While in 1986/87 there were 545 such admissions (8.9% out of a total of 6,136 admissions), by 1990/91, this figure had risen to 692 (10.7% out of a total of 6,475 admissions). This trend, however, was deemed to be an understatement of the actual rate of sex offender admissions when one considers admissions who have sex offenses which are not the major admitting offence, past sexual offenses or sexually-related offenses.

The 'Sex Offender Census' yielded information on a total of 3,066 male federal male sex offenders. Results at the time of the survey showed that these sex offenders made up 14.9% of the CSC's total offender population. In addition, it was found that 18.9% of the incarcerated population and 9.9% of the conditional release population were sex offenders. A total of 2,162 sex offenders (70.5%) were identified by the census as being incarcerated and 904 (29.5%) were found to be under community supervision (i.e., Day Parole [18.9%]; Full Parole [46.8%]; Mandatory Supervision [34.4%]). While 48.8% of the incarcerated sex offenders were located in medium security institutions, 6.4% were situated in regional psychiatric or treatment centres. Interestingly, nearly half of the incarcerated sex offender population could be accounted for by a total of five CSC institutions.

Some noteworthy differences were found in relation to the regional distribution of sex offenders across federal corrections. The 'Sex Offender Census' revealed that over fifty percent of the sex offender population could be accounted for by two regions: Ontario (25.2%) and Prairie (26.2%). A consistent pattern also emerged of a higher proportion of sex offenders in institutions relative to under community supervision. This pattern was most evident for the following Ontario, Prairie, and Pacific regions. On the other hand, the Atlantic and Quebec regions were found to be more evenly distributed with respect to the location of sex offenders.

Of special interest in the census was the nature of sexual offending amongst the federal sex offender population. Descriptive analyses revealed that the majority of federal sex offenders were serving their first sentence for a sexual offence and roughly a quarter were currently serving a sentence and had been convicted in the past for sexual offense (i.e., repeaters). As expected, those cases identified in the census as currently serving a sentence and had been convicted in the past for sexual offending (i.e., the highest risk group) were more likely to have received or be in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC. For the 2,013 sex offenders who had only a current sex offence, one out of four of these sex offenders had either completed or were in treatment.

Using the selected criteria for identifying sex offenders on caseload, the distributions of sex offenders were examined in relation to a variety of characteristics. Nearly a half of these sex offenders showed an increase in seriousness (violence) and rate of offenses over time, one out of three had two or more victims, and two out of three had used threat of force and/or serious injury during their offence. In regards to type of sexual offence, the largest proportion of sexual offenders had committed sexual assault against an adult victim.

At the time of the census, one out of four sex offenders had completed or were participating in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC . More important, however, there was relatively little differentiation to be found among the various sex offender types in relation to either the proportion of cases who had received or were participating in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC.

Although two thirds of the incarcerated sex offenders identified in the census had past their parole eligibility date, it is suggested that these individuals may form a rather unique group of high risk candidates for release into the community (i.e., degree of harm to victim(s), lengthy sentences, refused treatment, unsuitable for treatment, etc.). Therefore, a note of caution is warranted and further analyses are required before any definitive conclusion could be drawn. Nevertheless, nearly one out of four of those sex offenders identified as past their parole eligibility date had been treated or were in-progress. As expected, sex offenders as a group were more likely to have been treated or in a treatment program as they approached their parole eligibility date.

Data analysis for the Sex Offender Population study continues, and research will now focus on the development of typologies for differential treatment regimes. Most of the research results obtained to date are being used to help answer a variety of questions relating to the federal sex offender population in Canada and to current and planned programming for sex offenders.

I. INTRODUCTION

     The Working Group on Sex Offender Treatment Review (Solicitor General Canada, 1990) and the Correctional Service of Canada's (CSC) Task Force on Mental Health (CSC, 1991) both recommended further research on sex offenders for the purpose of developing and evaluating special treatment programs. Since these reviews had underscored the fact that a more co-ordinated programming and service strategy was needed, it was strongly recommended, as a first step, that a census identification of sex offenders under the federal jurisdiction of CSC be pursued.

     At the time of the above mentioned reviews, statistical information on key characteristics of sex offenders (i.e., nature of the offence), circumstances surrounding the offence(s) (i.e., degree of victim injury, involvement of alcohol/drugs) and treatment history were not available through CSC's existing automated Offender Information Systems (Gordon & Porporino, 1991). Therefore, a national census of sex offenders was conducted in order to accurately identify the number, types and characteristics of federally sentenced sex offenders - both in institutions and under community supervision.

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT

     The national survey of sex offenders under federal supervision initially began in 1990 with the design and development of a 'Sex Offender Census Checklist' (see Appendix A) and a set of instructions for completing the survey instrument (see Appendix B). Both the 'Census Checklist' and instructions for completing the instrument were made available in both english and french.

     The 'Census Checklist' was divided into four main sections. First, "identifying information" gathered relevant data with respect to personal demographics (i.e., age) and correctional process (i.e., date of admission on this sentence, parole eligibility dates, present location and status).

     Second, "sex offender status" identified all the possible ways an individual on a case management caseload could be a sex offender. For example, the following criteria were to be applied - if the offender: 1) is currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence; 2) has been convicted in the past for one or more sexual offenses; 3) committed a sexually-related offence, but is not currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence; and 4) committed a sexual offence in the past but were never convicted.

