Commissioner's Directive 705-6
Correctional Planning and Criminal Profile

Commissioner's Directive

Number: 705-6

In Effect: 2019-04-15

Related links

CD 705-3 - Immediate Needs Identification and Admission Interviews (2018-01-22)
CD 705-7 - Security Classification and Penitentiary Placement (2018-01-15)
CD 710-2 - Transfer of Inmates (2018-11-07)
CD 710-6 - Review of Inmate Security Classification (2018-01-15)
Policy Bulletin 554
Policy Bulletin 586
Policy Bulletin 619
Policy Bulletin 633

Authorities

Purpose

To outline the process for the completion of offenders' Correctional Plans and Criminal Profiles

Application

Applies to staff responsible for the completion of the Criminal Profile Report and the Correctional Plan

Contents

Responsibilities

  1. The Institutional Head/District Director will ensure that:
    1. the Criminal Profile Report, the Correctional Plan and all related reports are completed within the prescribed timeframes.
    2. procedures are in place to assist the offender in obtaining appropriate pieces of identification such as birth certificate, Indian Status card, Metis card, citizenship/permanent resident card, health coverage, Social Insurance Number.
  2. The Parole Officer Supervisor/Manager, Assessment and Interventions, will :
    1. determine the intake assessment process required for all admissions, including the Compressed Offender Intake Assessment
    2. provide quality control for the Custody Rating Scale, Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism, Criminal Profile Report, amended Criminal Profile Report and Correctional Plan
    3. ensure completion of the Primary Information Sharing Checklist (CSC/SCC 1199) and the Procedural Safeguard Declaration (CSC/SCC 1198).
  3. The Parole Officer will:
    1. assist and support the offender during the intake process
    2. complete, as required, actuarial and risk assessment tools, static and dynamic factors assessment
    3. complete the Criminal Profile Report
    4. complete, if required, the assessments for offender security level and penitentiary placement
    5. complete the Correctional Plan, Annex G in consultation with the offender and the Case Management Team, and :
      1. determine the key ratings including offender accountability, motivation, responsivity and engagement.
      2. review current pieces of identification and confirm validity
      3. determine the requirement for the offender to obtain outstanding pieces of identification
      4. explain the application process to obtain outstanding pieces of identification to the offender and provide assistance, when necessary
      5. document the above information in the Correctional Plan along with the offender’s plan for acquiring needed identification, including a health card when/if possible (refer to Appendices F and H of the National Essential Health Services Framework).
  4. The offender is expected to:
    1. participate in the intake assessment process
    2. participate in the development of Correctional Plan
    3. comply with the requirement to submit to urinalysis in accordance with section 54 of the CCRA and/or supervision requirements.

Procedures

  1. The Parole Officer and, if required, members of the Case Management Team will interview the offender prior to completing the intake assessment reports. If the offender refuses to participate, or is unable to participate (e.g. illness), the completed report will include a notation of the circumstances.

Timeframes

  1. The Criminal Profile Report and the Correctional Plan will be completed within the following timeframes:
    1. Compressed Offender Intake Assessment - within 60 days after admission for offenders who:
      1. are serving a sentence of four years or less for a non-violent offence
      2. have limited criminal history (five or less prior convictions, including those as a young offender) or no criminal history
      3. do not need a psychological risk assessment pursuant to criteria in CD 705-5 - Supplementary Assessments
      4. are not likely to be referred for detention
      5. do not have a long-term supervision order
    2. within 70 days after admission:
      1. for all other offenders serving four years or less
      2. for young persons transferred to a penitentiary pursuant to sections 76, 89, 92 or 93 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act
    3. within 90 days after admission date, for all other offenders serving sentences of more than four years (including indeterminate and life).

Intake Assessment Process

  1. The Parole Officer will complete the intake assessment documents and initial Correctional Plan using at least the minimum required information sources, pursuant to CD 705-2 - Information Collection.
  2. Upon receipt of additional official information and if required, the Parole Officer will update the intake assessment documents and the Correctional Plan.

Custody Rating Scale

  1. The Custody Rating Scale will be completed for all offenders, pursuant to CD 705-7 - Security Classification and Penitentiary Placement, prior to determining the level of intervention based on static factors.

Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism Scale

  1. The Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism Scale will be completed, pursuant to Annex B, for all offenders (except Indigenous offenders, women offenders, and provincial offenders) prior to determining the level of intervention based on static factors.
  2. The Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism Scale needs to be reviewed and updated if necessary following receipt of new information, revocation and/or new conviction.

Static Factors Assessment Report

  1. The Static Factors Assessment in OMS will be completed for all offenders at intake pursuant to Annex D. If the criteria for Compressed Offender Intake Assessment outlined above are met, the Criminal History Record section of the Static Factors Assessment will be completed at intake to determine the Criminal Risk Index score pursuant to Annex C. The overall Static Factors Assessment will be contained within the Correctional Plan.
  2. If serious harm was caused, pursuant to CD 705-8 - Assessing Serious Harm, Sentence Management will be advised.
  3. The guidelines for determining the overall rating for level of intervention based on static factors are:
    1. a rating of High reflects cases in which:
      1. the Criminal History Record reflects considerable involvement with the criminal justice system, or
      2. the Offence Severity Record reflects considerable harm to society in general, and victims in particular, or
      3. the Sex Offence History Checklist reflects considerable sex offending
    2. a rating of Low reflects cases where all of the following conditions are met:
      1. the Criminal History Record reflects little or no involvement with the criminal justice system
      2. the Offence Severity Record reflects little or no harm to society in general, and victims in particular
      3. the Sex Offence History reflects little or no sex offending
      4. a review against detention criteria, as well as the score on the Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism, if applicable, supports all of the aforementioned indices
    3. a rating of Medium signifies that the offender is clearly not a Low criminal risk and there exists sufficient latitude to not rate the offender as High.

Dynamic Factors Assessment Report

  1. The Dynamic Factor Identification and Analysis Revised Assessment Report will be completed at intake using the Dynamic Factor Identification and Analysis, Revised in Annex E. If the criteria for the Compressed Offender Intake Assessment outlined above are met, the dynamic factors assessment will be contained within the Correctional Plan.
  2. The Parole Officer will determine dynamic contributing factors and prioritize the domain needs.
  3. Within the domain analysis contained in the Dynamic Factors Assessment Report, or the Correctional Plan, the reasons why the specific dynamic factor is rated as contributing must be provided. The results from available supplementary assessments will be included in the rationale. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted each specific dynamic factor rated as contributing. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for guidance.
  4. Participation in Adult Basic Education must be included in the offender's Correctional Plan pursuant to CD 720 - Education Programs and Services for Inmates when:
    1. the grade level achieved by the offender is below grade twelve or the equivalent, or
    2. upgrading is required for participation in correctional programming or vocational training (CORCAN).
  5. For dynamic factors not directly related to criminal behaviour, but where intervention will improve safe and timely reintegration, provide a clear explanation of why such factors require intervention.
  6. If a domain has no bearing on the offender's criminal behaviour, this should be indicated.
  7. The guidelines for determining the overall rating for the level of intervention based on dynamic factors are:
    1. Low
      1. No identified dynamic factors (i.e. factors seen as an asset to community adjustment and/or no immediate need for improvement)
      2. Relatively few identified dynamic factors and rated as low or medium need for improvement
    2. High
      1. Few identified dynamic factors but rated as high need for improvement
      2. Multiple dynamic factors identified, (regardless of degree or severity of needs)
    3. Medium
      1. Any combination of dynamic factor severity and number that lie outside of either the low or high guidelines as identified above.

Domain Motivation Level

  1. The domain motivation level is assessed for eight need areas: education, employment, marital/family, associates, substance abuse, community functioning, personal/emotional orientation, and attitude using the following criteria:
    1. High
      The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They haves committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they have primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for themselves, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
    2. Medium
      The offender may not fully accept or recognize need area as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release or be transferred to a lower security institution).
    3. Low
      The offender would benefit from motivational interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that a need exists in this area. There is no genuine commitment to change.

Criminal Profile Report

  1. The Criminal Profile Report will be completed for all offenders pursuant to Annex F.
  2. An amended Criminal Profile Report is completed when:
    1. outstanding appeals or charges are processed
    2. additional documents are received that impact on the outcome of the Criminal Profile, including:
      1. Crown information
      2. police reports
      3. judge's reasons for sentence and relevant court orders
      4. psychiatric and/or psychological assessments completed for trial
      5. post-assessment/treatment reports completed for the purpose of developing an offence cycle
    3. the offender is convicted of new offences while incarcerated or while under community supervision
    4. the offender is readmitted with new conviction(s).
  3. The operational unit that is responsible for the offender at the time of the receipt of new information or convictions, or upon revocation, will amend the Criminal Profile Report.

Correctional Plan

  1. The Correctional Plan will be completed in consultation with the offender and the Case Management Team, pursuant to Annex G. The Correctional Plan will contain the following:
    1. level of intervention with respect to the offender's needs
    2. objectives for the offender's behaviour (i.e. conduct that demonstrates respect for other persons and property, penitentiary rules, and conditions of any release)
    3. programs and interventions required to manage risk
    4. court-ordered obligations (i.e. restitution to victims or child support).

Offender Accountability

  1. The guidelines for establishing the overall accountability rating are:
    1. High
      1. The offender accepts responsibility for actions and recognizes problems.
      2. Willingness to self disclose, displays guilt and victim empathy with evidence indicating a low level of cognitive distortions.
    2. Medium
      1. The offender may not fully accept responsibility for actions but recognizes some problems.
      2. Displays some guilt and victim empathy with some evidence of denial and cognitive distortions.
    3. Low
      1. The offender rejects responsibility for actions and fails to recognize problems.
      2. Does not disclose emotional states, display guilt or victim empathy with evidence indicating a high level of denial and cognitive distortions.

Offender Motivation

  1. The guidelines for establishing the overall motivation rating are:
    1. High
      The offender is self-motivated and is actively addressing problem areas.
    2. Medium
      The offender may not fully accept overall assessment, but will participate in recommended programs or other interventions.
    3. Low
      The offender strongly rejects the need for change.

Responsivity Factors

  1. Identify the offender's responsivity factors and consider barriers or facilitators, if applicable, pursuant to Annex E.

Offender Engagement

  1. Engagement is determined by combining ratings on motivation, accountability and responsivity. In order to be engaged there must be a rating of either medium or high in both accountability and motivation.

Reintegration Potential

  1. Reintegration potential of male, non-Indigenous offenders is determined by using the Custody Rating Scale, the Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism and the Static Factor Rating.
  2. Reintegration potential of women offenders and Indigenous offenders is determined by using the Custody Rating Scale, the Static Factor Rating and the Dynamic Factor Rating.
  3. The reintegration potential is calculated as follows:
    1. a low reintegration potential is assigned to offenders who received a high score in two or more of the three tools
    2. a moderate reintegration potential is assigned to offenders who received one high score in any one tool and a moderate score in at least one of the other two tools, or who received a moderate score on all three tools
    3. a high reintegration potential is assigned to all other offenders, i.e. all those who did not score high in any of the three tools, or scored high in one of the tools and no worse than low in the other two tools.
  4. When the Parole Officer disagrees with the determined reintegration potential, a clear rationale must be documented in the Correctional Plan, based on the following:
    1. High
      Offenders with high reintegration potential should not normally require formal correctional interventions. If required, these interventions should preferably be provided in the community. Other correctional interventions, services and work placements (including employability skills development) may be used, as well as any other risk management strategies, other than programs, in both institutions and the community.
    2. Medium
      Offenders with medium reintegration potential should require institutional correctional interventions based on the dynamic factors and the offender's level of risk and need(s).These interventions can also be provided in the community during the period of day parole or unescorted temporary absence program for personal development prior to full parole release.
    3. Low
      Offenders with low reintegration potential require institutional correctional interventions based on the dynamic factors and the offender's level of risk and need(s). Other risk management strategies are to be provided in institutions prior to release, and continued in the community as required.

Psychological/Psychiatric/Mental Health Information

  1. In the Correctional Plan, include the offender's psychological, psychiatric, mental health and/or physical health information on risk, risk management strategies, and recommended interventions.

Offence Cycle

  1. Summarize the offence cycle and the offender’s understanding of the cycle. For Indigenous offenders, their offence cycle must be explained within the context of their Indigenous Social History.

Correctional and Sentence Planning

  1. Correctional programs will be prioritized as the first correctional intervention for those who meet the referral criteria as set out in GL 726-2 - National Correctional Programs Referral Guidelines.
  2. Education programs will be prioritized as the second correctional intervention for those who meet the criteria as set out in GL 720-1 - Guidelines for Education Programs.
  3. Employment programs will be prioritized as the third correctional intervention for those who meet the eligibility criteria for all correctional interventions. If the offender has:
    1. limited cooperative work skills or employment history is absent, a referral to Employability Program will be made
    2. limited marketable job skills obtained through experience, formal training or is dissatisfied with job skills, a referral to Vocational Training will be made.
  4. Sentence planning in the Correctional Plan will identify the objectives and significant events for the offender to gain support for reduced security classification, temporary absences, work release and/or conditional release.
  5. These objectives and significant events will be individualized, structured and timeframed. They will initially focus on the next review period while setting the framework for managing the offender's sentence.
  6. These objectives and significant events will be prioritized based on public safety, institutional adjustment and adaptation, interventions required and safe reintegration.
  7. The Case Management Team, in consultation with the offender, will identify clear goals and expected results that support progress against the Correctional Plan.
  8. Sentence planning for offenders serving sentences of 10 years or more will include the four phases, pursuant to Annex G - Correctional Plan - Report Outline. The initial focus is on adaptation and integration to the institutional environment. Offenders classified as medium security must be in the "preparation for release" or "reintegration to the community" phase to be eligible for placement in, or transfer to, an environment without a secure and directly controlled perimeter pursuant to CD - 706 - Classification of Institution.
  9. In cases where the offender’s reintegration potential is rated as low and the Case Management Team is not supporting the release, a Community Strategy is not required unless the offender is:
    1. pursuing a release under the provisions of section 84 or section 84.1 of the CCRA
    2. being released on statutory release, or
    3. being released at warrant expiry and is subject to a long-term supervision order.
  10. For offenders serving three years or less who have applied for day parole or are eligible for full parole within six months of completion of intake, a Community Strategy is required. Following completion of the intake assessment, the institutional Parole Officer, Intake Assessment Unit, will request the Community Strategy from the proposed release destination pursuant to Annex G - Correctional Plan - Report Outline.

Offender Readmissions/Offenders With New Convictions Pre or Post-Release

  1. Offenders who are readmitted without having committed a new offence do not normally require a comprehensive reassessment.
  2. For offenders who are readmitted with one or more new convictions, or following an escape, the Criminal Profile Report and the Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism Scale will be amended and the Correctional Plan will be reviewed to determine if the current Correctional Plan remains appropriate, or if a comprehensive reassessment is required.
  3. In the case of an escaped offender, the region in which the offender has been recaptured becomes responsible for completing all reviews and updates to the Criminal Profile Report and the Correctional Plan.
  4. A decision to refer an offender readmitted with new convictions to the Intake Assessment Unit for a more comprehensive re-evaluation of the offender's static and dynamic factors could be made under the following circumstances:
    1. the offender's criminal behaviour has taken a significant shift (e.g., a property offender has committed violent offence(s), an offender previously not identified as a sex offender has committed a sexual offence) and there is no information in the offender's previous assessment or in the file that would assist in the development of a strategy to deal with that shift
    2. there is no comprehensive Correctional Plan on the offender
    3. the Correctional Plan does not provide the level or quality of information necessary to plan an adequate strategy for dealing with the offender, or
    4. the offender has been on conditional release or at large for five years or more, and the new offence(s) or other relevant information lead staff to consider that a review of the offender's previous assessment is necessary to determine an appropriate strategy.
  5. For offenders who commit new offences while incarcerated, use the same criteria found in the previous paragraphs to determine whether to refer the offender to the Intake Assessment Unit for reassessment. The transfer process, pursuant to GL 710-2-3 - Inmate Transfer Processes, is required and a decision should take place within 30 days of readmission or within 30 days from the date the offender is convicted of a new offence committed while incarcerated.
  6. If an offender is returned to the Intake Assessment Unit for reassessment, staff should review the previous assessment and only change or reassess those areas where the offender's situation has changed.

