{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023381294964028777, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.664670658682635, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Practitioner Compliance With Risk/Needs Assessment Tools

This study examines practitioners’ compliance and noncompliance with risk/needs assessment tools, using a national survey of frontline community corrections staff. Focusing on respondents required to complete tools and make decisions based on them, analysis showed that tools were mostly filled out when required, but decisions were not always based on the tool result. Latent class analysis suggests about half of the tool-using subgroup were “substantive” compliers who completed tools carefully and honestly and tended to use them for decision making. The remaining tool users were “formal” in their compliance: filling out the tools, but often making decisions that did not correspond with tool results, and in some cases even manipulating the information included in them. Multivariate analysis suggests that practitioners’ belief in risk/needs tools, agency monitoring and training, perceptions of agency procedural justice, and agencies’ projected confidence in their local risk/need tool may help explain patterns of compliance and noncompliance.