Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Assessing Risk in a Community Intellectual Disability Sample. The Clinical Utility of the Dynamic Risk Assessment and Management System (DRAMS): A Study of Clinician Evaluations

By Kelly Michelle Gaskin


Literature Review: Growing numbers of people with intellectual disabilities are now living in the community and as a result are more exposed to the risk of offending. Assessment of risk is therefore becoming progressively within the remit of professionals working within community settings. The aim of the current review was to critically evaluate the literature on assessing the risk of offending in people with intellectual disabilities living within the community. The review highlighted that there are a number of barriers to assessing risk in such settings and that services which do exist for this population are often variable in their availability. In addition to this, unlike non-intellectually disabled populations, there is currently no standardised tool specifically for assessing risk in people with intellectual disabilities. Further research is needed to develop specialised risk assessment tools and to better understand and meet the needs of this client group.\ud Research Report: The clinical utility of a newly-developed risk assessment tool, the Dynamic Risk Assessment and Management System (DRAMS), designed specifically for offenders with intellectual disabilities was investigated on a sample of 8 participants. The experience of clinicians' in carrying out the DRAMS was compared with their experience of carrying out the Functional Analysis of Care Environments Risk Profile (FACE) for the same participants. A randomised cross-over design found a significant difference between the two conditions, indicating that the DRAMS was favoured by the clinicians in terms of clinical utility and usability with intellectually impaired offenders. A thematic analysis of clinician experiences in administering the two measures supported this finding. In addition, verbal IQ of the offenders was found to be more highly correlated with the difference in scores on the Clinician Feedback Questionnaires than performance IQ, indicating that the clinicians found the DRAMS to be a more clinically useful tool with those offenders with a higher verbal IQ.\ud Critical Appraisal: Reflections on research process, origins of the research question, and conducting the project are discussed

Publisher: University of Leicester
Year: 2007
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2004a). Offenders with Developmental Disabilities. West Sussex. doi
  2. (1992). A comparison of criminal recidivism among schizophrenic and non-schizophrenic offenders. doi
  3. (2005). A Selective Review doi
  4. (1995). A Survey doi
  5. (2004). Assessment of Risk Manageability of Intellectually Disabled Sex Offenders. doi
  6. (2004). Clinical and Actuarial Prediction of Physical Violence in a Forensic Intellectual Disability Hospital: A Longitudinal Study. doi
  7. (2005). Clinical assessment of adult sexual offenders with learning disabilities. doi
  8. (1954). Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction. doi
  9. (1996). Comparative Efficiency of Informal (Subjective, Impressionistic) and Formal (Mechanical, Algorithmic) Prediction Procedures: The ClinicalStatistical Controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, doi
  10. (1993). Cross-over Trials in Clinical Research. doi
  11. (1998). Dangerous Care: Reviewing the risk to children from their carers. London. Policy Studies Institute and the Bridge Child Care Trust.
  12. (2002). Dilemmas in the community risk management of sexually offensive behaviour. doi
  13. (2002). Evaluating Sex Offenders: A Manual for Civil Commitments and Beyond. doi
  14. (1999). Explaining reconviction following a community sentence: the role of social factors. doi
  15. (1999). Facing the Facts - Services for People with Learning Disabilities. A Policy Impact Study of Social Care and Health Services.
  16. (2000). Forensic Risk Assessment in Intellectual Disabilities: The Evidence Base and Current Practice in One English Region. doi
  17. Functional Analysis of Care Environments (2000-3). Recording & Measurement Systems.
  18. (2002). Integration of Recent Reviews on Offenders with Intellectual Disabilities. doi
  19. (2002). Intellectual Disability amongst People on Probation: Prevalence and Outcome. doi
  20. (1996). Intimacy deficits and attribution of blame among sex offenders. doi
  21. (2002). Introduction to the special section on dynamic risk assessment of sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: doi
  22. (2003). Management of Sexually Inappropriate Behaviours in Men with Learning Disabilities. doi
  23. (2003). Offending and risky behaviour in community services for people with intellectual disabilities in one local authority. doi
  24. (1995). Offending by Adults with Learning Disabilities: Identifying Need doi
  25. (1993). Persons at Risk during Interviews in Police Custody: The Identification of Vulnerabilities.
  26. (1997). Predictors of Risk in Serious Sex Offenders. doi
  27. (2004). Predictors of Sexual Offence Recidivism in Offenders with Intellectual Disabilities. doi
  28. (1996). Prevalence of Mental Disorder in Remand Prisoners: Consecutive Case Study. doi
  29. (1936). Protecting the Public by Parole and Parole Prediction. doi
  30. (1993). Real World Research: A resource for social scientists and practitionerresearchers.
  31. (1992). Review of Health and Social Services for Mentally Disordered Offenders and Others Requiring Similar Services (The Reed Report), Volume 7, People with learning disabilities (mental handicap) or with autism.
  32. (1997). Risk and Misfortune: The Social Construction of Accidents. doi
  33. (2005). Risk Assessment and Management in Sexual and Violent Offending. OverArching Report.
  34. (2005). Risk assessment and management. In doi
  35. (1997). Risk Assessment and Risk Management: The Way Forward. Psychiatric Care,
  36. (2002). Risk Assessment in People with Learning Disabilities. doi
  37. (1996). Risk Assessment: A Practitioner's Guide to Predicting Harmful Behaviour. London: Whiting and Birch. doi
  38. (2004). Risk Assessment: Actuarial Prediction and Clinical Judgement of Offending Incidents and Behaviour for Intellectual Disability Services. doi
  39. (2004). Risk prediction in offenders with intellectual disability.
  40. (1996). Risk-needs assessment and treatment. In
  41. (1996). Sexual Offence Recidivism: Prediction versus Understanding. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, doi
  42. (2004). Should Actuarial Risk Assessments be Used with Sex Offenders who are Intellectually Disabled? doi
  43. (2004). Taylor (Eds. doi
  44. (1997). The Current Provision of Specialist Health Services to People with Learning Disabilities in England and Wales. doi
  45. (2004). The Dynamic Risk Assessment and Management System: An Assessment of Immediate Risk of Violence for Individuals with Offending and Challenging Behaviour. doi
  46. (1996). The Handbook of Psychology for Forensic Practioners. doi
  47. (2003). The intellectually disabled offender: Methodological problems in identification. doi
  48. (2001). The mathematics of risk assessment for serious violence. Psychiatric Bulletin, doi
  49. (1995). The Prediction of intentional interpersonal violence: An introduction. In
  50. (2002). The relationship between static and dynamic risk factors and reconviction in a sample of UK child abusers. Sexual Abuse: doi
  51. (2000). Treatment of the Intellectually Disabled Sex Offender. In doi
  52. (2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. doi
  53. (2001). Valuing People: A New Strategy for Learning Disabilityfor the 21 S` Century.
  54. (2001). Violence risk prediction in practice. doi
  55. (1998). Violent offenders: appraising and managing risk. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Intellectual Disabilities, doi
  56. (1998). Violent Offenders: Appraising and Managing the Risk. Washington DC: doi
  57. (2000). Where should we intervene? Dynamic predictors of sexual offence recidivism. doi
  58. (1999). Working with offenders and antisocial behaviour problems.
  59. (1998). Working with Offenders or Alleged Offenders with Intellectual Disabilities In doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.