Commissioner,

 

Original Signed by:

Anne Kelly

Annex A
Cross-References and Definitions

Cross-References

CD 001 - Mission, Values and Ethics Framework of the Correctional Service of Canada
CD 700 - Correctional Interventions
CD 701 - Information Sharing
CD 702 - Indigenous Offenders
CD 703 - Sentence Management
CD 705-1 - Preliminary Assessments and Post-Sentence Community Assessments
CD 705-2 - Information Collection
CD 705-3 - Immediate Needs Identification and Admission Interviews
CD 705-4 - Orientation
CD 705-5 - Supplementary Assessments
CD 705-7 - Security Classification and Penitentiary Placement
CD 705-8 - Assessing Serious Harm
CD 710-2 - Transfer of Inmates
GL 710-2-3 - Inmate Transfer Processes
CD 720 - Education Programs and Services for Inmates
GL 720-1 - Guidelines for Education Programs
CD 726 - Correctional Programs
GL 726-2 - National Correctional Programs Referral Guidelines
CD 784 - Victim Engagement
CD 800 - Health Services
CD 843 - Interventions to Preserve Life and Prevent Serious Bodily

Access to Information Act
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom
Canadian Human Rights Act
Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
Official Languages Act
Privacy Act
Youth Criminal Justice Act

Integrated Mental Health Guidelines
Indigenous Social History Tool
National Essential Health Services Framework

Definitions

Accountability: the level of involvement of the offender in their Correctional Plan in relation to the obligation to modify behaviours identified as being problematic. Attitude, behaviour, and insight are critical components to offender accountability.

Case Management Team: the individuals involved in managing an offender's case, which include at a minimum the Parole Officer and the offender, and in institutions, the Correctional Officer II/Primary Worker.

Criminal Risk Index: a research based tool used to assess static risk and guide offender intervention levels, which is derived from the Criminal History Record section of the Static Factors Assessment.

Custody Rating Scale: a research-based tool used to assist in assessing the most appropriate level of security for the penitentiary placement of an offender.

Domain Analysis: a concise narrative of a specific domain which qualifies or expands on the factors identified during the intake assessment process. This analysis provides a better understanding of how each area relates to the present offence and the offender's overall criminality. For Indigenous offenders, each domain analysis must consider the impact of the offender’s Indigenous Social History.

Dynamic Factor Identification and Analysis, Revised: primary instrument for assessing dynamic factors upon offender's admission to federal custody. Its main function is to identify and prioritize criminogenic needs according to seven dynamic risk areas (employment and education, marital/family, associates, substance abuse, community functioning, personal/emotional and attitudes) so as to focus correctional intervention on factors that, when appropriately addressed, reduce the likelihood of re-offending.

Engagement: the demonstrated willingness of an offender:

  1. to actively participate in their assigned Correctional Plan
  2. be free of criminal and gang activity while under sentence
  3. display conduct that demonstrates respect
  4. obey the penitentiary rules and/or supervision requirements.

Healing component: a component of the Correctional Plan that allows for consideration to be given to the circumstances and background of Indigenous offenders following a healing path.

Motivation: the desire or willingness to change.

Responsivity: the presence of a characteristic(s) that influences the offender's capacity to benefit from the targeted intervention(s).

Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism: a statistically derived tool for predicting recidivism, which combines measures of demographic characteristics and criminal history.

Serious harm: severe physical injury or severe psychological damage, as defined in section 99 of the CCRA.

Young person: a person who is or, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, appears to be twelve years old or older, but less than eighteen years old and, if the context requires, includes any person who is charged under the Youth Criminal Justice Act with having committed an offence while they were a young person or who is found guilty of an offence under this Act.

Annex B
Revised Statistical Information on Recidivism Scale (SIR-R1)

In the SIR screen in the Offender Management System (OMS), assign an individual score to each of the 15 items using the scoring guidelines and notes that follow:

  1. Current offence
  2. Age at admission
  3. Previous incarceration
  4. Revocation or forfeiture
  5. Act of escape
  6. Security classification
  7. Age at first adult conviction
  8. Previous convictions for assault
  9. Marital status at most recent admission
  10. Interval at risk since last offence
  11. Number of dependants at most recent admission
  12. Current total aggregate sentence
  13. Previous convictions for sex offences
  14. Previous convictions for break and enter
  15. Employment status at arrest.

Scoring Guidelines

  1. An item score may be positive, zero, or negative. Read each of the descriptions under an item. If one of them applies to the offender, enter the corresponding value in the OMS field. If no descriptions apply, then enter a value of zero. OMS calculates an offender's total score by adding the 15 individual item scores together.
  2. Ensure that all information about the offender is accurate. Verify the information through all available sources (file review, offender, collateral contacts, etc.). However, it is important that each of the 15 items be scored. So, if accurate data is not available, it is preferable to make an approximation rather than omitting the item or entering a value of zero by default.
  3. When scoring the items, include Young Offender Act or Youth Criminal Justice Act involvement (e.g., convictions, incarcerations, escapes, etc.) if the offender was 16 or over. Also, as a general principle, do not ignore information that is not on the official record. For example, where the FPS indicates assault, but other reliable sources allow us to determine that the offender actually committed a sexual assault, treat the offence as a sexual assault and score accordingly.
  4. To avoid confrontation at a hearing, the Parole Board of Canada should be alerted if the offender disputes the score. The Board should also know if the score is approximated.
  5. This scoring tool is to be used only for federal non-Indigenous male offenders.
  6. Indigenous, women, and provincial offenders are excluded from SIR use. However, to date there is no reason to exclude other groups from this scoring tool.
  7. Absolute and/or conditional discharges do not count as a conviction for purposes of the scale.
Item Description Scoring
1

Current Offence

Notes

  • Includes all offences under the current total aggregate sentence.
  • If more than one offence, score the offender according to the one that is the "most negative score". If the offender has two convictions at the same time, choose the conviction where the "rate of recidivism" is the "most negative".
  • Scores define the association between the likelihood of recidivism as associated with certain offences when this offence is the current offence.
  • Where an offence has not been defined within these lists, it is because the likelihood of recidivism for these offences was equal to the general average. These offences did not allow researchers to define the offenders as more or less likely to recidivate. In addition, there were certain offences where the frequency of occurrence was too low to be useful. "0" in this item is not a valued score, simply a default to assure that the item has been considered.

Definition of "homicide"

  • Refers to Criminal Code definition of murder and manslaughter.

Score on this item may not be static

  • If there are outstanding charges at time of incarceration and the charges are subsequently dealt with, these new convictions become part of the "current offence" category.
  • If offender has been revoked with new offences, both the new and the original offences are considered "current offences".
    
Scores
Escape (includes any conviction for escape or attempted escape from a federal or provincial correctional facility or court, or from an escort; does not include unlawfully at large)   -4
Break and enter (includes B. & E. and commit with intent), forcible entry, unlawfully in dwelling, illegal possession of firearm, carrying concealed weapon   -2
Theft (receiving or possession of stolen goods)   -1
None of the offence descriptions apply (armed robbery has a score of 0)   0
Unarmed robbery, kidnapping, arson, hijacking, criminal negligence in operation of vehicle, abduction, dangerous driving, obstruct peace officer +2  
Homicide (any act resulting in death, except by automobile), narcotics offences (Food & Drug Act, Narcotic Control Acts, Controlled Drugs and Substances Act) +3  
Incest, sexual intercourse with the underage, seduction, gross indecency +4  
Item Description Scoring
2

Age at Admission

Notes

Refers to "Admission" on the current total aggregate sentence (i.e. at original warrant of committal admission).

Does not apply to readmission as a result of a revocation, termination, etc.

    
Scores
  20 or under   -2
  Between 21 and 39   0
  Over 39 +2  
Item Description Scoring
3

Previous Incarceration

Notes

"Previous" refers to a period of incarceration that expired (i.e. warrant expiry date) before the current total aggregate sentence.

An incarceration is a separate original admission to a custodial place.

"Penal institution" refers to jail, prison, or penitentiary, in each case.

If offender was on the street through parole or statutory release (or mandatory supervision) and has been revoked with or without a new conviction, this is not a new period of incarceration. The revocation is still part of the original sentence.

    
Scores
  Has served sentences in jail, prison or penitentiary five or more times before.   - 2
  Has served sentences in jail, prison or penitentiary three or four times before.   - 1
  Has served sentences in jail, prison or penitentiary one or two times before.   0
  First time incarcerated. +4  
Item Description Scoring
4

Previous Revocation or Forfeiture

Notes

This does not include terminations.

    
Scores
  Has previously had a term of day parole, full parole or statutory release revoked or forfeited (does not include termination).   -2
  Has not previously had a term of day parole, full parole or statutory release revoked or forfeited.   0
Item Description Scoring
5

Previous Escape

Notes

Includes current or previous acts of escape or attempted escape from a federal or provincial correctional facility or court, or from an escort, whether or not this act resulted in a conviction. A conviction for unlawfully at large for any of the above should be treated as an escape.

    
Scores
  Has escaped or attempted to escape on one or more occasions.   -3
  Has never escaped or attempted to escape.   0
Item Description Scoring
6

Security Classification

Notes

If completed at admission, this score = 0 as it refers only to security level at time of parole hearing.

Multi-level institution did not exist when scale was developed; therefore, at this time they score "0".

    
Scores
  Is in maximum security at time of parole hearing.   -1
  Is not in maximum security at time of parole hearing.   0
Item Description Scoring
7 Age at First Adult Conviction    
Scores
  Was under 19.   -2
  Was 19-22 inclusive.   0
  Was 23-30 inclusive. +2  
  Was 31-40 inclusive. +3  
  Was 41-49 inclusive. +6  
  Was over 49. +7  
Item Description Scoring
8

Previous Convictions for Assault

Notes

"Previous" refers to convictions incurred before the current total aggregate sentence.

Does not include sexual assault or B. & E. and commit assault.

For a conviction with multiple counts, consider each count as a conviction

(e.g., assault (3) = three convictions)

    
Scores
  Has two or more previous convictions for assault.   -3
  Has one previous conviction for assault.   -2
  Has never been convicted of assault.   0
Item Description Scoring
9

Current Marital Status

Notes

Self-reported.

Includes heterosexual and homosexual common-law relationships.

This is a 'static' factor only in that it pertains to status at time of the most recent "admission" or "readmission".

    
Scores
  Was single.   0
  Was married or had common-law spouse. +1  
Item Description Scoring
10

Interval at Risk Since Last Offence

Notes

Defined as the period from when an offender is released from imprisonment (on a form of conditional release or free of supervision) until reincarceration (on breach of conditional release or new conviction).

If exact data on offender is not available, make the best possible approximation.

Key here is "interval at risk" - interval on the street.

While on day parole, offender is still on the registry of an institution; therefore, this does not count as time at risk.

If suspended, and suspension cancelled, bail granted, or suspended sentence, the time at risk is still seen as time since original release.

Terminations or revocations terminate the interval at risk.

Does not apply to periods of escape or unlawfully at large.

    
Scores
  Less than six months between current conviction/reincarceration and last release   -1
  Six months to two years between current conviction/reincarceration and last release   0
  Two years or more between current conviction/reincarceration and last release +2  
Item Description Scoring
11

Number of Dependants (under one roof)

Notes

This is a "static" factor only in that it pertains to status at time of the most recent "admission" or "readmission".

The intent was to define a statement to mainly cover dependent children who lived, at time of admission, with the offender "under the same roof" and who had been "economically" dependent on the offender.

    
Scores
  Had less than three dependants (including dependants from common-law marriage).   0
  Had three or more dependants (including dependants from common-law marriage). +2  
Item Description Scoring
12

Aggregate Sentence

Notes

Measure from the date of the original sentence, not the remnant.

Must be calculated from beginning of this sentence (i.e., from the original commencement of the total aggregate sentence).

    
Scores
  Aggregate sentence is less than five years.   0
  Aggregate sentence is five years and up to six years. +3  
  Aggregate sentence is six years or more. +2  
Item Description Scoring
13

Previous Convictions (Violent Sex Offence)

Notes

"Previous" refers to convictions incurred before the current total aggregate sentence.

Includes sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault (and rape).

Present offence could be either a sexual offence or any other type of offence (e.g., B. & E.). Reference FPS to see if there is a conviction for any of the defined sexual offences.

For a conviction with multiple counts, consider each count as a conviction (e.g., sexual assault (11) = 11 convictions).

    
Scores
  Has two or more previous convictions for any of rape, attempted rape, indecent assault, sexual assault or aggravated sexual assault.   -4
  Has never been convicted or has only one conviction for rape, attempt rape, indecent assault or aggravated sexual assault.   0
Item Description Scoring
14

Previous Convictions For Break And Enter

Notes

"Previous" refers to convictions incurred before the current total aggregate sentence.

Break and enter includes B. & E. with intent to commit, and B. & E. & commit.

Multiple counts of offences are considered separate convictions (e.g., B. & E. (9) = nine convictions).

Convictions listed separately at the same time are also separate convictions.

B. & E. (2)
B. & E. (4) = nine convictions
B. & E. (3)

    
Scores
  Has five or more previous convictions for break and enter.   -6
  Has three or four previous convictions for break and enter.   -3
  Has one or two previous convictions for break and enter.   -2
  Had no previous convictions for break and enter. +2  
Item Description Scoring
15

Employment Status at Arrest

Notes

Includes either part-time or full-time legal employment.

Self-reported at time of arrest.

Current offences are those associated with the original commencement of the current total aggregate sentence.

Paid for retraining is considered employment.

Going to school is not considered employment unless being paid for through programs such as employment insurance.

    
Scores
  Was not employed at time of arrest for current offence(s) (full time or part time).   0
  Was employed at time of arrest for current offence(s) (full time or part time). +1  
Success Rates Based on SIR Scores
+6 to +27 Four out of every five offenders will not commit an indictable offence after release.
+1 to +5 Two out of every three offenders will not commit an indictable offence after release.
-4 to 0 One out of every two offenders will not commit an indictable offence after release.
-8 to -5 Two out of every five offenders will not commit an indictable offence after release.
-30 to -9 One out of every three offenders will not commit an indictable offence after release.

Annex C
Criminal Risk Index

The Criminal Risk Index (CRI) score is generated when the Criminal History Record section of the Static Factors Assessment is completed at intake.

Each indicator marked as applying in the Criminal History Record of the Static Factors Assessment will have a value of one and will contribute to the final CRI score and resulting grouping.

In the Static Factors Assessment screen in the Offender Management System (OMS), provide a “Yes” response to all of the Criminal History Record indicators that apply using the scoring guidelines and notes that follow:

Scoring Guidelines

Some of the indicators apply if any element within a numerical range is true. For example, if the indicator question specifies a range of 10-14 inclusive, this includes all the numbers (10/11/12/13/14).

When reporting on the number of convictions, count the total number even if they formed part of same court proceeding and sentence. For example an offender convicted of Robbery x 3 on a certain date would count as three separate convictions.

Criminal History Record

Previous Offences - Youth Court

The indicators in this section apply to offences committed by the offender as a young offender. This applies to individuals who are under eighteen (18) years old at the time the crime was committed.

Number of Convictions:

Count the number of convictions on the youth record (i.e., offender found guilty of the offence).

Check all indicators that apply.

