SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: NOTIFICATION LEVELS AND RECIDIVISM

Apparently -in this study- the risk one presents to the community is ONLY determined based upon that person WHEN they committed their crime, which may have been many years ago. Folks change and prison, therapy and many other factors do affect a person. The risk assessment used herein does not take any of that into consideration. Hence, I would question it. eAdvocate

December 2005

SUMMARY
This report examines the relationship between recidivism and the sex offender notification levels set by Washington State’s End of Sentence Review Committee (ESRC). These notification levels are sent to local law enforcement who make the final determination of the level communicated to the public.

Starting in 1990 the ESRC’s notification risk classification was based upon a review of the offender’s criminal history, institutional behavior, and other relevant information. As a result of 1997 legislation, the ESRC adopted a more consistent approach to classification—the Washington State Sex Offender Risk Level Classification Tool.

The Classification Tool combines two factors: specific notification considerations and an offender’s risk assessment score. The result is three notification levels (I, II, III) that define the degree of risk to the community posed by convicted sex offenders.

Key Findings

• The 1997 statute increased the percentage of sex offenders who received a notification level from 50 percent in 1997 to nearly 90 percent in 1999.

• The notification levels determined by the ESRC do not classify sex offenders into groups that accurately reflect their risk for reoffending. Future reports will address prospects for a more accurate sex offender risk assessment instrument.


The 2004 Legislature directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (Institute) to conduct a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the impact and effectiveness of current sex offender sentencing policies.1 Because this is an extensive topic, we are publishing a series of reports.

In 1990, the Washington State Legislature passed the Community Protection Act, an omnibus bill that included the requirement for sex offenders to register with the sheriff in their county of residence.2 Public officials, for the first time in U.S. laws, were also authorized to release “necessary and relevant” information about sexual predators to the public. In 1990, the multi-disciplinary End of Sentence Review Committee (ESRC) within the Department of Corrections began issuing three types of notifications to law enforcement: Special Bulletins (highest risk), Law Enforcement Alerts, and Teletype.3 The ESRC’s notification decision was based upon a review of the offender’s criminal history, institutional behavior, and other relevant information.

In 1997, the Legislature directed a more consistent statewide approach to notifications.4 The extent of disclosure was to be rationally related to: (a) the level of risk posed by the offender to the community; (b) the locations where the offender resides, expects to reside, or is regularly found; and (c) the needs of the affected community members for information to enhance their
individual and collective safety.

The ESRC then adopted the Washington State Sex Offender Risk Level Classification Tool5 to determine a sex offender’s risk to the community. The ESRC notification levels are sent to local law enforcement who determine the level communicated to the public. In a previous report, the Institute analyzed the relationship between recidivism and Washington’s passage of sex offender registration and community notification statutes.6 The report concluded that recidivism rates for sex offenders have decreased since the enactment of these statutes.

This report examines how well the ESRC’s notification levels predict recidivism. A future report will examine the notification levels issued by law enforcement. ..more..