     Third, the 'Census Checklist' gathered case-specific information on details of the "current sex offence" (i.e., nature of the offence, number of victims, age and sex of victims, degree of injury, degree of force).

     Finally, the 'Census Checklist' surveyed the "past history" of sexual offenses (i.e., patterns, seriousness) and treatment history (i.e., dates, type/nature, location, sponsors).

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE SEX OFFENDER CENSUS

     The census identification of all sex offenders under federal jurisdiction was conducted with the assistance of CSC staff from national headquarters, regional headquarters (Atlantic, Quebec, Ontario, Prairie, Pacific) and the operational units (i.e., penitentiaries and parole offices) spread across the country.

     The 'Census Checklist' was administered by case management staff during the month of March 1991. Instructions were given to all case management staff to identify all sex offenders on current caseloads - both in institutions and in the community. Regional contact persons served to collect the completed 'Census Checklists' and then forward them to research staff at National Headquarters to be entered into a sex offender database.

IV. FINDINGS

A.   SEX OFFENDER ADMISSION RATES

     Over the past five years, there has been a 20.4 % growth in the rate of admission of offenders whose major admitting offence (i.e., offence which received the longest sentence) was a sex offence. While for fiscal year 1986/87 there were 545 offenders whose major admitting offence was a sex offence (8.9% of a total 6,136 admissions), by 1990/91 this figure had risen by 147 cases to 692 (10.7% of a total of 6,475 admissions).

Table 1.

Percent of New Admissions for Sex Offenses (1986/87 - 1990/91)

Fiscal Year
Total Annual
Admissions
Sex Offender
Admissions
Percent
Sex Offenders
 
1986/87
6,136
545
8.9
1987/88
6,315
570
9.0
1988/89
6,281
707
11.3
1989/90
6,598
669
10.1
1990/91
6,475
692
10.7

B.   DISTRIBUTION OF SEX OFFENDERS

     The national sex offender census yielded information on a total of 3,066 sex offenders. Overall, the results of the census showed that sex offenders made up 14.9% of the CSC's total offender population. It was found that 18.9% of the incarcerated population and 9.9% of the conditional release population were sex offenders. As Table 2 shows, 2,162 sex offenders (70.5%) identified by the census were incarcerated and 904 sex offenders (29.5%) were under community supervision. Of note is the fact that in the Atlantic and Quebec regions there is a more equal distribution of sex offenders who are incarcerated versus under community supervision. A distribution of identified sex offenders by operational units is appended (see Appendix C).

Table 2.

Relative Distribution of Sex Offenders by Location

Location
Atlantic
n      %
Quebec
n      %
Ontario
n      %
Prairie
n      %
Pacific
n      %
TOTAL
n      %
 
Incarcerated
175      57.0
344      55.4
615      79.6
620      77.1
408      72.7
2,162      70.5
Community
132      43.0
277      44.6
158      20.4
184      22.9
153      27.3
904      29.5
Total
307      10.0
621      20.3
773      25.2
804      26.2
561      18.3
3,066

     Table 3 presents the regional distribution of incarcerated sex offenders by security level. Nearly half of the incarcerated sex offenders were in medium-security institutions, and 6.4% were located in regional psychiatric or treatment centres.

Table 3.

Regional Distribution of Incarcerated Sex Offenders by Security Level

Security Level
Atlantic
n      %
Quebec
n      %
Ontario
n      %
Prairie
n      %
Pacific
n      %
 
Minimum
55      31.4
60      17.4
38      6.2
51      8.2
18      4.4
Medium
31      17.7
204      59.3
241      39.2
302      68.4
279      68.4
Maximum
76      43.0
67      19.5
304      49.4
196      31.6
49      12.0
RPC/RTC
N/A
N/A
31      5.0
45      7.3
62      15.2
High Maximum
N/A
10      2.9
N/A
7      1.1
N/A
Provincial/CCC
13      7.4
3      0.9
1      0.2
19      3.1
N/A
Total
175      8.1
344      15.9
615      28.4
620      28.7
408      18.9

Note: RPC = Regional Psychiatric Centre; RTC = Regional Treatment Centre; CCC = Community Correctional Centre; N/A = Not Applicable

     In Table 4, we present the regional distribution of sex offenders according to their current release status. Of those sex offenders under community supervision, 18.9% were on day parole, 46.8% were on full parole and 34.3% were on mandatory supervision. In Ontario, as contrasted with other regions, a larger proportion of sex offenders are under mandatory supervision relative to those on day parole or full parole.

Table 4.

Regional Distribution of Sex Offenders on Conditional Release by Current Status

Release
Status
Atlantic
n      %
Quebec
n      %
Ontario
n      %
Prairie
n      %
Pacific
n      %
Total
n      %
 
Day Parole
18      31.6
63      22.7
16      10.1
35      19.0
39      25.5
171      18.9
Full Parole
82      62.1
134      48.3
60      38.0
87      47.3
60      39.2
423      46.8
Mandatory Supervision
32      24.2
80      28.9
82      51.9
62      33.7
54      35.3
310      34.3
Total
132      14.6
277      30.6
158      17.5
184      20.4
153      16.9
904

C.   SEXUAL OFFENCE HISTORY AND TREATMENT

     In order to explore the extent of sexual offending among the federal sex offender population, we categorized sex offenders identified in the census as to whether or not they were currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence and/or had been convicted in the past for one or more sexual offenses. An inspection of Table 5 reveals that the majority of federal sex offenders (65.7%) were serving their first sentence for a sexual offence. While 828 cases (27%) were currently serving a sentence and had been convicted in the past for sexual offenses, there were 187 cases (6.1%) who were not currently serving a sentence for sexual offending but had been convicted in the past. Interestingly, 38 cases (1.2%) were identified in the census as both currently not serving a sentence and never had been convicted of a sexual offence. These individuals represent those cases identified in the census who had committed a sexually-related offence and were not currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence as well as those who had previously committed a sexual offence for which they were never convicted.