Indicator Description Score
Previous offences youth court? Check if the offender has had any previous convictions in youth court.  
Fifteen or more convictions? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of 15 or more offences in youth court.  
Ten to fourteen convictions? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of more than 14 offences or there are between 10 and 14 offences (inclusive) in youth court.  
Five to nine convictions? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of more than 9 offences or there are between 5 and 9 offences (inclusive) in youth court.  
Two to four convictions? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of more than 4 offences or there are between 2 and 4 offences (inclusive) in youth court.  
One conviction? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of 1 or more offences in youth court.  

Type of Convictions:

Refers to the current schedules of offences listed in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA - Schedules I and II).

Indicator Description Score
Scheduled convictions? Check if any of the convictions in Youth court were for offences listed in Schedules I and/or II of the CCRA.  

Youth Court Dispositions:

This refers to the sentence received from a youth court for the conviction of a youth offence.

Check all that apply.

If the offender had a number of separate convictions as a youth and received all types of sentences, check all the indicators that apply.

Indicator Description Score
Community supervision? Check if the offender was sentenced by the court to a period of supervision in the community (i.e., probation, community service order, house arrest).  
Open custody? Check if the offender was sentenced to a term of confinement in an open custody facility (community residential facility, group home, wilderness camp).  
Secure custody? Check if the offender was sentenced to a term of confinement in a secure custody facility (locked secure facilities).  

Disposition Outcomes:

This section refers to the offender’s behaviour/performance during a sentence imposed by a youth court.

This does not include conditional releases granted during a sentence.

Indicator Description Score
Failure during community-based supervision? Check if the offender had any failures during a sentence of community supervision imposed by a youth court (i.e., breach of probation, failure to complete community service order, further conviction while serving a sentence of community supervision).  
Disciplinary transfers from open to secure? Check if the offender was sentenced by a youth court to an open custody facility and transferred to a secure custody facility during this sentence.  
Disciplinary reports while in secure custody? Check if the offender has received any disciplinary reports while serving a sentence in secure custody.  
Attempt escape/UAL/escape from secure custody? Check if the offender previously attempted to escape, has escaped or was unlawfully at large during any sentence previously imposed in youth court. This includes escape/UAL incidents during an escorted absence from secure custody. This indicator is applicable even if the offender was not convicted of the offence but file information reveals that the incident occurred.  
Transfer from secure custody to adult facility? Check if the offender was sentenced by a youth court to a term of confinement in secure custody and was transferred to an adult facility during the sentence.  

Previous Offences - Adult Court

This section gathers information involving previous convictions as an adult (18 years or older).

Number of Convictions:

Count the number of convictions on the adult record.

Check all that apply.

Indicator Description Score
Previous offences adult court? Check if the offender has had any previous convictions in adult court.  
Fifteen or more convictions? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of 15 or more offences in adult court.  
Ten to fourteen convictions? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of more than 14 offences or between 10 and 14 offences (inclusive) in adult court.  
Five to nine convictions? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of more than 9 offences or between 5 and 9 offences (inclusive) in adult court.  
Two to four convictions? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of more than 4 offences or between 2 and 4 offences (inclusive) in adult court.  
One conviction? Check if the offender has previously been convicted of 1 or more offences in adult court.  

Types of Convictions:

Refers to the current schedules of offences listed in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA - Schedule I and II).

Indicator Description Score
Scheduled convictions? Check if the offender has any previous offences listed in Schedules I and/or II of the CCRA.  

Adult Court Sanctions:

Refers to sentences previously imposed on the offender for convictions in adult court.

Indicator Description Score
Community supervision? Check if the offender previously received a sentence of community supervision in adult court (i.e., probation, community service order, house arrest, electronic monitoring or any other form of sentence imposed that did not involve incarceration).  
Provincial terms? Check if the offender previously received a sentence in adult court of less than two years in prison.  
Federal terms? Check if the offender previously received a sentence in adult court of two years or more in penitentiary.  

Sanction Outcomes:

These refer to the offender’s behaviour/performance during any previous sentences imposed by adult court.

These include sentences or orders imposed by the court to community-based supervision and/or periods of incarceration.

Indicator Description Score
Failure during community-based supervision? Check if the offender has had any failures during a previous sentence of community supervision imposed by an adult court (i.e., probation, house arrest or long term supervision order). This may have been caused by further criminal behaviour or for a breach of a condition attached to community supervision order.  
Segregation for disciplinary infractions? Check if the offender has previously been placed in segregation during any period of incarceration in an adult facility (either provincial or federal) for disciplinary reasons.  
Attempt escape/UAL/escapes? Check if the offender previously attempted to escape, has escaped or was unlawfully at large during any sentence previously imposed in adult court. This includes attempt escape/UAL or escape incidents during an escorted absence. This indicator is applicable even if the offender was not convicted of the offence but file information reveals that the incident occurred.  
Reclassified to higher levels of custody? Check if the offender has previously been transferred to increased security while serving a custodial sentence resulting from previous convictions in adult court.  
Failures during conditional release? Check if the offender has any previous failures of conditional release (release to the community during a sentence of incarceration - i.e., temporary absence, work release, day parole, full parole, statutory release). This indicator also applies to failures on bail. The indicator applies for any reason that the conditional release was not completed as a result of the behaviour of the offender. It does not apply if the release was terminated for reasons outside of the offender’s control (i.e., extreme weather conditions, technical issues with the release permit).  

Crime-Free Period:

Indicator Description Score
Less than six months since last incarceration? Check if the offender’s date of offence was within 6 months of a release from any form of incarceration.  
No crime-free period of one year or more? Check if the offender’s history indicates the absence of any periods of one year or more without being convicted of an offence since the commencement of their adult criminal history (18 years or older).  

Current Offences

Refers to the offences for which the offender is currently serving time in the federal system.

Number of Convictions:

Count the number of convictions on the warrant of committal.

Where there is a requirement to obtain or update the Criminal History Record section of the Static Factors Assessment component of the Offender Intake Assessment for offenders who are supervised on a Long-Term Supervision Order (LTSO), use only the convicted offences that correspond to the sentence containing the LTSO. However, for offenders whose LTSO has been interrupted by another sentence, use only the convicted offences corresponding to the interrupting sentence: the offences that correspond to the initial sentence or previous interrupting sentences are to be considered as previous offences

Check all that apply.

Indicator Description Score
Fifteen or more current convictions? Check if the offender is currently serving a sentence for 15 or more convictions.  
Ten to fourteen current convictions? Check if the offender is currently serving a sentence for more than 14 convictions or ten to fourteen inclusive.  
Five to nine current convictions? Check if the offender is currently serving a sentence for more than 9 convictions or 5 to 9 inclusive.  
Two to four current convictions? Check if the offender is currently serving a sentence for more than 4 convictions or 2 to 4 inclusive.  
One current conviction? Check if the offender is currently serving a sentence for one or more convictions.  

Types of Convictions:

Refers to the current schedules of offences listed in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA - Schedule I and II).

Indicator Description Score
Scheduled current convictions? Check if the offender has any current offences listed in Schedules I and/or II of the CCRA.  

Score Groupings

Once the Criminal History Record has been completed, the system will generate a total Criminal History Record score. The total score is used to place the offender into the appropriate score grouping based on gender as per the following tables:

Score Case Management Statement - Men
1 to 7 X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 6% of men federal offenders in this category (range: 1-7) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
8 to 13 X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 13% of men federal offenders in this category (range: 8-13) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
14 to 17 X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 22% of men federal offenders in this category (range: 14-17) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
18 to 21 X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 30% of men federal offenders in this category (range: 18-21) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
22+ X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 37% of male federal offenders in this category (range: 22 or greater) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
Score Case Management Statement - Women
1 to 4 X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 5% of women federal offenders in this category (range: 1-4) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
5 to 8 X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 7% of women federal offenders in this category (range: 5-8) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
9 to 13 X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 14% of women federal offenders in this category (range: 9-13) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
14 to 18 X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 16% of women federal offenders in this category (range: 14-18) committed an offence within 3 years of release.
19+ X scored # on the Criminal Risk Index. Research found that 30% of women federal offenders in this category (range: 19 or greater) committed an offence within 3 years of release.

Professional Discretion

The Criminal Risk Index is a reliable tool to assess static risk and to guide intervention levels. Nevertheless, there will be certain cases in the federal system whereby professional discretion is to be used in assessing the offender’s overall risk level and potential program and/or intervention placement. For example, a first time offender sentenced to life for multiple murders may score low on the CRI due to the lack of previous criminal history and/or previous periods of custody/supervision. In these cases, the Parole Officer (in conjunction with their supervisor) will need to exercise professional discretion in reliance on the CRI in determining intervention levels. Discretion will also be required in other assessment decisions referring to Indigenous Social History, information about the degree of harm caused to victims, whether sexual offending occurred as well as information from the Dynamic Factor Identification and Analysis - Revised and other available assessment tools.

The CRI is used as a static risk assessment and is applied in conjunction with other assessment tools to manage individual offenders and guide the development of correctional plans and supervision strategies to manage the risk to re-offend. Once the offender is released to the community, the degree to which the CRI influences the supervision levels will decrease the longer the offender is succeeding and performing in line with their Correctional Plan while under community supervision.

Annex D
Static Factors Assessment

Criminal History Record

Previous Offences - Youth Court

Number of Convictions

Type of Convictions

Youth Court Dispositions

Disposition Outcomes

Previous Offences - Adult Court

Number of Convictions

Type of Convictions

Adult Court Sanctions

Sanction Outcomes

Crime-Free Period

Current Offences

Number of Convictions

Type of Convictions

Offence Severity Record

Previous Offences

Type of Convictions

Type of Victim

Degree of Force Used on Victim

Degree of Physical Harm to Victim

Degree of Psychological Harm to Victim

Sentence Length

Current Offences

Type of Conviction

Types of Victims

Degree of Force Used on Victims

Degree of Physical Harm to Victims

Degree of Psychological Harm to Victims

Sentence Length

Sex Offence History Checklist

Sex Offender Status

Sexual Offence Type - Current Sentence

Sexual Offence Type - Past Sentence(s)

Number Of Victim(s)

Female Victim(s)

Male Victim(s)

Serious Harm

Assessment/Treatment History

Annex E
Dynamic Factor Identification and Analysis, Revised (DFIA-R)

Employment/Education Domain Indicators

Employment/ Education
Domain Indicators 		Interview Prompts Help Messages
Academic History
Has less than grade 10 or equivalent? How far did you go in school? What is the last grade you completed? Have you done any upgrading since then?
If so, what?		 Level achieved either through the regular school system, upgrading, night school, correspondence courses, or some other method of obtaining grade 10 level standing. In order to be rated No the offender must have completed all required grade 10 credits or, in Quebec, Secondary-IV. GED completers must have taken final exams and received official diploma/certificate. Current functioning as determined by the CAAT (Canadian Adult Achievement Test) or other tests should be included in the narrative section if applicable. For Indigenous offenders, consider any geographical limitations (such as isolated/remote community; high school out of area; etc.) that may have had an impact on their access to educational resources. 
Has less than high school diploma or equivalent? How far did you go in school? What is the last grade you completed? Have you done any upgrading since then?
If so, what?		 Diploma obtained either through the regular school system, upgrading, night school, correspondence courses, or some other method of obtaining grade 12 level standing. In order to be rated No, the offender must have completed all required grade 12 credits or, in Quebec, Secondary-V. Current functioning as determined by the CAAT (Canadian Adult Achievement Test) or other tests should be included in the comments section if applicable. For Indigenous offenders, consider any geographical limitations (such as isolated/remote communities; high school out of area; etc.) that may have had an impact on their access to educational resources. 
Work History
Employment history is absent? What kind of work have you done in the past? What is the longest you have ever been employed? Have you ever been unemployed for six or more consecutive months? Rate Yes if the offender has never worked for more than 6 months in a row (full or part time during adulthood). Employment must have been in the community (e.g., roofing, undeclared daycare). Young offenders who have not yet gained employment experience are automatically rated Yes. If the offender has only worked full time in the home, particularly as the primary caregiver, this should be considered employment; however, it is important to distinguish between offenders who actually performed these duties within the home versus those who led unstable lifestyles (e.g., were not actually looking after the home and/or children). For Indigenous offenders, consider the lack of employment opportunities in their home community and/or the movement to an urban city area without skills sets or education that may have had an impact on their work history. For Indigenous offenders, a history of traditional and cultural work or activities to support their family or community should be considered a form of employment. Document if the offender had been supporting themselves by working in the sex trade.
Unemployed at the time of arrest? Were you employed/in school at the time of your arrest? How long had you been working at that job? For individuals working in the home: Describe a typical day at home. What types of activities did you do with the children/around the home? Rate Yes if the offender was unemployed at the time of arrest. For young offenders, being in school is considered equivalent with being employed. If the young offender was suspended or expelled from school at the time of arrest and was not employed in the workforce, rate Yes. Young offenders who were suspended or expelled but were nonetheless working merit a rating of No. With regards to offenders who are parents, if the offender was working full time in the home, particularly as the primary caregiver, this should be considered employment; however, it is important to distinguish between offenders who actually performed these duties within the home versus those who were not actually looking after the home and/or children. Medical or health related leave from employment should be rated No. For Indigenous offenders, consider the lack of employment opportunities in their home community and/or the movement to an urban city area without skills sets or education that may have had an impact on their work history. For Indigenous offenders, a history of traditional or cultural work or activities to support their family or community should be considered a form of employment.
Job history has been unstable? How many different jobs have you had during your lifetime? Have you ever quit a job without knowing where your next pay cheque was coming from? What's the shortest job you have ever had? What's the longest? What's the longest time you have been without work? Rate Yes if there is evidence of significant unemployment (six months or more in two years) or has walked off several jobs without having another job in sight. For young offenders, school is considered employment. With regards to offenders who are parents, particularly primary caregivers, consider to what extent the offender managed the household on a regular basis. Additionally, if there is evidence that the offender also worked outside the home, consider whether or not the work history was unstable and sporadic. Note: When scoring this item, consider the offender's entire life history not just the past year prior to arrest. For Indigenous offenders, consider the lack of employment opportunities in their home community and/or the movement to an urban city area without skills sets or education that may have had an impact on their work history. For Indigenous offenders, a history of traditional and cultural work or activities to support their family or community should be considered a form of employment.
Work Skill Set
Marketable job skills obtained through experience are limited? [If not already answered for the previous indicator] What type of work have you done in the past? How many days/months/years did you spend working as a ________ (e.g., roofer, mechanic, sales clerk, administrative assistant, etc.)? Have you received any on-the-job training for anything we haven't talked about yet? Rate Yes if the offender has not obtained any job-related skills during on-the-job training in any law-abiding area, trade or profession. Skill set must be considered useful in current context (for Indigenous offenders, particularly Inuit offenders, take current community into consideration, isolated area where traditional and cultural skills would be considered marketable). Note: Managing a household including raising children may not count as a marketable job skill unless it can be readily linked to formal employment (e.g., cleaning services, daycare).
Marketable job skills obtained through formal training are limited? Have you ever received any kind of formal training, certificate or diploma? If so, what for and how long ago? Rate Yes if the offender has never received formal training (e.g., does not have a ticket, official certificate, diploma, apprenticeship) in any law-abiding area, trade or profession. Skill set must be judged useful given current market demands.
Dissatisfied with job skills? Are you satisfied with the type of work you have done in the past? Do you wish that you could have done something different? How often do you think about changing the nature of work you have done in the past? Were the benefits acceptable? Was the salary sufficient? Were you happy with the degree of job security? Rate Yes if the offender expresses personal dissatisfaction with current skill set/trade/profession or employment history. Individuals rated Yes for this indicator will typically talk negatively about the work they have done in the past. The offender may also comment that the salary was insufficient, the employment benefits were poor and the job lacked security. Offenders who are satisfied with their job skills typically have higher self-esteem. This item also applies to parents who have never had an opportunity to work outside the home due to caregiver responsibilities and would like to pursue employment opportunities outside of the home.
Co-operative work skills are limited? How would you describe your past relationships with co-workers (or classmates), and supervisors? Have you had difficulties with co-workers or supervisors in the past? For those who have not worked: Do you think you would have any difficulties working with others or reporting to someone? Rate Yes if there is evidence of conflict or friction with co-workers or supervisors (e.g., problems with authority). Individuals rated Yes on this item generally view teamwork in a negative light and believe that it is unimportant to plan and make decisions with others. They also believe that it is unimportant to respect the opinions and feelings of others in the workplace. For individuals who have never worked outside the home or who have never worked, consider volunteer work, or any situation where the individual was required to accomplish some task with at least one other person (e.g., sharing of parental responsibilities with other family members).
Work Attitudes
Belief in oneself to improve employability is low? Have you ever been fired or let go from a job? Why/why not? If you were fired/let go, how did that make you feel? Do you think you can be employed? Do you think you are able to improve your future job options? This indicator is meant to measure the extent to which an offender believes they are incapable of improving their future employment options. Offenders rated Yes on this indicator do not believe that they are capable of learning new job skills or that they will be able to adjust to working with new people or meet the expectations of future employers. If mainly unemployed during the one-year period prior to arrest, rate whether or not the offender was actively seeking employment.
Work ethic can be described as poor? Do you believe it is important to work hard regardless of who is watching? Do you believe that you should be the best at what you do no matter what? Can you think of reasons for working, above and beyond receiving a pay cheque? Are you ever late for work (or for class if in school)? Offenders rated Yes on this indicator generally do not believe that hard work is fulfilling in and of itself. They do not believe in the value of steady work or a steady income. They do not see value in work, above and beyond the pay cheque (e.g., making a contribution to society). They may believe that it is okay to rely on the system for financial support regardless of whether or not someone is capable of working. In regards to household work, the offender does not believe it is important to maintain an organized and clean house nor do they put much value in providing and caring for their children. Evidence for a poor work ethic may also be taken from poor work performance (e.g., must be prompted to start working, house is described as poorly maintained, they are often late or hung over at work, school or home, may have been fired from several jobs for poor work performance).
Past Interventions
Has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under this domain? Have you ever participated in a course to upgrade your level of education? Have you ever participated in an employment program? Rate Yes if the offender has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under the education/employment domain.
Employment Need Rating Employment Need Domain Rating Guidelines
Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment A rating of "Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment" indicates that employment has been stable and has played an important role for the offender. In the domain analysis, note how this area will contribute/facilitate community reintegration.
No immediate need for improvement A rating of "No immediate need for improvement" indicates that neither employment, under employment, sporadic employment, nor chronic unemployment have interfered with daily functioning.
Low need for improvement An offender receives a rating of "Low need for improvement" if any of the aforementioned have caused minor adjustment problems while in the community. Need could be addressed through community-based programming.
Moderate need for improvement A rating of "Moderate need for improvement" indicates that any of the aforementioned have caused moderate adjustment problems.
High need for improvement A rating of "High need for improvement" indicates that the employment situation has caused serious adjustment problems.
Current Motivation Level - Education Are you interested in treatment/upgrading? Why/why not? How would it help you/not help you? Who else benefits from the intervention? On a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 represents "extremely motivated", how motivated are you to upgrade your education?
Low The offender would benefit from motivation interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that they have a need in this area. There is no genuine commitment to change.
Medium The offender may not fully accept or recognize need areas as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release, to be transferred to a lower security institution).
High The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They have committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they are primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for themselves, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
Not applicable No need in this area.
Current Motivation Level - Employment Are you interested in treatment/upgrading? Why/why not? How would it help you/not help you? Who else benefits from the intervention? On a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 represents "extremely motivated", how motivated are you to upgrade your employment?
Low The offender would benefit from motivation interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that they have a need in this area. There is no genuine commitment to change.
Medium The offender may not fully accept or recognize need areas as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release, to be transferred to a lower security institution).
High The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They have committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they are primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for themselves, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
Not applicable No need in this area.
Domain Analysis Provide narrative summary explaining how this need area relates to the present offence and the offender's overall criminality. Indicate whether or not the individual is a primary caregiver. Report strengths if applicable (e.g., volunteer work). Identify whether the offender's income was principally derived from illegal or legal means (e.g., theft, fraud and drug sales). Indicate the reasons why the specific dynamic factor is rated as contributing (directly linked to the criminal behaviour). For dynamic factors not directly related to criminal behaviour, but where intervention will improve safe and timely reintegration, provide a clear explanation of why such factors require intervention. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted this dynamic factor. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for guidance.

