Technology is not an excuse for ducking the hard problem of values. When it comes to the use of artificial intelligence in the justice space, we can't ignore the histories of risk assessment and electronic monitoring. With the adoption of AI already underway in criminal legal systems, the time is now for humans—not machines—to ask: What do we want to use AI for?
Before implementing the CCAT, jurisdictions should consider how the tool will be used and enact policies to support these goals. This module will explore the national landscape of CCAT implementation and offer tips for effectively implementing the CCAT, including stakeholder collaboration, data mining, decision-making frameworks, and revalidation.
Recognizing the inherent limitations of risk-need tools, it is critical that practitioners use assessments appropriately to minimize potential harms and create positive case outcomes. This practical session examines the development of the Criminal Court Assessment Tool (CCAT), reviews all assessment domains and scoring, and provides tips for effective implementation.
Modern criminal justice reforms have called for the use of risk-need-responsivity (RNR) theory to help reduce the inherent subjectivity in case processing. Yet there is growing concern over racial bias and misclassification in risk assessment. This research-based module dives deep into the origins and core principles of RNR and its inherent limitations.
In an effort to help practitioners consider the implications of applying Risk-Need-Responsitivy (RNR) principles and learn how to effectively administer risk-need tools, the Center developed the training series, Administering the Criminal Court Assessment Tool.
In recent years, justice reform efforts have included the use of risk assessments to inform pretrial decision-making and minimize subjective bias. However, risk-need tools must be used in a targeted way that reduces detention, identifies salient needs, and alleviates racial disparities. This guidesheet offers strategies for implementing the Criminal Court Assessment Tool (CCAT) to help mitigate bias and create positive case outcomes.
Researchers Lenore Lebron and Tia Pooler discuss their ongoing efforts to oversee the use of the CCAT in the field, including identifying trends, monitoring accuracy, and confirming responsiveness to associated populations. Tia and Lenore present recommendations for jurisdictions collecting and using their own data.
Arielle Freedman, Associate Director for Pretrial Clinical Practice at the Center for Justice Innovation, underscores the importance of using the CCAT interview as a starting point for building a foundation of trust and rapport with participants. She encourages practitioners to be responsive, person-centered, and aware of their own internal biases and projections in their work with participants.
Sarah Thompson, Therapeutic Court Coordinator of Spokane Municipal Court in Washington, discusses the administration of the CCAT by Spokane's 4-member therapeutic team to identify an individual's risk and need levels. Assessed risk and need levels then help determine how staff can most appropriately respond. In addition, Sarah explains how the CCAT interview is also a place to holistically hear from an individual, guiding staff as they identify more acute or more specific needs that staff can then work to directly address.
This article, which appeared in the Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution, seeks to address a gap in the fierce debate over pretrial risk assessment: the role of the defender. The authors contend defense attorneys can challenge the data science undergirding risk assessments and use their implementation as a lever for renegotiating the “going rates"—the default rules that expedite the disposition of cases and drive plea-bargaining in a given jurisdiction.