     As expected, those cases identified in the census as currently serving a sentence and had been convicted in the past for sexual offending (i.e., the highest risk group) were more likely to have received or be in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC. We also note in Table 5 that those cases who were identified as currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence but had not been convicted in the past for a sexual offence were the next most likely group to have received treatment or currently be participating in a sex offender treatment programme.

Table 5.

Distribution of Sex Offenders by Sexual Offence History and Treatment

CURRENT
SEXUAL OFFENCE
HISTORY OF
SEXUAL OFFENSES
N
TREATMENT*
 
YES
YES
828
30.8%
YES
NO
2,013
25.0%
NO
YES
187
10.2%
NO
NO
38
2.6%
TOTAL
 
3,066
25.4%

Note: *Treatment programmes offered or sponsored by CSC.

D.   SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF SEX OFFENDERS AND TREATMENT

     Table 6 presents the percentage of cases identified in the census for selected characteristics (i.e., seriousness, number of victims, threat of force or serious injury, type of sexual offence) and the proportion of these sex offenders who had received or were in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC. Overall, the results indicated that two out of three cases identified in the census had sexual offenses in which there was one victim and threat of force and/or serious injury had been used in the commission of the offence. It is noteworthy that approximately 30% of these sex offenders had received or were in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC.

     In examining the type of offence(s) with respect to homogeneity of sexual offending, the census revealed that 6.2% of the cases were incest offenders, 21% were paedophiles, 40.4% were for convicted for sexual assault only, and for other offenses (i.e., exhibitionism) the percentage was 3.1%. On the other hand, 27.9% were identified as sex offenders with mixed offenses (i.e., incest and sexual assault, etc.). At the time of the census, we note that there was relatively little differentiation to be found among the sex offender population with respect to the proportion of cases who had received or were participating in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC.

Table 6.

Distribution of Sex offenders by Selected Characteristics and Treatment

CHARACTERISTICS
CASES IDENTIFIED
TREATMENT IN PROGRESS
OR COMPLETED
 
Increasing seriousness
(violence) and rate of
offenses over time:


42.0%


30.6%
Two or more victims:
33.7%
31.4%
Threat of force
and/or serious injury:

68.4%

26.9%
Type of Sexual Offence:
Incest
Paedophilia
Sexual Assault
Mixed
Other
Not known

6.2%
21.0%
40.4%
27.9%
3.1%
1.5%

31.6%
27.1%
24.3%
25.8%
18.1%
13.0%

E.   SEX OFFENDER TREATMENT AND PAROLE ELIGIBILITY

     A regional distribution of those sex offenders identified in census as having received or were in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC is presented in Table 7. While over 25% of the sex offenders had received or were receiving sex offender treatment, we note that this percentage does not include those cases who were in treatment and dropped out (5.1%), or those who had completed treatment or were in a sex offender program offered by other agencies (4.9% and 3.8%, respectively). It is noteworthy that the smallest proportion of sex offenders treated or in progress was in the Quebec Region.

Table 7.

Distribution of Sex Offenders by Region and Treatment

REGION
TREATMENT IN PROGRESS
OR COMPLETED
 
ATLANTIC
35.2%
QUEBEC
11.9%
ONTARIO
33.5%
PRAIRIES
21.6%
PACIFIC
29.1%
NATIONAL
25.4%

     The offender information available on the census checklist allowed for an examination of the proportion of sex offenders treated or in-progress by parole eligibility date. It should be noted, however, that since complete information on each offender was not captured on the checklists (i.e., parole eligibility date), it was decided to delete these cases (less than 1%) and conduct the analyses.

     The distribution of sex offenders identified in the census past parole eligibility date as well as within six months, one year and two years of parole eligibility is presented in Table 8. While the majority of sex offenders identified in the census had past their parole eligibility date (68.6%), a note of caution is warranted. Sex offenders identified in the census as being past parole eligibility may form a rather unique group of high risk candidates for release into the community (i.e., degree of harm to victim(s), lengthy sentences, refused treatment, unsuitable for treatment, etc.). Therefore, it is not surprising to find that this group of offenders would accumulate in custody and before any definitive conclusions could be drawn further analyses are required. Nevertheless, nearly one out of four of those sex offenders identified as past their parole eligibility date had been treated or were in-progress. As expected, the pattern of results in Table 8 shows that sex offenders as a group were more likely to have been treated or in a treatment program as they approached parole eligibility.

Table 8.