Marital/Family Domain Indicators

Marital/Family Domain Indicators Interview Prompts Help Messages
Childhood
Limited attachment to family unit during childhood? Who raised you when you were growing up? How old were you when you left home? Did you move around a lot when you were young? Did you ever spend time in a foster home, group home, or residential school when you were growing up? Is there at least one person you would consider a parent? Rate Yes if several foster home placements or residential school placements occurred during early childhood that resulted in no particular ties or bonding to any one family unit (e.g., parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents) or if cared for by several different family members during early childhood. For Indigenous offenders, consider whether they were directly or indirectly impacted by placement in residential schools. Consider the impact of family members attending residential schools; the offender growing up in foster care or raised by other relatives; sixties scoop etc. on the offender’s childhood.
Relations with parental figure were negative during childhood? How did you get along with your primary caregiver(s)? Would you characterize the relationship as loving? Would you describe your relationship as positive or negative? Were the Children's Aid Society or other government authorities ever involved in your life? If so, how? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the relationship between the offender and their primary caregiver(s) (mother and/or father figures such as parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents) was chronically negative (e.g., characterized by abuse, neglect, prolonged absences, poor supervision, absence of emotional closeness). Describe the exact nature of the conflict in the narrative section. For Indigenous offenders, consider any historic and/or current family violence; the direct and indirect impact of residential schools; the offender growing up in foster care or raised by other relatives; sixties scoop that resulted in family fragmentation such as the offender’s relations with parental figures.
Abused during childhood? Was your family ever investigated by a child welfare agency (e.g., Children's Aid Society) or the police? If yes, for what? What was the outcome? Did anyone in your family ever push, shove, slap, or hit you? If so, why? How often? Were you ever afraid of your parents/caregiver? If yes, describe. Were you ever sexually abused? If yes, would you like to talk about it? Rate Yes if admitted by offender or documented in another official source. Includes physical abuse (pushing, shoving, slapping, hitting, etc.), sexual abuse or emotional abuse (threatening, demeaning or insulting behaviour) from an immediate family member (e.g., father, mother, sibling), extended family member (e.g., uncle, aunt, grandparent), or a non-family member. For Indigenous offenders, consider the direct and indirect impact of residential schools; sixties scoop on the offender’s abuse during childhood.
Witnessed family violence during childhood? Did you ever see your parents/primary caregivers push, shove, slap or hit one another? If so, how often? Did you ever hear them argue, yell or threaten to hurt one another? If yes, describe. Rate Yes if admitted by offender or documented in another source (e.g., Community Assessment, pre-sentence report). Family violence includes physical abuse (pushing, shoving, slapping, hitting, etc.), sexual abuse or emotional abuse (threatening, stalking, demeaning, insulting, or financially controlling behaviour) against any family member (e.g., siblings, father, mother, or any other extended family member). For Indigenous offenders, consider the direct and indirect impact that residential schools; sixties scoop; or family fragmentation could have had on the violence the offender witnessed. 
Family members criminally active during childhood? When you were young, were any of your family members (parents, siblings, extended family) arrested, charged or convicted of a criminal offence? If yes, describe. Rate Yes if criminal activity occurred while the offender was under 18.
Intimate Relationships
Inability to maintain an enduring intimate relationship? Have you ever been divorced or separated? If yes, how many times? For individuals never married: How many girlfriends/boyfriends would you say you have had? For those never involved in a long-term relationship: How many short-term relationships have you had? Rate Yes if the offender has never had a long-term relationship or has only been in short-term casual relationships with no evidence of commitment. Consider offender's age and ethnocultural background when rating this indicator (e.g., young offender versus 50+).  For Indigenous offenders, consider any historic and/or current family violence; the direct and indirect impact of residential schools; the offender growing up in foster care or raised by other relatives; sixties scoop; family fragmentation on the offender’s ability to maintain relationships.
Intimate relationship(s) have been problematic? On average, how often do you and your partner argue? About what (e.g., money, suspected infidelity, children, sex)? How does the argument(s) usually get resolved? Have you ever thought about counseling? Have friends or family ever suggested it to you? Are/were you happy in your relationship(s)? Rate Yes if offender's relationship(s) is best characterized by excessive jealousy (e.g., continually suspicious and/or distrustful of partner under all circumstances) or constant arguing (e.g., about money, sex, infidelity, or children) resulting in serious consequences (e.g., temporary separation, counseling, interference from other family members). Unhealthy co-dependency is also rated yes - particularly salient for women. Please note that the previous indicator (i.e., inability to maintain an enduring intimate relationship) pertains to instability across different relationship(s) while this indicator pertains to instability within a relationship(s). For Indigenous offenders, consider any historic and/or current family violence; the direct and indirect impact of family members attending residential schools; the offender growing up in foster care or raised by other relatives; sixties scoop; the impact of family fragmentation on the offender’s intimate relationships.
Victimized by spousal abuse? How do you normally solve disagreements with your partner(s)? Have the police ever been called to your house? If yes, why? What was the outcome? Have you ever gone to the hospital because of an injury caused by your partner? If yes, describe. Have you ever felt afraid of your partner(s)? Why/why not? How do you make decisions about money in your relationship/family? Rate Yes if self-reported or documented in another source (e.g., Community Assessment, police reports). Spousal violence includes physical abuse (pushing, shoving, slapping, hitting, etc.), sexual abuse or emotional abuse (threatening, stalking, demeaning, insulting, financially controlling behaviour). Includes same-sex partners. For Indigenous offenders, consider the historic and/or current family violence within the context of the offender’s Indigenous Social History.
Perpetrated spousal violence? How do you normally solve disagreements with your partner(s)? Have the police ever been called to your house? If yes, why? What was the outcome? Has your partner ever gone to the hospital because of an injury caused by you? If yes, describe. Have you ever gotten the sense that your partner(s) was/is afraid of you? Why/why not? How do you usually make decisions about money matters in your relationship/family? Rate Yes if there is an official (past or present convictions) or unofficial record (past or present charges) admitted by offender or reported by another source such as Community Assessment or police reports. Spousal violence includes physical abuse (pushing, shoving, slapping, hitting, etc.), sexual abuse or emotional abuse (threatening, stalking, demeaning, insulting, or financially controlling behaviour) against an intimate partner. Includes same-sex partners. For Indigenous offenders, consider historic and/or current family violence and the impact that any family fragmentation or lack of positive role models may have had as a direct or indirect result of residential school attendance and/or sixties scoop.
Attitudes support spousal violence? Do you believe that both partners should have equal say in a relationship? Is it okay to hurt or scare your partner if they get out of line? Is it okay to hurt or scare your partner to get them to do what you want? Do you believe it is okay for the bread winner to make all household spending decisions? Do you believe that one spouse has a right to force the other to have sex? Rate Yes if the offender demonstrates attitudes, values or beliefs supportive of physical abuse (pushing, shoving, slapping, hitting, etc.), sexual abuse or emotional abuse (threatening, stalking, demeaning, insulting, or financially controlling behaviour). Prior convictions/charges do Not merit an automatic Yes rating. For Indigenous offenders, consider historic and/or current family violence and the impact that any family fragmentation or lack of positive role models may have had as a direct or indirect result of residential school attendance and/or sixties scoop.
Parenting
Has no parental responsibilities? Do you have children? If so, how often do you see them (e.g., lived together, regular visitations)? Who is currently looking after the children? What is the status of any court hearings in your case? Rate Yes if the offender Does not have biological or non-biological children currently considered dependents under 18 years of age (i.e., the parent provides or should be providing regular financial or instrumental support for the child).
Has significant difficulties handling parental responsibilities? For individuals with children: How often do you typically see your children? What is a typical day like for you and your children? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender cannot or does not provide for the physical or emotional needs of the child. If the offender does not have children, rate No. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted the offender’s parental responsibilities.
Parental knowledge and/or skill is limited? Tell me what a typical week is like for you and your child or children. For example, how do you usually pass the time? What does your child or children typically eat/drink on any given day? If your child or children are under 12: Is there always someone with your child or children? If over 12: Do you like to know where your child or children are at all times? Do they have a curfew? What do you usually do when your child or children do something that makes you happy? What's the best way to modify your child's behaviour - to get them to do what you want? Rate Yes if any one of the following three situations applies:
1) the offender does not use positive reinforcement (e.g., hugs, kisses, praise, special privileges) on a regular basis to encourage good behaviour; 2) the offender does not participate in activities with child or children (e.g., sports, hobbies, games, crafts, reading, talking, playing); or 3) the offender lacks information about basic childcare needs and childhood development (e.g., has unrealistic expectations about child's abilities during different stages of development, nutrition, sensory stimulation, and supervision requirements). If the offender does not have children, rate No. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted the offender’s parental knowledge and/or skills (for example, family fragmentation and lack of positive parental figures in the offender’s history may have contributed to current deficits in parental knowledge and or skills).
Formally investigated for suspicion of child abuse and/or neglect? Have you or anyone else in your family ever been seen by the Children's Aid Society? If yes, when? What for? What was the eventual outcome? Rate Yes if the offender self-reports or file information indicates that the offender was investigated at least once by a child welfare agency for suspicion of child abuse or neglect. Consider abuse or neglect of dependents, biological children, non-biological children and/or any child within or outside the family unit (extended family member, niece, nephew, care of neighbour's children, etc.). For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family fragmentation and/or systemic racism and discrimination that has resulted in higher interventions by child welfare agencies. Additionally the potential lack of inherent parental skill sets based on their historic experiences, and any direct or indirect impacts related to residential school or the sixties scoop.
Uses excessive force to discipline child? What do you usually do when your child or children do something you don't like (e.g., temper tantrum, whine, poor school grades, fight with siblings/friends, etc.)? How do you usually discipline them? Have you ever disciplined your child or children by hitting, slapping, pushing or shoving them? Have you ever restrained your child? Have you used time outs? If so, for how long? Has your child ever been bruised, suffered broken bones as a result of discipline? If yes, how often? Under what circumstances? Rate Yes if the offender self-reports or file information indicates that the offender has used excessive force (e.g., pushing, shoving, slapping, hitting, or other extreme measures). Consider use of excessive force against dependents, biological children, non-biological children and/or any child within or outside the family unit (extended family member, niece, nephew, care of neighbour's children, etc.). For Indigenous offenders, consider intergenerational family violence that may have resulted through direct and indirect exposure to the residential school system and how they were exposed to discipline and it may have shaped their point of view.
Past Interventions
Has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under this domain? Have you ever participated in a course or program addressing family violence, parenting skills, etc.? Rate Yes if the offender has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under the marital/family domain.
Martial/Family Need Rating Marital/Family Need Domain Rating Guidelines
Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment For this category, a rating of "Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment" indicates that there is history of positive and supportive relationships with either parents, relatives, spouse or children and there is no evidence of having either experienced or perpetrated family violence. In the domain analysis, note how this area will contribute/facilitate community reintegration.
No immediate need for improvement A rating of "No immediate need for improvement" indicates that there is evidence of a satisfying and caring relationship within a marriage and/or family which has resulted in no current difficulties while in the community.
Low need for improvement A rating of "Low need for improvement" indicates that there has been evidence of uncaring, hostility, arguments, fighting or indifference in the marital/family relationships resulting in occasional instability (including relationships with children as well as spouse).
Moderate need for improvement A rating of "Moderate need for improvement" indicates that there is a substantial problem in at least one area of this domain that is resulting in a pattern of unstable relationships (e.g., unresolved issues pertaining to childhood abuse).
High need for improvement A rating of "High need for improvement" is given if more than two of the aforementioned have been causing a very unstable pattern of marital/family relationships.
Current Motivation Level - Identified Deficit Are you interested in treatment/upgrading? Why/why not? How would it help you/not help you?
Who else benefits from the intervention?
Low The offender would benefit from motivation interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that they have a need in this area. There is no genuine commitment to change.
Medium The offender may not fully accept or recognize need areas as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release, to be transferred to a lower security institution).
High The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They have committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they are primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for themselves, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
Not applicable No need in this area.
Domain Analysis Provide a narrative summary explaining how this need area relates to the present offence and the offender's overall criminality. For offenders with children, report current custody arrangement. Report strengths, if applicable. Indicate the reasons why the specific dynamic factor is rated as contributing (directly linked to the criminal behaviour). For dynamic factors not directly related to criminal behaviour, but where intervention will improve safe and timely reintegration, provide a clear explanation of why such factors require intervention. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted this dynamic factor. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for guidance.