Proportion of Sex Offenders Treated or In-progress by Parole Eligibility

Past Parole Eligibility Date
(n = 1,475)
Within Six Months
(n = 259)
Within 1 Year
(n = 432)
Within 2 Years
(n = 558)
 
23.5%
13.5%
11.8%
10.8%

V. DISCUSSION

     The national sex offender census was conducted in order to provide statistical information on the growth and key characteristics of sex offenders [nature of the offence, circumstances surrounding their offence(s) (i.e., degree of victim injury, involvement of alcohol/drugs) and treatment history]. More specifically, the census was an attempt to accurately identify the number, types and characteristics of federally sentenced sex offenders - both in institutions and under community supervision.

     Upon examination of CSC's offender information system, it was found that there had been steady growth (20.4%) in the rate of admission of offenders over the past five years whose major admitting offence was a sex offence. While in 1986/87 there were 545 admissions of sex offenders (8.9% of a total 6,136 admissions), by 1990/91, this figure had risen to 692 (10.7% of a total of 6,475 admissions). We note that these admission figures represent an understatement of actual sex offender admissions due to some limitations inherent in CSC's automated offender information system. For example, the aforementioned rates do not reflect those new admissions who had been involved in sexual offenses but did not receive the longest sentence for that offence, had been involved in sexual in the past or had committed sexually-related offenses. Nevertheless, the current trend for major admitting offence which are sexual being on the rise appears to substantiate the claim that a more co-ordinated programming and service strategy is needed.

     Notwithstanding the finding that sex offenders made up 14.9% of the CSC's total offender population, it was also discovered that 18.9% of the incarcerated population and 9.9% of the conditional release population were sex offenders. There were, however, 70.5% of sex offenders incarcerated and 29.5% under community supervision. Albeit, that a substantial proportion of sex offenders were in custody, it was further found that nearly half of them were located in a total of five medium security institutions. It may be important to consider this tendency for sex offenders to accumulate in specific institutions when formulating a service strategy in federal corrections.

     In a similar fashion, some noteworthy differences were found in relation to the regional distribution of sex offenders across federal corrections. The 'Sex Offender Census' revealed that over fifty percent of sex offenders could be accounted for by two regions: Ontario (25.2%) and Prairie (26.2%). In addition, there was variation across the regions with respect to the proportion of sex offenders incarcerated versus under community supervision. Whereas a consistent pattern emerged of a higher proportion of sex offenders in institutions relative to under community supervision, this pattern was most evident for the following Ontario, Prairie, and Pacific regions, the Atlantic and Quebec regions were found to be more evenly distributed with respect to the location of sex offenders.

     Of special interest in the census was the nature of sexual offending among the federal sex offender population. Descriptive analyses revealed that the even though the majority of federal sex offenders were serving their first sentence for a sexual offence, roughly a quarter were currently serving a sentence and had been convicted in the past for sexual offense. As expected, those cases identified in the census as currently serving a sentence and had been convicted in the past for sexual offending (i.e., the highest risk group) were more likely to have received or be in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC. For the 2,013 sex offenders who had only a current sex offence, one out of four sex offenders had either completed or were in treatment.

     Using the selected criteria for identifying sex offenders on caseload, the distributions of sex offenders were examined in relation to a variety of characteristics. Nearly a half of these sex offenders showed an increase in seriousness (violence) and rate of offenses over time, one out of three had two or more victims, and two out of three used threat of force and/or serious injury during their offence. In regards to type of sexual offence, the largest proportion of sexual offenders had committed sexual assault against an adult victim. At the time of the census, one out of four sex offenders had completed or were participating in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC . More importantly, however, there was relatively little differentiation found among the various sex offender types in relation to the proportion of cases who had received or were participating in a sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC.

     Although two thirds of the incarcerated sex offenders identified in the census had past their parole eligibility date, it is suggested that these individuals may form a rather unique group of high risk candidates for release into the community (i.e., degree of harm to victim(s), lengthy sentences, refused treatment, unsuitable for treatment, etc.). Therefore, a note of caution is warranted and further analyses are required before any definitive conclusion could be drawn. Nevertheless, nearly one out of four of those sex offenders identified as past their parole eligibility date had been treated or were in-progress. As expected, sex offenders as a group were more likely to have been treated or in a treatment program as they approached parole eligibility.

     Data analysis for the 'Sex Offender Population Study' continues, and research will now focus on the development of typologies for differential treatment regimes. Most of the research results obtained to date are being used to help answer a variety of questions relating to the federal sex offender population in Canada and to current and planned programming for sex offenders.


REFERENCES

CSC (1991). Report of the Task Force on Mental Health. Ottawa: Communications Branch

Gordon, A. & Porporino, F.J. (1991). The management and treatment of incarcerated sexual offenders. Corrections Today, 53, 162-168.

Solicitor General of Canada. (1990). The management and treatment of sex offenders. Report of the Working Group: Sex Offender Treatment Review. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services.