Associates Domain Indicators

Associates Domain Indicators Interview Prompts Help Messages
Criminal
Associates with substance abusers? Do any of your friends, acquaintances or family members drink excessively or use drugs? How often do you see them? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender socializes with friends, family or acquaintances who abuse drugs or alcohol. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family and community fragmentation on the offender’s associates.
Has many criminal acquaintances? How many of your acquaintances have criminal records or have been involved with the police (e.g., none, few, most)? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender socializes with criminal acquaintances. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family and community fragmentation, racial discrimination and gang affiliation on the offender’s associates.
Has many criminal friends? How many of your friends have criminal records or have been involved with the police (e.g., none, few, most)? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender has several criminal friends. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family and community fragmentation, racial discrimination and gang affiliation on the offender’s associates.
Has contact with criminal family members? How much contact have you had with your family during the last year? What about now? Do any of them have criminal records? Rate Yes if the offender has regular contact with family members who have been involved or are currently involved in crime. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family and community fragmentation, racial discrimination and gang affiliation on the offender’s associates.
Has a criminal partner? Has your partner ever been involved with the criminal justice system? Rate Yes if the offender is married, or was living common-law, or is involved in a long-term relationship (at least one year) with someone involved in crime (e.g., the person has been charged and/or convicted of a criminal offence in the past or is currently involved in crime). Includes same-sex partners. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family and community fragmentation, racial discrimination and gang affiliation on the offender’s associates.
Suspected affiliation with street gang/organized crime? Do you know anyone who belongs to a gang? Have you ever socialized with a known gang member or associate? Have you ever belonged to a gang? Rate Yes if any of the following apply:
1) the offender was arrested while participating in a criminal activity with known gang members or affiliates;
2) the offender self-reports membership/affiliation;
3) a judicial finding confirms membership/affiliation;
4) tangible evidence (e.g., written, photographic) confirms membership/association; or
5) unofficial information from a reliable source (e.g., informant, Community Assessment report) confirms association. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family and community fragmentation, racial discrimination and gang affiliation on the offender’s associates.
Resides in a high crime area? Did you live in a high crime area? Did you feel safe at night? Did you worry about your children? Did you notice criminal activity? Did the police come to your neighbourhood regularly? Rate Yes if the offender lives in a high crime area (e.g., prostitution, drug trafficking, highly visible police presence). Consider offender's perception as well as official information. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family and community fragmentation, racial discrimination and gang affiliation on the offender’s associates.
Prosocial Deficits
Prosocial support from an intimate partner is limited? How has your partner helped you during the last year and since your arrest? When was the last time you spoke to them? On the outside, how frequently did you talk to them (daily, weekly, monthly)? Do they have a criminal record? Rate Yes if the offender does not receive support (instrumental or emotional) from a prosocial partner (e.g., common-law partner, husband/wife, same-sex partner, long-term non-cohabitating partner). Instrumental support includes tangible help (e.g., housing, money) while emotional support includes non-tangible support (e.g., someone to talk to). If applicable, indicate whether or not the offender has been banished (Indigenous offenders only) in the narrative section. Rate Yes if the offender does not have an intimate partner. For Indigenous offenders, consider whether the impact of family and community fragmentation contributed to a lack of prosocial support from an intimate partner.
Prosocial family support is limited? Are you close to your family? Have they ever helped you out when you needed it? When was the last time you spoke to them? On the outside, how frequently did you talk to them (daily, weekly, monthly)? Do they have criminal records? Rate Yes if the offender does not receive support (instrumental or emotional) from prosocial family member(s) (includes extended family members). Instrumental support includes tangible help (e.g., housing, money) while emotional support includes non-tangible support (e.g., someone to talk to). If applicable, indicate whether or not the offender has been banished (Indigenous offenders only) in the narrative section. For Indigenous offenders, consider whether the impact of family and community fragmentation contributed to a lack of prosocial support from family.
Prosocial support from friends is limited? Have your friends ever helped you out when you needed it (money, talk to them about a problem)? When was the last time you spoke to any of your friends? On the outside, how frequently did you talk to them (daily, weekly, monthly)? Do they have criminal records? Rate Yes if the offender does not receive support (instrumental or emotional) from prosocial friends. Instrumental support includes tangible help (e.g., housing, money) while emotional support includes non-tangible support (e.g., someone to talk to). If applicable, indicate whether or not the offender has been banished (Indigenous offenders only) in the narrative section. For Indigenous offenders, consider whether the impact of family and community fragmentation contributed to a lack of prosocial support from friends.
Past Interventions
Has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under this domain? Have you ever participated in a course or program about criminal acquaintances and/or socializing with friends that abuse drugs or alcohol? Rate Yes if the offender has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under the associates domain.
Associates Need Rating Associates Need Domain Rating Guidelines
Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment A rating of "Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment" indicates that there is evidence of the offender having had positive prosocial support from either family, friends or spouse and no associations with criminal friends or acquaintances. In the domain analysis, note how this area will contribute/facilitate community reintegration.
No immediate need for improvement A rating of "No immediate need for improvement" indicates that there is evidence of the offender having had mostly non-criminal and positive associates.
Low need for improvement A rating of "Low need for improvement" indicates that there has been a lack of positive associates and/or some negative companions (e.g., criminal).
Moderate need for improvement A rating of "Moderate need for improvement" indicates that there is a substantial problem in that the offender has mainly criminal associates but they may have some prosocial supports.
High need for improvement A rating of "High need for improvement" is given if there is an absence of prosocial support coupled with a strong criminal support system that has been interfering consistently with the offender's performance in the community.
Current Motivation Level - Identified Deficit Are you interested in treatment/upgrading? Why/why not? How would it help you/not help you? Who else benefits from the intervention?
Low The offender would benefit from motivation interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that they have a need in this area There is no genuine commitment to change.
Medium The offender may not fully accept or recognize need area as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release, to be transferred to a lower security institution).
High The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They have committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they are primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for themselves, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
Not applicable No need in this area.
Domain Analysis Provide a narrative summary explaining how this need area relates to the present offence and the offender's overall criminality. Report strengths if applicable (e.g., prosocial support systems). Indicate the reasons why the specific dynamic factor is rated as contributing (directly linked to the criminal behaviour). For other dynamic factors not directly related to criminal behaviour, but where intervention will improve safe and timely reintegration, provide a clear explanation of why such factors require intervention. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted this dynamic factor. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for guidance.

Substance Abuse Domain Indicators

Substance Abuse Domain Indicators Interview Prompts Help Messages
Alcohol Use
Early age alcohol use? How old were you when you first consumed alcohol? Who were you with? How often did you drink (daily, weekly, monthly)? How often were you hung over? Were you ever suspended or expelled from school as a result of drinking? If so, how many times? Tell me about it. Did your parents or caregivers ever talk to you about your drinking? Were you ever in counselling because of your drinking? Rate Yes if there is evidence that early-age drinking (under age 16) interfered with any aspect of the offender's life (e.g., expelled/suspended from school, in trouble with parents, referred for an assessment). Also rate Yes if the offender reports being intoxicated or hung over regularly (e.g., at least once per week) at an early age. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s early alcohol use and lifestyle.
Frequently engages in binge drinking? During the last year, how often did you drink in bouts or binges? Did you ever do it for more than two days in a row? If so, how often (a few times a year, a few times a month, every week)? Rate Yes if over the course of the last year:
1) there is evidence that the offender had at least 5 (for men) or 4 (for women) drinks in one sitting for at least two days in a row; and
2) this behaviour occurred at least twice per month.
For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s binge drinking.
Has combined the use of alcohol and drugs? Have you ever used alcohol and drugs at the same time? Describe the circumstances and frequency (a few times in the last year, a few times per month, every week). Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender combined the use of alcohol and drugs at least a few times per month (consider all information sources including the Computerized Assessment of Substance Abuse, Community Assessment reports, interview results). For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s combined use of alcohol and drugs.
Alcohol use interferes with employment? Ever miss work/school because you were too hung over? Were you ever drunk at work/school, or consume alcohol at work/school? Have you ever been fired/expelled from a job/school because of alcohol?" For individuals who work within the home: Did you feel like your drinking ever affected your household and/or children? Did anyone ever comment that your drinking was interfering with your children or your home? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender's alcohol use interfered with their job or education in any way (e.g., fired from job because of being drunk at work or hung over, evidence of poor job performance as a result of drinking). Note: Consider academic performance for young offenders (if applicable) and management of household responsibilities for individuals working within the home. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s alcohol use and employment.
Alcohol use interferes with interpersonal relationships? Has anyone ever expressed concern about your alcohol use? Did your family ever claim that you have a drinking problem? For example, did your partner ever seek help for your drinking or ask you to seek help? Has your drinking ever resulted in arguments or physical fights with other people? If yes, with whom and how often (rarely, occasionally, frequently)? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender's alcohol use has negatively impacted interpersonal relationships with significant others including intimate partners, family members, or friends (e.g., lost friends over drinking, drinking resulted in divorce/separation, caused problems in general with intimate partner, children or other family members). For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s alcohol use and interpersonal relationships.
Alcohol use interferes with physical or emotional well-being? Have you ever been hospitalized (injured/hurt) as a result of drinking? If yes, how often and what for (e.g., alcohol poisoning, liver problems)? Have you ever felt guilty about your drinking or lost sleep because of it? If yes, describe. Have you ever received psychiatric help or help from anyone else for an emotional problem related to your drinking (e.g., mental health clinic, social worker, clergy, Elder)? If yes, describe. Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender's alcohol use has caused problems with physical health (e.g., liver problems, alcohol poisoning) or emotional health (e.g., psychiatric intervention, evidence of guilt/sleeplessness or feeling stressed about drinking). For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop,  etc. on the offender’s alcohol use and emotional well-being.
Excessive alcohol use is part of the offender's lifestyle? Have you ever stumbled, staggered or weaved about as a result of drinking? If yes, describe the circumstances and frequency (daily, weekly, monthly). Have you ever felt physically sick (e.g., vomits, stomach cramps) as a result of drinking? If yes, describe the circumstances and frequency. Have you ever 'blacked out' as a result of drinking? If yes, describe the frequency and circumstances. Do you ever drink in the morning or alone? If yes, describe frequency and circumstances. Have you ever tried to quit drinking completely or cut down the amount you were drinking? If yes, describe. Did you ever attend Alcoholics Anonymous? If so, describe the circumstances and frequency. Rate Yes based on the responses to the above indicators. Also rate Yes if there is additional evidence that the offender drinks to excess on a regular basis based on the answers to the following questions. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s alcohol use and lifestyle.
Drug Use
Early age drug use? How old were you when you first experimented with drugs? Who were you with? How often did you use drugs (daily, weekly, monthly)? Were you ever suspended or expelled from school as a result of drug use? If so, how often? Tell me about it. Did your parents/caregivers ever talk to you about your drug use? Were you ever in counselling because of your drug use? Rate Yes if there is evidence of regular (at least twice per month) drug use (includes illegal drugs, solvents, as well as prescription drugs in excess of directions) that occurred before the age of 16. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s early drug use.
Has gone on drug-taking bouts or binges? During the last year, did you ever use drugs for more than two days in a row? If yes, how often (a few times a year, a few times a month, every week)? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender has been 'strung-out' on drugs for two or more days in a row on at least two separate occasions in any given month. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including  residential schools or the sixties scoop,  etc. on the offender’s drug binges.
Has combined the use of different drugs? Have you ever used more than two drugs (excluding alcohol) at the same time? Describe circumstances and frequency (a few times in the last year, a few times per month, every week)? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender combined the use of more than two drugs (excluding alcohol) on a relatively regular basis (e.g., at least twice in any given month during the last year). (Consider all information sources including the Computerized Assessment of Substance Abuse, Community Assessment reports, interview results.) For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s combined use of different drugs.
Drug use interferes with employment? Ever miss work/school because you were too hung over? Were you ever high or stoned at work/school, or did you ever take drugs at work/school? Have you ever been fired or expelled from a job/school because of being high or stoned? If Yes to any of the above questions, have the offender discuss in further detail. For individuals who work within the home: Did you feel like your being high or stoned ever affected your household and/or children? Did anyone ever comment that your drug use was interfering with your children or your home? If yes, can you tell me more about it? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender's drug use interfered with their job or education in any way (e.g., fired from job because of being high or stoned at work, evidence of poor job performance as the result of drug use). Note: Consider academic performance for young offenders (if applicable) and management of household responsibilities for individuals working within the home. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop, etc. on the offender’s drug use and employment.
Drug use interferes with interpersonal relationships? Has anyone ever expressed concern about your drug use? Did your family ever claim that you have a drug problem? For example, did your spouse/partner ever seek help for your drinking or ask you to seek help? Has your drug use ever resulted in arguments or physical fights with other people? If yes, with whom and how often (rarely, occasionally, frequently)? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender's drug use has negatively impacted interpersonal relationships with significant others including intimate partners, family members, or friends (e.g., lost friends over drug use, drug use resulted in divorce/separation, caused problems in general with intimate partner, children or other family members). For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop,  etc. on the offender’s drug use and interpersonal relationships.
Drug use interferes with physical or emotional well-being? Have you ever been hospitalized as a result of taking drugs? If yes, how often and what for (e.g., alcohol poisoning, liver problems)? Have you ever felt guilty about your drug use or lost sleep because of it? If yes, describe. Have you ever received psychiatric help or help from anyone else for an emotional problem related to your drug use (e.g., mental health clinic, social worker, clergy, Elder)? If yes, describe. Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender's drug use has caused problems with physical health (e.g., liver problems, alcohol poisoning) or emotional health (e.g., psychiatric intervention, evidence of guilt/sleeplessness or feeling stressed about drinking). For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop,  etc. on the offender’s drug use and emotional well-being.
Regular drug use is part of the offender's lifestyle? In the past year, how often have you used illegal drugs or abused prescription drugs (never, yearly, monthly, weekly, daily)? If answer is anything but "never", ask the individual to describe the circumstances. Who were you with? Have you ever tried to quit using drugs completely or cut down the amount you were using? If yes, describe. Did you ever attend Narcotics Anonymous? If so, describe the circumstances and frequency. Rate Yes based on the responses to the above drug indicators. Also rate Yes if there is additional evidence that the offender uses drugs on a regular basis based on the answers to the following questions. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse; resorting to substances as a coping mechanism in response to direct and indirect experiences including residential schools or the sixties scoop,  etc. on the offender’s drug use and emotional well-being.
Alcohol/Drug Crime Link
Alcohol or drug use has resulted in law violations? Have you ever been arrested, charged or convicted for any offence that involved alcohol or drugs? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender has been arrested, charged or convicted for alcohol/drug-related offences. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse, offender’s drug use, and law violations.
Becomes violent when drinking or using drugs? Has anyone ever accused you of becoming violent when you drink or use drugs? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender becomes violent (physical aggression) when using drugs and/or alcohol. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse, offender’s drug use, and law violations.
Alcohol and/or drug use is part of the offence cycle? Have you ever been under the influence of alcohol/drugs when you committed a crime? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender's alcohol and/or drug use is clearly part of the offence cycle (e.g., if offender is usually drunk/stoned while committing offence, if the period preceding the offence is characterized by excessive drinking and/or drug use). For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of family history of substance abuse, offender’s drug use, and law violations.
Past Intervention
Has previously been referred to programs addressing drugs or alcohol problems? Have you ever participated in a drug or alcohol program? Rate Yes if the offender has previously been referred to programs addressing substance abuse issues.
Substance Abuse Domain Rating Substance Abuse Domain Rating Guidelines
No immediate need for improvement "No immediate need for improvement" indicates that the extent, nature, and patterns of alcohol and/or drug consumption by the offender while in the community has had no influence on their adjustment (e.g., abstinence, social drinking).
Low need for improvement An offender demonstrates "Low need for improvement" if alcohol and/or drug consumption has caused minor adjustment problems while in the community.
Moderate need for improvement A rating of "Moderate need for improvement" means that while the offender's drinking has caused adjustment problems, the extent of the problems has not been significant enough to merit a considerable need for improvement rating.
High need for improvement Rate "High need for improvement" if substance abuse has caused serious adjustment problems while in the community.
Current Motivation Level - Identified Deficit Are you interested in treatment/upgrading? Why/why not? How would it help you/not help you? Who else benefits from the intervention?
Low The offender would benefit from motivation interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that they have a need in this area. There is no genuine commitment to change.
Medium The offender may not fully accept or recognize need area as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release, to be transferred to a lower security institution).
High The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They have committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they are primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for themselves, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
Not applicable No need in this area.
Domain Analysis Provide a narrative summary explaining how this need area relates to the present offence and the offender's overall criminality. Report strengths if applicable (e.g., evidence of periods of sobriety in the past, evidence that treatment has been successful in the past). Interview Prompts: Did you ever notice what or who helped you stop using drugs or alcohol? Who are the most important people that could help you be alcohol or drug free? Indicate the reasons why the specific dynamic factor is rated as contributing (directly linked to the criminal behaviour). For other dynamic factors not directly related to criminal behaviour, but where intervention will improve safe and timely reintegration, provide a clear explanation of why such factors require intervention. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted this dynamic factor. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for guidance.