Appendix A:

IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
 
1. FPS Number ___:___:___:___:___:___:___
 
2. Coding Date (yy/mm/dd) ___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
 
3. Offender’s Date of Birth (yy/mm/dd) ___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
 
4. Date of admission on this sentence (yy/mm/dd) ___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
 
5. Mandatory supervision date (yy/mm/dd): ___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
 
6. Parole eligibility date (yy/mm/dd) ___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
 
7. Present location of offender:
 
1. Institution: _______________
2. Parole Office: _______________
 
8. Present status:
 
1. Incarcerated
2. Day parole
3. Full parole
4. Mandatory supervision
 
SEXUAL OFFENDER STATUS
 
9. Indicate all of the ways in which this individual was identified as a sex offender. (Check all that apply)
 
The offender:
1. is currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence. :____:
2. has been convicted in the past for one or more sexual offenses: - Federal (__ __) - Provincial, including probation (__ __)
3. committed a sexually-related offence, but is not currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence (see Guidelines). :____:
4. has previously committed a sexual offence for which he was never convicted (see Guidelines). :____:
 
CURRENT SEXUAL OFFENCE
 
10. If the offender is currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence(s):
 
a) Specify the nature of the offence(s): (Check all that apply)
1. Incest :____:
2. Paedophilia: male child under 16 yrs. :____:
3. Paedophilia: female child under 16 yrs :____:
4. Paedophilia: male and female children under 16 yrs :____:
5. Sexual Assault: adult male or female 16 yrs. & over :____:
6. Other sexual offenses (e.g., exhibitionism) :____:
7. No information :____:
 
b) How many were involved? (___ ___)
c) indicate sex (M/F) and age group of the victims:
(Check all that apply) M F
1. Children (< 12 years) :___::___:
2. 12 to 17 years
3. Adult (18 or over)
 
11. Degree of victim injury from the current sexual offence(s)::___:
 
0. No injury
1. Slight injury; no weapon
2. Slight injury; weapon used
3. Treated in a clinic and released
4. Hospitalized for at least one night
5. Caused death; without post-death mutilation
6. Caused death; with post-death mutilation
7. Not known
 
12. Degree of force or coercion used to commit the current sexual offence(s): :___:
 
0. No coercion
1. Threatened to use force; no weapon used
2. Threatened to use force; weapon used
3. Used physical aggression, minor assault (e.g., hit, slapped, struck, minor physical injury)
4. Brutal assault with serious physical injury (e.g., wounding, maiming, disfiguring, endangering victim’s life)
5. Caused death; without post-death mutilation
6. Caused death; post-death mutilation
7 . Not known
 
13. Were alcohol or drugs involved in any of the current sexual offence(s)? :___:
 
0. No
1. Yes
2 . Not known
 
PAST HISTORY OF SEXUAL OFFENSES
 
14. Were alcohol or drugs involved in any of the previous sexual offence(s)? :___:
 
0. No
1. Yes
2. Not known
 
15. Is there a pattern of increasing seriousness (violence) and rate of sexual offenses over time? :___:
 
0. No
1. Yes
2. Not known
 
16. a) Has the offender ever received any sex offender treatment program offered or sponsored by CSC: :___:
 
0. No
1. Yes, completed
Date of completion:(yy/mm/dd): :___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
(go to part (b))
2. Yes, but dropped out
Date of last attendance at program:
(yy/mm/dd) (go to part (b)) :___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
3. Yes, in progress now (go to part (b))
4. Not known
b) If yes, specify the type/nature of treatment and the location (Institution or Community):________________________________
 
17. a) Has the offender ever received any sex offender treatment program offered or sponsored by any other organization or treatment facility: :___:
 
0. No
1. Yes, completed
Date of completion:(yy/mm/dd) (go to part (b)) :___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
2. Yes, but dropped out
Date of last attendance at program:
(yy/mm/dd) (go to part (b)) :___ ___/___ ___/___ ___
3. Yes, in progress now (go to part (b))
4 . Not known
b) If yes, specify the type/nature of treatment and the location: ________________________________________
 
18. Has the offender expressed interest for any sex offender treatment program during the current sentence: :___:
 
0. No
1. Yes
2. Not known
 
THANK YOU!
Your cooperation is very much appreciated.

Appendix B:


INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE SEX OFFENDER CENSUS CHECKLIST

IDENTIFYING INFORMATION

  1. FPS Number:
  2. Coding Date: Date on which you are completing this checklist.
  3. Offender's Date of Birth:
  4. Date of Admission on this sentence:
  5. Date for offender's current admission
  6. Enter the dates for these items.
  7. Present location of offender: Name of Institution or Parole Office.
  8. Present Status:

Code 1 ("Incarcerated"), if: offender is currently incarcerated.

Code 2 ("Day Parole"), if: offender is currently on day parole.

Code 3 ("Full Parole"), if: offender is currently on full parole.

Code 4 ("Mandatory Supervision"), if: offender is currently under mandatory supervision.

SEXUAL OFFENDER STATUS

  1. Indicate all of the ways in which this individual was identified as a sex offender. (Check all that apply). The offender:

Check 1 ("is currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence"), if: he is currently serving a sentence for at least one sexual offence.

Check 2 ("has been convicted in the past for one or more sexual offenses: (Indicate no. of offenses))
- Federal, if: they were convicted for one or more sexual offenses and had served a federal sentence(s) prior to current sentence, indicate the number of sexual offenses for which they were convicted.

- Provincial, if: they were convicted for one or more sexual offenses and had served a provincial sentence(s), including a probationary sentence(s) prior to current sentence, indicate the number of sexual offenses for which they were convicted.

Check 3 ("committed a sexually-related offence, but is not currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence"), if. offender's current offence is sexually - related, but has been convicted for a non-sexual offence, e.g. due to plea bargaining.

Check 4 ("has previously committed a sexual offence for which he was never convicted"), if: offender committed a sexual offence in the past but was never convicted for it, e.g. victim never reported the sexual incident, but offender admitted to its commission in a psychology report.

CURRENT SEXUAL OFFENCE

  1. If the offender is currently serving a sentence for a sexual offence(s): (Check all that apply)
  • Specify the nature of the offence(s): (Check all that apply)
  • Record all sexual offenses for which the offender was charged for the current sentence. More than one of the following may be applicable:
Check 1 ("Incest"), if: offender had sexual intercourse with a victim who is related to offender by blood relationship; this includes half-brother and half-sister.

Check 2 ("Paedophilia; male child"), if: victim was a male under 16 years old at time of incident.

Check 3 ("Paedophilia; female child"), if: victim was a female under 16 years old at time of incident.

Check 4 ("Paedophilia; male and female children"), if: victims includes both male and female under 16 years old at time of incident.

Check 5 ("Sexual Assault; adult male or female"), if: victim was 16 years old or over at time of incident.

Check 6 ("Other"), if any of the following is applicable: buggery, bestiality, parent or guardian procuring sexual activity, seduction, acts of gross indecency, indecent exhibition, nudity in a public place.
  • Number of victims involved:
  • Record the total number of victims involved with all incidents related to the charge(s) under the current admission.
  • For cases in which multiple victims were involved and the exact number of victims is unknown, record the approximate number of victims, e.g., "approx. 5"
  • Indicate the sex and age group of the victim(s):
  1. Degree of victim's(s') injury for the current sexual offence(s):
  • If more than one victim involved in the incident(s) related to the offender's current sentence, refer to the victim with the most serious injury.
  • E.g., if three victims were involved and only one sustained injury caused by the offender using a weapon, code 2.
Code 0 ("No injury"), if: no physical injury resulted.

Code 1 ("Slight injury; without weapon"), if injury was: not serious, not an internal injury, victim(s) was (were) not required to remain at hospital overnight, and no weapon or object was used to threaten or harm victim(s) in any incidents related to current admission. "Slight injury" includes: bruises and scratches.

Code 2 ("Slight injury; with weapon"), if injury was: as in all conditions of Code 1 above, and a weapon or an object was used to threaten or harm victim(s) in at least one incident related to current admission.

Code 3 ("Victim treated in clinic and released"), if: victim required clinical treatment but not hospitalization.

Code 4 ("Victim hospitalized for at least one night"), if: victim was hospitalized for one night or more.

Code 5 ("Caused death; without post-death mutilation"), if: victim died as a result of the offence, regardless of the time lapse between the offence and the death, and offender did not mutilate victim's body following victim's death.

Code 6 ("Caused death; with post-death mutilation'), if: victim died as a result of the offence, regardless of the time lapse between the offence and the death, and the offender mutilated the victim's body following victim's death.

Code 9 ("Not known"), if: no information is available.
  1. Degree of force or coercion used in commission of current sexual offence(s):
  • Refer to offence(s) related to current sentence only.
  • If offender's current admission is related to more than one incident, refer to the offence in which most force or aggression was used.
  • E.g., If three separate incidents occurred, and offender threatened victim with a weapon in only one incident, but no force or threat was used in the other two incidents, code 2.
Code 0 ("No coercion"), if: no threat, force or coercion was ever used in the offence(s).

Code 1 ("Threatened to use force; no weapon used"), if: verbal or physical threat was used in any of the offenses related to current sentence, and no weapon or object was ever used in any of the offenses related to the current sentence.

Code 2 ("Threatened to use force; weapon used"), if: verbal or physical threat was used in any of the offenses related to current sentence, and a weapon or object was produced in any of the offenses related to the current sentence.

Code 3 ("Used physical aggression; minor assault"), if: a minor assault was involved, e.g., hitting or slapping, and victim sustained minor injury which did not require overnight hospitalization.

Code 4 ("Brutal assault with serious physical injury"), if: assault resulted in serious physical injury which required extensive clinical treatment, e.g., caused physical disability, seriously wounding victim, or endangered victim's life.

Code 5 ("Caused death; without post-death mutilation"), if: victim died as a result of the offence, regardless of the time lapse between the offence and the death, and offender did not mutilate victim's body following victim's death.

Code 6 ("Caused death; with post-death mutilation"), if: victim died as a result of the offence, regardless of the time lapse between offence and death, and offender mutilated victim's body following victim's death.

Code 9 ("Not known"), if: no information is available.
  1. Were alcohol or drugs involved in offender's current sexual offence(s)?
  • If alcohol or drugs were never involved in any of the incidents, code 0 ("No").
  • If alcohol or drugs were involved in at least one incident, code 1 ("Yes").

PAST HISTORY OF SEXUAL OFFENSES

IGNORE #14 & #15 If:

  1. PRIOR TO CURRENT ADMISSION, offender HAS NEVER BEEN PLACED ON PROVINCIAL OR FEDERAL SUPERVISION UNDER CSC for any sexual offenses (i.e., current admission is offender's FIRST admission to any form of supervision under CSC); AND
  2. PREVIOUS ADMISSION information did not contain any evidence of commission of sexual offenses.
If 1) AND 2) apply, go to #16

History of sexual offenses includes:

  1. past convictions of sex offence;
  2. current non-sexual offenses which were sexual in nature; and
  3. past sexual offence(s) for which the offender was never convicted.
  1. Were alcohol or drugs involved in any offender's previous sexual offence(s)? If alcohol or drugs were never involved in any of the incidents, code 0 ("No").
  • If alcohol or drugs were involved in at least one incident, code 1 ("Yes").
  1. Is there a pattern of increasing seriousness (violence) and rate of sexual offenses over time?
Code 0 ("No"), if: seriousness and frequency of sexual offenses had not changed significantly over time.

Code 1 ("Yes"), if: over time, sexual incidents showed a pattern of increasing seriousness and frequency.
  1. Has the offender ever received any sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by CSC:
  • Regardless of the date of admission, type, and location of supervision under CSC.
Code 0 ("No"), if: offender has never received any sex offender treatment.

Code 1 ("Yes, completed"), if: offender has completed for all components of treatment programme, & left the programme under the consent of staff.

"Date": record the last date of attendance in the programme.
Go to part (b).
Code 2 ("Yes, but dropped out") if: without consent from any staff involved with the treatment programme, offender ceased to attend in one or more sessions and did not return to complete the session(s) at a later date; OR offender was requested by treatment staff to discontinue attendance at treatment programme, e.g., offender's presence in treatment group was disruptive to other participants.

"Date": record the most recent date of attendance in the treatment programme; i.e., last date of attendance, after which offender did not return to attend other sessions.
Go to part (b).
Code 3 ("Yes, in progress"), if: offender is currently participating in the treatment programme.

Code 9 ("Not known"), if: no information is available in file.
  1. If yes, specify the type/nature of treatment and the location (Institution or Community):

If part (a) was coded 1 or 2, record the type/nature of treatment and location of institution or community.

  1. Has the offender ever received any sex offender treatment programme offered or sponsored by any other organization or treatment facility?

    Regardless of the date of admission, type, and location of organization or treatment facility which is not under the jurisdiction of CSC.

Code 0 ("No"), if: offender has never received any sex offender treatment.

Code 1 ("Yes, completed"), if: offender has completed for all components of treatment programme, & left the programme under the consent of staff.

"Date": record the last date of attendance in the programme.
Go to part (b).
Code 2 ("Yes, but dropped out") if: without consent from any staff involved with the treatment programme, offender ceased to attend in one or more sessions and did not return to complete the session(s) at a later date; OR offender was requested by treatment staff to discontinue attendance at treatment programme, e.g., offender's presence in treatment group was disruptive to other participants.

"Date": record the most recent date of attendance in the treatment programme; i.e., last date of attendance, after which offender did not return to attend other sessions.
Go to part (b).
Code 3 ("Yes, in progress"), if: offender is currently participating in the treatment programme.

Code 9 ("Not known"), if: no information is available in file.
  1. If yes, specify the type/nature of treatment and the location (Institution or Community):

    If part (a) was coded 1 or 2, record the type, nature, and location of treatment facility.

  1. Has the offender expressed interest for any sex offender treatment programme during the current sentence:

    During the current admission:

Code 0 ("No"), if: offender has never received any sex offender treatment.

Code 1 ("Yes"), if: offender has expressed an interest in participating in a sex offender treatment programme.

Code 9 ("Not Known"), if: no information is available from the file related to the current admission.

Appendix C:


Distribution by Current Institution
REGION/ Institution
Frequency
  Percent
  Cumulative
Frequency
  Cumulative
  Percent
         
ATLANTIC        
         
Labrador C.C.
Cumberland C.C.
Colchester C.C.
H.M.P. St. John’s
Clarenville C.C.
Springhill
Dorchester
Westmorland
1
2
2
7
1
31
76
55
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.0
1.4
3.5
2.5
1
3
5
12
13
44
120
175
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.6
0.6
2.0
5.6
8.1
 
 
QUEBEC
 
Benoit
Montee St. Francois
Federal Training Centre
Donnacona
Leclerc
Archambault
Ste-Anne-Des Plaine
Quebec R.R.C.
Drummond
R.R.C.-S.H.U.
Cowansville
La Macaza
Port Cartier
3
29
35
13
15
10
31
5
39
10
53
62
39
0.1
1.3
1.6
0.6
0.7
0.5
1.4
0.2
1.8
0.5
2.5
2.9
1.8
178
207
242
255
270
280
311
316
355
365
418
480
519
8.2
9.6
11.2
11.8
12.5
13.0
14.4
14.6
16.4
16.9
19.3
22.2
24.0
 
 
ONTARIO
 
Northern Treatment Centre
Kingston Treatment Centre
Kingston Penitentiary
Millhaven Transfer Unit
Millhaven
Bath
Collins Bay
Frontenac
Beaver Creek
Joyceville
Pittsburgh
Warkworth
1
31
224
79
1
6
7
3
20
12
9
222
0.0
1.4
10.4
3.7
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.9
0.6
0.4
10.3
520
551
775
854
855
861
868
871
891
903
912
1,134
24.1
25.5
35.8
39.5
39.5
39.8
40.1
40.3
41.2
41.8
42.2
52.5
 
 
PRAIRIES
 
Calgary C.C.
Saskatoon C.C.
Lethbridge C.C.
Prairies R.P.C.
Stony Mountain
Rockwood
Edmonton Remand Centre
Fort Saskatchewan C.C.
Saskatchewan Penitentairy
Saskatchewan Farm
Saskatchewan S.H.U.
Regina C.C.
Drumheller
Bowden
Edmonton
3
6
2
45
21
22
4
1
16
29
7
2
82
199
28
1.3
0.3
0.1
2.1
1.0
1.0
0.2
0.0
7.8
1.3
0.3
0.1
3.8
9.2
1.3
1,137
1,143
1,145
1,190
1,211
1,233
1,237
1,238
1,406
1,435
1,442
1,444
1,526
1,725
1,753
52.6
52.9
53.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
57.2
57.3
65.0
66.4
66.7
66.8
70.6
79.8
81.1
 
 
PACIFIC
 
Peace River C.C.
William Head
Matsqui
Pacific R.P.C.
Mountain
Kent
Elbow Lake
Ferndale
Mission
1
12
13
62
199
49
1
17
53
0.0
0.6
0.6
2.9
9.2
2.3
0.0
0.8
2.5
1,754
1,768
1,781
1,843
2,042
2,091
2,092
2,109
2,162
81.1
81.8
82.4
85.2
94.4
96.7
96.8
97.5
100.0

REGION/ Parole Office
  Frequency
  Percent
  Cumulative
  Frequency
  Cumulative
Percent
         
ATLANTIC        
         
Renous
Sand River Centre
Parrtown Centre
Grand Falls
Kentville
Charlottetown
Cornerbrook
Frederickton
Halifax
Moncton
St. John’s, Nfld.
Truro
Sydney
Saint John, N.B.
Salvation Army
6
1
1
3
16
5
18
3
21
21
14
10
8
5
1
0.7
0.1
0.1
0.3
1.8
0.6
2.0
0.3
2.3
2.3
1.6
1.1
0.9
0.6
0.2
6
7
8
11
27
32
50
53
74
95
109
119
127
132
134
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.2
3.0
3.6
5.6
5.9
8.2
10.6
12.1
13.2
14.1
14.7
14.9
 
 
QUEBEC
 
Phoenix
Painchaud
Martineau Centre
Laferriere
Ville-Marie
Lafontaine
L’Annonciation
Sherbrook
Quebec
Granby
Rimouski
Chicoutimi
Trois-Riveres
Ste-Therese
Laurentides
Secteur Laval
Rouny-Noranda
Hull
Langelier
Longueuil
1
5
7
7
15
28
3
3
79
7
6
7
17
12
11
14
6
16
16
15
0.1
0.6
0.8
0.8
1.7
3.1
0.3
0.3
8.8
0.8
0.7
0.8
1.9
1.3
1.2
1.6
0.7
1.8
1.8
1.7
135
140
147
154
169
197
200
203
282
289
295
302
319
331
342
356
362
378
394
409
15.0
15.6
16.4
17.1
18.8
21.9
22.2
22.6
31.4
32.1
32.8
33.6
35.5
36.8
38.0
39.6
40.3
42.0
43.8
45.5
 
 
ONTARIO
 
York Durham
John Howard/London
Salvation Army/Barrie
Toronto East
Kingston SO
Peterborough
Portsmouth Centre
Ottawa
Barrie
Sudbury
Timmins
Sault-Ste-Marie
Keele Centre
Toronto-Team
Toronto-West
London
Guelph
Hamilton
Windsor
St.Catherine’s
Brantford
Downtown Toronto
10
2
4
12
12
11
6
12
6
11
3
3
1
5
14
4
12
8
6
3
4
5
1.1
0.2
0.4
1.3
1.3
1.2
0.7
1.3
0.7
1.2
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.6
1.6
0.4
1.3
0.9
0.7
0.3
0.4
0.6
419
421
425
437
449
460
466
478
484
495
498
501
502
507
521
525
537
545
551
554
558
563
46.6
46.8
47.3
48.6
49.9
51.2
51.8
53.2
53.8
55.1
55.4
55.7
55.8
56.4
58.0
58.4
59.7
60.6
61.3
61.6
62.1
62.6
 
 
PRAIRIES
 
Osborne Centre
High Prairie ASG
Olds
Stony Plain
Oskana Centre
Medicine Hat ASG
Wetaskiwin
St. Albert
Sherwood Park
Westlock
Grierson ASG
Winnipeg SO
Prince Albert
Regina SO
Saskatoon
Edmonton ASG
Red Deer ASG
North District ASG
Calgary ASG
Lethbridge
Belmont ASG
Bow River ASG
3
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
6
38
16
10
14
39
7
1
29
2
1
6

0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.7
4.2
1.8
1.1
1.6
4.3
0.8
0.1
3.2
0.2
0.1
0.7
566
568
569
570
572
573
574
575
576
577
583
621
637
647
661
700
707
708
737
739
740
746
63.0
63.2
63.3
63.4
63.6
63.7
63.8
64.0
64.1
64.2
64.8
69.1
70.9
72.0
73.5
77.9
78.6
78.8
82.0
82.2
82.3
83.0
 
 
PACIFIC
 
Sumas Centre
Vancouver North
Vancouver SO
Victoria & Nanai
Abbotsford
Prince George
Chilliwack
Kamloops
New Westminster
9
16
13
25
16
25
14
28
7
1.0
1.8
1.4
2.8
1.8
2.8
1.6
3.1
0.8
755
771
784
809
825
850
864
892
899
84.0
85.8
87.2
90.0
91.8
94.5
96.1
99.2
100.0