Community Functioning Domain Indicators

Community Functioning Domain Indicators Interview Prompts Help Messages
Accommodations
Unstable accommodations? How many different places have you lived in the last year? Who have you lived with? Why have you changed residences so often? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender frequently changed residences during the last year in the absence of a strong rationale. (Consider all information sources including the street instability rating from the Custody Rating Scale.) For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact of their Indigenous Social History such as family and community fragmentation, interventions by child welfare and poverty that may have contributed to unstable accommodations.
Finances
Financial instability? Do you have a bank account? Do you have any credit? Have you ever declared bankruptcy, had furniture or your car repossessed? Have you ever owned a house? If so, have you ever defaulted on your mortgage? How often do you pay bills on time (always, sometimes, rarely, never)? Have you ever been evicted? Have you ever had a collection agency after you? Have you stressed about money? Have you ever had to borrow money illegally? Rate Yes if there is evidence of financial instability (e.g., no bank account, poor credit rating, no credit, no savings, defaulting on bills or loans, bankruptcy declaration, repossession by bank).
Has used social assistance? Have you ever been in receipt of social assistance? Please describe these circumstances. How frequent and for how long were you in receipt of social assistance? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender used social assistance in the last year. For Indigenous offenders, rate Yes for those who may have been working for the band while receiving social assistance. Rate No for offenders receiving family benefits from their provincial governments.
Leisure
Constructive leisure activities are limited? When you are not working or looking after your children, how do you spend your spare time? Do you have a membership anywhere? How often do you participate in this activity (daily, weekly, monthly, yearly)? Do you participate in cultural or spiritual activities? If yes, how often? Rate Yes if regular involvement in hobbies or organized activity (e.g., car repair, sports/exercise, family activities, gardening, home improvement projects, crafts, camping, drawing, volunteering, singing, cultural/spiritual activities). First Nations specific activities include: circles, medicine bundles, drumming, pow-wows/feasts, sweat lodges, smudges, food, dress, music, craft, pipe ceremonies, and vision quests. Métis specific activities include: Sash weaving, bead making, jigging, and fiddling. Inuit specific activities include: throat singing, country food feasts, drum dancing and carving. Exclude all reported passive activities (e.g., parties, bars, hanging out with friends, sleeping, listening to music, watching television).
Community
Community attachment is limited? What do you do in your spare time? Do you volunteer anywhere currently? Are you a member of any organization? Describe. Do you feel connected to the community? If yes, why? If no, why not? Rate Yes if the offender is isolated or unattached to the community. Note that the reason for being unattached to the community should be discussed in the narrative section. For example, some offenders may choose to isolate themselves from the community. In contrast, others may wish to be part of the community but can't (e.g., sex offenders, banished offenders, unaware of available options). Examples of community attachment include: Big Brothers/Sisters, sports leagues, spiritual community activities, and volunteer work. Be aware of membership that facilitates criminal activity (e.g., sex offenders and organized community groups for children). For Indigenous offenders, consider limited community attachment in the context of family/community fragmentation as a direct or indirect result of experiences with residential schools, child welfare interventions or the sixties scoop.
Use of community resources is limited? Have you ever relied on the community for support? Describe. Do you know where to go if you needed help for housing, food, etc.? Rate Yes if the offender is unaware of, chooses not to, or does not have access to community resources. Provide reason in narrative section. Support includes instrumental support (e.g., housing, money, drives, food), informational support (e.g., how to get a SIN number, driver's license, employment insurance application), and emotional support (e.g., telephone help lines). If applicable, indicate in the narrative comment if the offender has been banished. For Indigenous offenders, consider limited community resources in the context of family/community fragmentation as a direct or indirect result of experiences with residential schools, child welfare interventions or the sixties scoop.
Past Intervention
Has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under this domain? Have you ever participated in a leisure skills program, community reintegration program, or any other program addressing issues related to your community involvement or leisure activities? Rate Yes if the offender has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under the community functioning domain.
Community Functioning Domain Rating Community Functioning Domain Rating Guidelines
Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment A rating of "Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment" indicates that the offender has been effectively managing their situation (i.e., accommodation, deportment, health, finance, communication, leisure, support) while in the community. In the domain analysis, note how this area will contribute/facilitate community reintegration.
No immediate need for improvement A rating of "No immediate need for improvement" indicates that knowledge and having the necessary skills for daily living has not been causing the offender difficulties.
Low need for improvement A rating of "Low need for improvement" is given if any of the aforementioned has been causing the offender situational or minor difficulties while in the community.
Moderate need for improvement An offender exhibits "Moderate need for improvement" if the aforementioned has been causing them moderate problems.
High need for improvement An offender exhibits "High need for improvement" if community functioning has been causing them severe difficulties.
Current Motivation Level - Identified Deficit Are you interested in treatment/upgrading? Why/why not? How would it help you/not help you? Who else benefits from the intervention?
Low The offender would benefit from motivation interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that they have a need in this area. There is no genuine commitment to change.
Medium The offender may not fully accept or recognize need areas as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release, to be transferred to a lower security institution).
High The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They have committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they are primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for themselves, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
Not applicable No need in this area.
Domain Analysis Provide a narrative summary explaining how this need area relates to the present offence and the offender's overall criminality. Include discussion of forced versus chosen isolation from community, which is particularly relevant for women in abusive relationships and Indigenous offenders who have been banished. Record strengths if applicable. Indicate the reasons why the specific dynamic factor is rated as contributing (directly linked to the criminal behaviour). For other dynamic factors not directly related to criminal behaviour, but where intervention will improve safe and timely reintegration, provide a clear explanation of why such factors require intervention. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted this dynamic factor. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for guidance.

Personal/Emotional Domain Indicators

Personal/Emotional Domain Indicators Interview Prompts Help Messages
Problem Solving Skills
Displays narrow and rigid thinking? Who do you think should be primarily responsible for raising children? Why/why not? Narrow and rigid thinkers are characterized by one-track thinking and close-mindedness. They maintain their beliefs despite contrary evidence. They find it difficult to see a situation from another viewpoint. In addition to collateral information (e.g., previous assessments, Community Assessments, pre-sentence reports, etc.), you may use the following method for determining whether or not someone should be rated Yes for this indicator. Ask their opinion about a mainstream issue(s) (e.g., working parents versus stay-at-home parents). Once the individual has responded, try presenting counter arguments in favour of the opposing view. Individuals who appear to see at least some merit in both sides of the issue would not be considered narrow and rigid thinkers (e.g., "While I think that women should stay home and raise the children, it is pretty difficult nowadays given how expensive daycare can be."). For Indigenous offenders, consider whether their Indigenous Social History including direct or indirect experiences with residential schools, foster care, sixties scoop contributed to their narrow and rigid thinking.
Problem recognition skills are limited? Are there any aspects of your life you would like to improve? If so, what are they and why do you want to do something about them? If not, why not? [Continue to probe if necessary.] What about your family, your friends, your job, your finances, your emotions? Are you having any problems in any of these areas? Why/why not? Rate Yes if there is no evidence that the offender believes they have any problem(s) that need to be addressed. The indicator is NOT meant to identify individuals who deny or minimize responsibility for their criminal actions but rather, it is meant to identify individuals who have difficulty recognizing problem areas (e.g., the factors that brought them to prison). For Indigenous offenders, consider whether their limited problem recognition skills are related to a lack of positive role modeling or learned behaviour growing up as a result of direct or indirect family/community experience with residential schools, foster care and the sixties scoop.
Ability to generate choices is limited? How would you or how have you dealt with the following situation (e.g., you just had an argument with your partner, you just lost your job, your Parole Officer recommends more programming but you don't feel you need anymore)? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender finds it difficult to generate a number of different solutions when confronted with a problem (e.g., they are unable to brainstorm). You may wish to consider how the offender responds to a hypothetical problem situation. For Indigenous offenders, consider whether their limited ability to generate choices is related to a lack of positive role modeling or learned behaviour growing up as a result of direct or indirect family/community experience with residential schools, foster care and the sixties scoop.
Ability to link actions to consequences is limited? How has your criminal offending affected your relationships, your employment opportunities, your children? What will happen if you don't follow your Correctional Plan? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender has difficulty linking actions (e.g., walk off job) to consequences (e.g., won't be able to pay bills, buy food, will produce conflict with partner). Consider both short-term and long-term consequences.
Has difficulty coping with stress? Describe a recent stressful event in your life (e.g., admission into prison)? How did you respond? How did others feel you were coping with the problem? Was there something you should have done to deal with the stress but didn't? ($$$ oriented crimes) Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender becomes aggressive, turns to substance abuse or avoids problem situations entirely when stressed (e.g., evidence of self-harming behaviour). Consider whether stress is linked to the crime cycle. Individuals who cope poorly with stress do not rely on others for support nor do they seek long-term solutions. Often their responses tend to worsen rather than improve the original problem (note: not all problems produce stress). For Indigenous offenders, consider whether their difficulty coping with stress is related to a lack of positive role modeling or learned behaviour growing up as a result of direct or indirect family/community experience with residential schools, foster care and the sixties scoop.
Gives up easily when challenged? What goals have you had for yourself in the past? Have you achieved them? If so, why? If not, why not? Which adjective best describes your goal-seeking behaviour: 1) persistent, 2) unshakable, 3) half-hearted, 4) ineffective. Why? Can you give me an example? Are you like a dog with a bone (you keep trying until you get what you want, obtain goal)? [Use interview responses as well.] Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender is not persistent in goal-oriented behaviour. For example, the offender may have a history of verbally committing to achieve a particular goal but never follows through or makes few attempts to achieve goal. Consider file information if available. In addition, consider the answers to the following questions.
Self-Regulation
Impulsive? Were your crimes planned or spur of the moment? Do you make decisions on the spot or do you like to have time to think things over before making a final decision? Have you ever bought something on the spot and later regretted it? Do you live for today, live in the moment? Do you like to go with the flow? Rate Yes if any of the following apply: the offender typically fails to stop and think before acting, looks for immediate gratification, engages in impulsive behaviours (spur of the moment crimes, many jobs, many relationships, admits to making decisions too quickly that they later regret. Consider offender's answers to date particularly in regards to past relationships and employment history.
Engages in thrill seeking behaviour? How do you feel when you are doing crime (excited, nervous)? Do you like to do risky things? Do you like fast driving? Are you the kind of person that dives right in and asks questions later? If you had a choice between sky-diving and watching a movie, what would you prefer? Why? Rate Yes if the offender seeks situations (criminal or prosocial) that cause emotional excitement. These individuals may describe themselves as sensation-seekers who become bored easily. They report getting a thrill or rush from crime.
Gambling has been problematic? Have you ever placed bets at racetracks, casinos, or sporting events? Has anyone ever told you that you waste too much time or money gambling? Have you ever argued with anyone about gambling? Have you ever gone into debt because of gambling? Have you had to borrow to gamble? Have you been placed in protective custody as a result of gambling debts incurred while inside. What is the longest stint of gambling you've had? Do you gamble on the Internet? Rate Yes if gambling has interfered with at least one aspect of life (work, finances, relationships, criminal justice system).
Life Planning Skills
Has difficulty setting long-term goals? Do you have any long-term goals? Where would you like to be one year and five years from now? What are your plans for the next year? Rate Yes if the offender lives day-to-day (in the moment), does not think about the future or generally lacks direction in life. Consider length of sentence. Can discuss community-focused or institution-based long-term goals. For Indigenous offenders, consider the direct and indirect impact of residential schools, foster care and the sixties scoop and potential institutionalization that may have occurred.
Has difficulty setting realistic goals? What would you like to accomplish in the future in terms of work, living arrangements, other personal goals, relationships? Do you think these are realistic goals? Are there any obstacles to meeting these goals? Have you looked into it? Rate Yes if the offender's plans are inconsistent with current abilities or potential improvements. Consider whether or not the offender's lifestyle expectations appear to be consistent with their earning potential, educational background, employment background, and past experiences. Examples include unrealistic job expectations given educational level, employment history, and criminal history (e.g., a sex offender who wants to work with children).
Time management skills are problematic? Do you like to plan your time, or are you more day-to-day? Do you ever feel pressured for time? How would your former employers/partners comment on your time management skills? Has anyone ever indicated that you need to work on your time-management skills? If so, who? Can you tell me more about it? Do you plan tasks appropriately? Are you good at allocating the right amount of time towards specific tasks? Do you organize your time well? Rate Yes if the offender is unable to set priorities and manage time appropriately.
Interpersonal Skills
Assertiveness skills are limited? In a group setting, would you characterize yourself as the person who likes to make the rules or someone who doesn't mind going by someone else's rules? Would you characterize yourself as an assertive person? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender has difficulty requesting or refusing things in interactions with others, has difficulty stating their point of view, is easily led by others and may have been influenced into problems by others in the past (e.g., criminal associates, spouse, other relatives). For Indigenous offenders, consider the direct and indirect impact of residential schools, foster care and the sixties scoop on their level of comfort to assert and their need to conform or belong which can also be linked to family and community fragmentation.
Listening skills are limited? If I asked your boss, wife, mother, sister on a scale of 1 to 10 if you are a good listener or not, what would they give you and why? Rate Yes if the offender demonstrates poor listening skills during interview process.
Has difficulty solving interpersonal problems? Describe a recent situation in which you experienced some form of conflict with another person. What happened? How was the situation resolved? Were you happy with the outcome? Why/why not? Rate Yes if the offender does not deal with interpersonal conflict (conflict with other people) effectively. For instance, when presented with conflict involving another person (e.g., argument with partner, disagreement with boss regarding workload, disagreement about money with friend), the offender relies on short-term solutions, uses drugs/alcohol, fails to address the problem entirely or reacts in a manner that makes the problem worse (e.g., responds with aggression, antagonizes the other person).
Manipulates others to achieve goals? Has anyone ever accused you of being untrustworthy or manipulative? Are you a con artist? Are you good at getting people to do things you want them to do? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender influences others through deceptive or fraudulent means (e.g., fraud-related crimes, chronic lying, aliases).
Empathy skills are limited? What effect has your crime(s) had on the victim(s)? Has your conviction(s) hurt anyone else? If yes, describe who and how so. Do you have any other regrets in life that aren't directly related to crime? If yes, describe. Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender does not consider the effects of their actions on others or is incapable of understanding someone else's perspective or feelings (consider convictions as well as other aspects of the offender's life). Note: Remorse and feelings of guilt do not indicate empathy.
General Aggression
Frequently feels intense anger? Have you ever experienced road rage? Have you ever "seen red" or felt so angry about something that you almost blacked out? Has anyone ever told you that you have an anger control problem? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender frequently (once a week or more) feels enraged (self-reports "seeing red" or blacking out from intense rage) across various situations (e.g., interpersonal conflict, minor mishaps). Also consider whether or not the offender reports feeling rage for prolonged periods of time. For Indigenous offenders, consider whether the difficulty in emotional regulation is related to direct or indirect experiences of intergenerational violence and trauma.
Frequently suppresses anger? When you feel angry, what do you typically do? Do you talk to anyone about it? Do you act on it, or are you more likely to think about it a lot but never do anything about it? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender frequently suppresses feelings of anger. For Indigenous offenders, consider whether the difficulty in emotional regulation is related to direct or indirect experiences of intergenerational violence and trauma.
Frequently acts in an aggressive manner? Has anyone ever described you as violent or aggressive? Have you ever slapped, hit or pushed anyone? If yes, can you tell me more about it? Have you ever verbally threatened anyone? Do you ever use your physical strength to intimidate people? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender is verbally and/or physically abusive or threatening towards others across various situations (work, relationships). Note: This indicator is related to actions rather than feelings; some individuals may feel anger but they may not act out on that anger. Include conviction record (e.g., uttering threats). For Indigenous offenders, consider whether the difficulty in emotional regulation is related to direct or indirect experiences of intergenerational violence and trauma.
Has low frustration tolerance? What things frustrate you on a daily basis? How do you respond? Would you describe yourself as patient and laid-back? Rate Yes if there is evidence of a pattern of inappropriate responses (e.g., inpatient, behavioural indications of agitation - sighing/rolling eyes, slamming door) to daily life hassles (waiting too long for the elevator, missed bus, cancelled appointments, etc.). Also, consider the offender's behaviour during the interview.
Frequently interprets neutral situations as hostile? Do your friends ever accuse you of over-reacting or reading too much into a given situation? Has anyone ever referred to you as short-tempered? Why? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender interprets other people's actions as hostile, malicious or deliberately provocative regardless of the true motivation. Thus, in ambiguous situations (e.g., without more information it is impossible to know what the true motivation really is), the offender would attribute hostile intent. When rating this indicator, consider how the offender has responded to you throughout the interview.
Sexual Aggression
Has deviant sexual preferences? [Refer to supplementary assessment results or official documentation.] This indicator is only applicable to identified sex offenders. All other offenders should be rated No. Rate Yes if supplementary phallometric data or official documentation (police reports, Community Assessments, court documents) demonstrate that the offender has deviant sexual preferences (e.g., towards children, non-consensual sex between adults). For Indigenous offenders, consider past sexual trauma and any direct or indirect impacts related to experiences in the residential school system, foster care or the sixties scoop.
Displays deviant sexual attitudes? Do you believe it is okay to have sex with children? Does no really mean no? This indicator is only applicable to identified sex offenders. All other offenders should be rated No. Rate Yes if the offender displays attitudes that support illegal sexual activity (e.g., non-consensual sex between adults; sex between adults and children).
Past Interventions
Has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under this domain? Have you ever participated in a program addressing anger management, violence, cognitive skills or inappropriate sexual behaviour? Rate Yes if the offender has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under the personal/emotional domain.
Personal/Emotional Domain Rating Personal/Emotional Domain Rating Guidelines
No immediate need for improvement "No immediate need for improvement" indicates that none of the offender's characteristics or patterns (i.e., cognition, behavioural, sexual behaviour, anger) have been interfering with daily functioning in the community.
Low need for improvement An offender exhibits "Low need for improvement" if characteristics or patterns of personal/emotional orientation have caused minor interference while in the community.
Moderate need for improvement An offender exhibits "Moderate need for improvement" if characteristics or patterns of personal/emotional orientation have caused moderate interference in the community.
High need for improvement An offender demonstrates "High need for improvement" if any of the aforementioned has seriously interfered with daily functioning while in the community.
Current Motivation Level - Identified Deficit Are you interested in treatment/upgrading? Why/why not? How would it help you/not help you? Who else benefits from the intervention?
Low The offender would benefit from motivation interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that they have a need in this area. There is no genuine commitment to change.
Medium The offender may not fully accept or recognize need areas as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release, to be transferred to a lower security institution).
High The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They have committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they are primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for themselves, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
Not applicable No need in this area.
Domain Analysis Provide a narrative summary explaining how this need area relates to the present offence and the offender's overall criminality. Describe strengths if applicable. Indicate the reasons why the specific dynamic factor is rated as contributing (directly linked to the criminal behaviour). For other dynamic factors not directly related to criminal behaviour, but where intervention will improve safe and timely reintegration, provide a clear explanation of why such factors require intervention.  For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted this dynamic factor. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for guidance.

Attitude Domain Indicators

Attitude Domain Indicators Interview Prompts Help Messages
General Criminal Attitudes
Displays negative attitudes towards the criminal justice system? Do you think the law is fair? Did your lawyer do a good job defending you? Do you think the police are trustworthy? Rate Yes if the offender demonstrates negative attitudes towards any one of the following: the law, the police, the correctional system (includes staff). For Indigenous offenders, consider the direct and indirect impact of residential school; sixties scoop; historical and current community conflicts with government or law enforcement agencies; family/community fragmentation on offender’s attitude towards the criminal justice system.
Displays negative attitudes towards the correctional system? Overall, what do you think about the correctional system/prison? Do you think it works? Why/why not? What do you think about the people who work in the system (e.g., Program Officers, Correctional Officers, Psychologists, Parole Officers, Probation Officers)? Are they trustworthy, effective, fair? What about rehabilitation? Rate Yes if the offender displays negative attitudes towards any aspect of the correctional system including community supervision and treatment. For Indigenous offenders, consider the direct and indirect impact of residential school; sixties scoop; historical and current community conflicts with government or law enforcement agencies; family/community fragmentation on offender’s attitude towards the correctional system.
Takes pride in criminal exploits? How do you feel about the crime(s) you have committed? If your friends were planning a crime, would they ask for your help in the planning/execution of the crime? Why/why not? Rate Yes if the offender takes pride in criminal activities (e.g., boasts or brags about criminal involvement, has high self-esteem or a positive self-image because of criminal involvement, no evidence of shame or embarrassment associated with criminal conduct).
Displays non-conforming attitudes toward society? What do you think about things such as maintaining steady employment, marriage, owning a home? Are these things important to you? Why/why not? Is there anything about your cultural heritage that would be considered mainstream or commonly accepted within your culture but perhaps not so by mainstream society? If yes, describe it. What do you think about this practice? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender does not conform to social convention or displays negative attitudes towards social convention. Social convention may include traditional values held by mainstream society (e.g., steady and satisfying employment, financial security, stable accommodation, meaningful relationships with friends/family, and an intimate partner). It may also include traditional values considered mainstream within specific cultures (e.g., Indigenous, Asian, East Indian communities).
Values a substance abusing lifestyle? What do you think about people who use drugs/alcohol excessively? What's good about it? What's bad about it? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender either enjoys or takes pride in the lifestyle associated with substance abuse (e.g., sleeping in late, staying up all night, hanging out in bars, being high/stoned, hung over at work). For Indigenous offenders, consider the direct and indirect impacts of intergenerational substance abuse.
Property-Specific Attitudes
Disrespects personal belongings? What do you think about people who vandalize or steal from other people or other peoples' homes? Is it ever okay? Under what circumstances? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender supports the destruction or theft of personal property (e.g., self-reported attitudes or behavioural examples such as property-related convictions/charges involving private dwellings).
Disrespects public or commercial property? What do you think about people who vandalize or steal from a public area or business? Is it ever okay? If so, under what circumstances? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender supports the destruction or theft of public or commercial property (e.g., self-reported attitudes or behavioural examples such as property-related convictions/charges involving public or commercial property).
Violence-Specific Attitudes
Attitudes support instrumental/goal-oriented violence? To what extent do you agree with the following statements: "Sometimes a physical fight is necessary to settle an argument. Sometimes the only way to get what you want is to physically fight for it. Violence is the means to an end." Rate Yes if there is attitudinal evidence (the offender verbally expresses attitudes supportive of instrumental violence) or behavioural evidence (crimes involve instrumental violence) that the offender believes it is okay to use violence as a method of achieving a goal or getting what they want.
Attitudes support expressive/emotional violence? Under what circumstances is violence acceptable? Why/why not? To what extent do you believe it's okay to hit someone if you just go crazy with anger? Is it okay to fight someone if they insults you? Rate Yes if there is attitudinal evidence (the offender verbally expresses attitudes supportive of expressive/emotional violence) or behavioural evidence (crimes involve emotional violence, e.g., violent crimes motivated by emotions such as anger, jealousy, fear) that the offender believes it is okay to use expressive violence. For Indigenous offenders, consider whether the difficulty in emotional regulation is related to direct or indirect experiences of intergenerational violence and trauma as a coping mechanism.
Rationalizations
Denies crime or uses excuses to justify or minimize crime? What effect has your crime(s) had? Who was/were the victim(s)? How were they affected? Who do you think is responsible for what happened? Rate Yes if the offender denies the crime completely OR if they minimize the extent of the harm (e.g., "there were no broken bones", "insurance covers the cost", "no one was home when I broke in", doesn't recognize emotional damage that was done) OR justifies their behaviour (e.g., "they deserved it", "I was drunk", "it happens all the time").
Past Interventions
Has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under this domain? Have you ever participated in a program addressing general attitudes, or for example, attitudes towards the use of violence? Rate Yes if the offender has previously been referred to programs addressing deficit(s) under the attitudes domain.
Attitude Domain Rating Attitude Domain Rating Guidelines
Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment In this category, a rating of "Factor seen as an asset to community adjustment" indicates that there has been evidence of a very positive attitude and considerable involvement in prosocial activities (e.g., work, school, family, treatment, supervision). In the domain analysis, note how this area will contribute/facilitate community reintegration.
No immediate need for improvement A rating of "No immediate need for improvement" indicates that the offender's attitudes towards justice, society, property, violence and lifestyle have not been interfering with daily functioning in the community.
Low need for improvement An offender exhibits "Low need for improvement" if attitudes have caused minor interference while in the community.
Moderate need for improvement An offender has "Moderate need for improvement" if their attitudes have caused moderate interference in the community.
High need for improvement An offender exhibits "High need for improvement" if any of the aforementioned has seriously interfered with daily functioning while in the community.
Current Motivation Level - Identified Deficit Are you interested in treatment/upgrading? Why/why not? How would it help you/not help you? Who else benefits from the intervention?
Low The offender would benefit from motivation interviewing prior to programming. There is absolutely no recognition that they have a need in this area. There is no genuine commitment to change.
Medium The offender may not fully accept or recognize need areas as deficit but is willing to participate in recommended programs or other interventions. Genuine commitment to change may still be absent. While the offender may commit to intervention, they may only be doing so for external reasons (e.g., to secure early release, to be transferred to a lower security institution).
High The offender fully recognizes a need requiring intervention and is fully ready to start intervention. They have committed to change and may have already started actively engaging in behaviours related to change. While still recognizing external benefits for pursuing intervention (e.g., securing early release), they are primarily motivated for internal reasons (e.g., doing it for himself/herself, "I'm tired of the lifestyle or I want a change").
Not applicable No need in this area.
Domain Analysis Provide a narrative summary explaining how this need area relates to the present offence and the offender's overall criminality. Record strengths if applicable. Note: If the offender has been convicted of a hate crime against a minority or someone with a disability, please indicate to what extent the person displays negative attitudes towards the minority group in question. Provide the reasons why the specific dynamic factor is rated as contributing (directly linked to the criminal behaviour). For other dynamic factors not directly related to criminal behaviour, but where intervention will improve safe and timely reintegration, give a clear explanation of why such factors require intervention. For Indigenous offenders, explain how the Indigenous Social History may have impacted this dynamic factor. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for guidance.

Responsivity

Responsivity Interview Prompt Help Messages
Language barriers interfere with learning, work or intervention? Do you think language barriers will affect your performance in treatment/work, etc.? Rate Yes if English or French is the offender's second language and they have problems writing or speaking in English or French as indicated by the CAAT (Canadian Adult Achievement Test) or as evidenced during the interview. Consideration should be additionally given for Indigenous and ethnocultural offenders whose primary language may be something other than English or French.
Basic reading and/or writing skills are problematic? How much difficulty, if any, did you have reading safety information or written instructions at work? How often, if at all, did you find it difficult to leave written messages or instructions for your co-workers or supervisors? Rate Yes if current functioning as determined by the CAAT (Canadian Adult Achievement Test) or other tests is below grade 8 (Secondary-II in Quebec). Results should be included in the narrative section if applicable. If the CAAT scores are unavailable, also consider whether or not the offender reports having difficulties applying basic reading and writing skills in the workplace.
Concentration problems are evident? Has a teacher/employer ever told you that you have a short attention span? Do you think you have a short attention span? If yes, why? If no, why not? Have you ever been officially diagnosed or tested for ADD? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender has trouble focusing for long periods of time.
Introverted/shy? On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent will working in a group cause you stress? To what extent do you like being the center of attention? Consider behaviour during interview as well as file information. Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender's anxiety, shyness or introversion would prevent them from benefiting from group programming or impact their program performance reports.
Displays chronic antisociality? Not applicable. Rate Yes if supplementary psychological assessment reports that the offender scored either at or above the average-high range of the Hare Revised Psychopathy Checklist (not applicable to women).
May have a learning disability (LD)? Did you ever have to repeat a grade? Did you ever fail a subject or class? Did you ever cut/skip class? Were you ever suspended for skipping school? Did you ever receive special testing at school that was not part of your regular class tests or exams? Were you ever in special education classes? Did you ever have a tutor? Did you use devices to help you learn (e.g., books on tape)? Consider the following information when deciding whether or not to rate this indicator Yes: underwent a psycho/educational assessment at school; received special assistance in school; evidenced poor school performance (offender failed a grade or a subject), or reports frequently missing school for no legitimate reason (e.g., cut classes regularly) (note: exclude women who leave school on account of pregnancy); diagnosed or told they were learning disabled.
Low self-esteem? Overall, how would you rate your self-esteem (below average, average, above average)? Why? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender holds themselves in low regard (e.g., feels worthless, negative self-image).
Intellectually disabled? Not applicable. Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender is intellectually challenged. Consider supplementary assessment (standard IQ test) results if available. If there is reliable evidence regarding the cause of the impairment (e.g., Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder), please discuss in the narrative section.
May have personal/emotional/ psychological/physical issues that would interfere directly or indirectly with correctional programming? Is there any reason why you might find it difficult to participate in correctional programs? This includes, for example, paying attention during sessions, completing homework assignments, and actively contributing to group discussions. Rate Yes if the offender reports a potential issue. The nature and severity of the issue and its potential impact on ability to participate in programs should be assessed by a mental and/or medical health professional.
Suicide attempts/self-harm history? Have you ever felt that you wanted to hurt yourself? Have you ever wanted to hurt yourself? Have you ever tried? Why? What stopped you? Rate Yes if there is evidence that the offender has engaged in self-injurious behaviour or has attempted suicide in the past. Consider present behaviour, severity and potential impact on ability to participate and complete correctional programming (refer to psychiatric assessment if available).
Grief and loss? What are the most important losses in your life? Who or what contributed to these losses? Consider impact of loss of freedom, children, friends, family members, etc. Consider consequences/repercussions of residential schools, deaths, illness, separation, foster care, divorce, etc.
Has unique cultural communication style? Not applicable. Rate Yes if passive communication styles are considered appropriate in some cultures (e.g., Indigenous community). Thus, a passive, non-forthcoming style should not be misinterpreted.

Overall Dynamic Factor Rating Guidelines (Contributing Factors)

A dynamic factor rating is the compilation of professional judgements derived from DFIA-R assessment results (i.e., degree or severity of need) on each of the seven target domains.

The number of target domains identified and severity of each need are considered.

For those offenders who have no identified needs (i.e., "Factors seen as asset to community adjustment" and/or "No immediate need for improvement") or relatively few identified needs which have been rated as "Low need for improvement", an overall case needs rating of Low is warranted.

Overall ratings of Medium or High case needs are determined from a systematic review of professional judgements identifying the need for intervention within each target domain (i.e., "Moderate need for improvement" and "High need for improvement").

Again, the number of target domains identified, both individually and in combination, and severity of each need are considered.

For those offenders assessed as having few identified needs but indicate "High need for improvement" in those areas, an overall rating of High case needs should be given.

Regardless of degree or severity of needs, offenders who have been identified to be multi-need individuals also warrant an overall rating of High case needs.

Where professional judgement concludes that the offender is clearly not a Low case needs and there exists sufficient latitude to not rate the offender as High, then an overall rating of Medium case needs is deemed appropriate.

Annex F
Criminal Profile - Report Outline

Case Status

Official Version of Index Offence(s)

Concise official version of index offence(s) based on official documentation.

For multiple offences that were committed in a similar manner, do not describe the details of each individual offence but summarize pattern.

Note the following:

Reference source document(s) and include:

Assessment of Harm and Victim Impact

Analysis of Criminal Behaviour

Criminal History

Reference source document(s) and include a brief analysis of criminal behaviour, and if applicable, include:

Institutional History

Provide a brief summary of past institutional history, reference source, and if applicable, include:

Escape/Attempted Escape History

Provide a brief summary of past attempted escape, conspiracy to escape, and/or escape behaviour/history, reference source, and if applicable, include:

Community Supervision History

Provide a brief summary of past community supervision history and pattern, reference source, and if applicable include:

Psychological/Psychiatric/Mental Health History

Summarize mental health screening results. If applicable, provide summary analysis of psychological and mental health assessments/reports, and psychiatric assessments from the courts or other sources.

Family Violence History

If applicable, provide a summary analysis of family violence concerns and/or the results of the Family Violence Risk Assessment. For Indigenous offenders, consider the impact the offender’s Indigenous Social History had on family violence.

Detention Criteria

Based on the available information, make a preliminary statement whether the offender meets the criteria for a referral for detention.

Analysis of the Offence Cycle

Provide an analysis of the offence cycle based on the overall pattern of criminal behaviour, not only the current offence. All factors that lead to criminal behaviour(s) must be examined, including the offender's understanding of the behaviour and a description of the events or situations that lead to the commission of any offence. For Indigenous offenders, the offence cycle must be explained within the context of the offender’s Indigenous Social History. 

Consider the following:

Annex G
Correctional Plan - Report Outline

Case Status

Include the offender's age, length of sentence, current offence(s), court-ordered obligations, outstanding charges or appeals, immigration, deportation or extradition status. Identify members of the Case Management Team and the offender's level of participation in the development of the Correctional Plan.

Static Factors Assessment Rating - Low, Medium or High

Provide a brief analysis of the offender's criminal history and level of intervention based on static factors.

Dynamic Factors Assessment Rating - Low, Medium or High

Provide a brief summary of each domain incorporating supplementary assessments and prioritizing areas of need. For all Indigenous offenders, each domain must be explained within the context of their Indigenous Social History. Refer to Annex H - Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History for assistance making links between dynamic factors and an offender’s Indigenous Social History.

For contributing factor(s) or areas of need, identify the program(s) and/or intervention(s) required, including cultural and restorative options (such as interventions with an Elder), the domain level of motivation and the expected objectives and gains in measurable, positive goal statements.

Under personal/emotional orientation domain related to the offender’s needs, include information pertaining to psychological, psychiatric, mental health information, and comments from an Elder if applicable.

Under the employment domain include an initial education, vocational and employment plan that will address the offender’s needs and identify the expectations for behaviour, skill or knowledge development related to work placements and future community employment.

Indicate whether the offender has appropriate identification, such as Social Insurance Number, Indian Status Card, Métis card, Non-Insured Health Benefits (NIHB) N-Number, birth certificate/citizenship card, and health coverage, (refer to Appendices F and H of the National Essential Health Services Framework), and if not, outline the offender's plan for acquiring needed identification.

For offenders following a Healing Plan

Incorporate healing components through consultation with the Elder or Indigenous Liaison Officer and referencing the Elder Review. Indicate the offender's understanding in relation to the four aspects of traditional healing, and how this may assist in the management of risk. Integrating the Indigenous Continuum of Care, identify the Elder-supported short and long-term traditional goals.

Through consultation with the Elder and/or Indigenous Liaison officer, and referencing the Elder's Review, outline the plans for each component over a specified period of time (e.g., until the change of season, next parole decision date or transfer to lower security).

Physical Aspect
What ceremonies/teachings/activities will address the physical aspects outlined in the Elder Review?

Emotional Aspect
What ceremonies/teachings/activities will address the emotional aspects outlined in the Elder Review?

Spiritual Aspect
What ceremonies/teachings/activities will address the spiritual aspects outlined in the Elder Review?

Mental Aspect
What ceremonies/teachings/activities will address the mental aspects outlined in the Elder Review?

Accountability Rating - Low, Medium or High

Provide a brief analysis considering the following:

The overall rating of offender accountability is obtained by the following:

Low - Offender rejects responsibility for their actions and fails to recognize their problems. Does not disclose emotional states, display guilt or victim empathy with evidence indicating a high level of denial and cognitive distortions.

Medium - Offender may not fully accept responsibility for their actions but recognizes some of their problems. Displays some guilt and victim empathy with some evidence of denial and cognitive distortions.

High - Offender accepts responsibility for their actions and recognizes their problems. Willing to self-disclose, displays guilt and victim empathy with evidence indicating a low level of cognitive distortions.

Motivation Rating - Low, Medium or High

Provide a brief analysis considering the following:

The overall rating of offender motivation is obtained by the following:

Low - Offender strongly rejects the need for change.

Medium - Offender may not fully accept overall assessment but will participate in recommended programs or other interventions.

High - Offender is self-motivated and is actively addressing their problem areas.

Responsivity Factor - Yes or No

If responsivity factor(s) exists, provide a brief analysis. When determining whether the offender's responsivity is affected, consider the following:

Engagement Rating - Yes or No

Provide a brief analysis of the offender's engagement to:

In order to be engaged, there must be a rating of either moderate or high in both accountability and motivation.

Reintegration Potential Rating - High, Medium or Low

Using the results of the relevant actuarial tools, the reintegration potential is calculated as follows:

  1. a low reintegration potential is assigned to offenders who received a high score in two or more of the three tools
  2. a moderate reintegration potential is assigned to offenders who received one high score in any one tool and a moderate score in at least one of the other two tools, or who received a moderate score on all three tools
  3. a high reintegration potential is assigned to all other offenders, i.e. all those who did not score high in any of the three tools, or scored high in one of the tools and no worse than low in the other two tools.

When the Parole Officer disagrees with the determined reintegration potential, a clear rationale must be documented, based on the following:

High

Offenders with high reintegration potential should not normally require formal correctional interventions. If required, these interventions should preferably be provided in the community. Other correctional interventions, services and work placements (including employability skills development) may be used, as well as any other risk management strategies, other than programs, in both institutions and the community.

Medium

Offenders with medium reintegration potential should require institutional correctional interventions based on the dynamic factors and the offender's level of risk and need(s).These interventions can also be provided in the community during the period of day parole or unescorted temporary absence program for personal development prior to full parole release.

Low

Offenders with low reintegration potential require institutional correctional interventions based on the dynamic factors and the offender's level of risk and need(s). Other risk management strategies are to be provided in institutions prior to release, and continued in the community as required.

Psychological/Psychiatric/Mental Health Information (If Applicable)

Include a brief analysis of psychological, psychiatric, or mental health information on risk, risk management strategies, and intervention recommendations , including interventions with an Elder. If applicable, incorporate the Integrated Management Plan.

Offence Cycle

Summarize the offence cycle and the offender's understanding of the cycle. For Indigenous offenders, explain the offence cycle within the context of their Indigenous Social History.

Correctional and Sentence Planning

Sentence planning for all offenders will identify the objectives and significant events to reach in order to gain support for reduced security and/or conditional release. These objectives and significant events will be individualized, structured, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound, while setting the framework for managing the sentence. For Indigenous offenders, objectives tied, for example, to Pathways initiative should be identified in consultation with the Elder and documented in the Healing Plan.

The objectives and significant events will be prioritized based on:

  1. institutional adjustment and adaptation
  2. interventions required
  3. public safety, being the paramount consideration
  4. safe reintegration.

The Case Management Team, in consultation with the offender, will identify clear goals and expected results that support progress against the Correctional Plan.

Sentence planning for offenders serving sentences of 10 years to life, who are not approaching release eligibility, is developed according to the four phases of a long-term sentence:

  1. adaptation - coming to terms with the reality of confinement
  2. integration to the prison environment - living within the context of that reality
  3. preparation for release - preparing for release in a progressive manner. This can include consideration for placement or transfer to an institution without a secure and directly controlled perimeter
  4. reintegration into the community - assuring a coherent and continuous process leading to safe reintegration. This can include consideration for placement or transfer to an institution without a secure and directly controlled perimeter assuring a coherent and continuous process leading to safe reintegration.

Indicate whether Community Strategy is being requested, and if not requested, provide a rationale.

Analysis of Current Request (Only Required in Cases Where a Community Strategy is Being Requested)

If release is being considered, summarize the offender’s release plan, including the following:

If completing for statutory release or long-term supervision order at warrant expiry date, review the early discretionary release and accompaniment criteria pursuant to CD 712-4 - Release Process.

Annex H
Dynamic Factors and Indigenous Social History

This table provides general examples of how to incorporate Indigenous Social History within the dynamic factors and how different cultural and restorative options may be able to meet a need area. This table is not inclusive of all considerations or options, but provides an example.

Dynamic Factor Indicators Links to ASH Conventional Interventions Indigenous Interventions
Employment/Education
  • Has less than high school
  • No employment history
  • Low confidence regarding employability
  • Reserve has geographical limitations (i.e. isolated)
  • High school is out of area
  • No tangible employment opportunities in home community
  • Lack of opportunity to develop confidence
  • Movement to an urban inner city area without skill sets or education
  • Educational upgrading
  • Institutional employment
  • Skills/certification training
  • Traditional teachings/ceremonies
  • One-on-one counselling with an Elder (Respect, Traditional Learning, Family and Community)
  • Pathways
Marital Family
  • Perpetuates violence against partners
  • Abused physically, emotionally and sexually as a child
  • Children are in foster care or raised by relatives
  • Historic and/or current family violence
  • Family members attended residential school and have scattered off reserve and have poor family links
  • Offender grew up in foster care or raised by other relatives
  • Offender was impacted by the sixties scoop
  • Indigenous Family Violence Prevention Program
  • Indigenous Integrated Correctional Program Model
  • Teachings/ceremonies
  • One-on-one counselling with an Elder (The Role of Men, The Role of Women, The Role of Elders and Children, Responsibility and Parenting, and/or Respect, and/or Grieving and/or Healing)
  • Pathways
Associates
  • Associates with known substance users
  • Associates with criminally oriented peers
  • Is associated with or is a member of a security threat group
  • Family and community fragmentation (could be due to intergenerational impacts of residential schools, sixties scoop)
  • Racial discrimination
  • Gang affiliation
  • Indigenous Integrated Correctional Program Model
  • Teachings/ceremonies
  • One-on-one counselling with an Elder (Respect, Healthy Communities, Healthy Families and/or Healing)
  • Pathways
Substance Abuse
  • Substances are interfering with daily life (employment and family)
  • Committed the index offence while under the influence
  • Violent when under the influence
  • Started using at a young age
  • Family history of substance abuse (could be the result of intergenerational impacts of residential schools, sixties scoop)
  • Witnessed parents abusing substances while growing up
  • Moved to a foster home at a young age
  • Suffered abuse at a young age
  • Resorted to substances as a coping mechanism
  • Indigenous Substance Abuse Program
  • Indigenous Integrated Correctional Program Model
  • Teachings/ceremonies
  • One-on-ones with an Elder (Trauma, Respect and Traditional life, Protocols, Spirituality, Grieving and Cleansing)
  • Pathways
Community Functioning
  • Unstable accommodations
  • Financially unstable
  • Community attachment is limited
  • Family and community fragmentation - Removed from home and culture at a young age, lost connection with culture and community (foster homes and/or sixties scoop)
  • Limited opportunities and skill development due to geographical location of home community
  • Community Integration Program
  • Educational/employment skills upgrading
  • Teachings/ceremonies
  • One-on-one counselling with an Elder (Respect, Traditional Life, and/or Grieving and Cleansing)
  • Pathways
Personal Emotional
  • Deals with stress by using substances
  • Impulsive
  • Problem solving deficits
  • Limited empathy
  • Aggressiveness
  • Low self-esteem
  • Intergenerational impacts of residential schools, sixties scoop
  • Family fragmentation
  • Victim of sexual and physical abuse
  • Foster care
  • Indigenous Family Violence Prevention Program
  • Indigenous Basic Healing Program
  • Psychological counselling
  • Indigenous Integrated Correctional Program Model
  • Teachings/ceremonies
  • One-on-one counselling with an Elder (Patience, Parenting, Preparation of Feast Foods, Protocols, Healing, Preparation for Fasting, Preparation for Vision Quest)
  • Pathways
Attitude
  • Takes pride in criminal exploits
  • Distrust or challenging attitude toward authority figures
  • Values criminal lifestyle
  • Justifies/minimizes crime
  • Intergenerational residential school impact and sixties scoop
  • Historical and current community conflicts with government or law enforcement agencies has lead to a general mistrust of authority (for example, Ipperwash and Oka crises)
  • Family/community fragmentation
  • Struggle with cultural/spiritual identity
  • Indigenous Integrated Correctional Program Model
  • Teachings/ceremonies
  • One-on-one counselling with an Elder (Respect, Traditional Family and Community Preparation of Offerings and Feast Food, Protocols, Healing and Grieving)
  • Pathways

*Please note that Elder interventions may vary from what is presented above depending on the Elder and their traditional teachings. The Elder interventions presented above are examples, with the purpose of illustrating how connections can be made between conventional and cultural interventions.

Date modified: