Entry
Reader's guide
Entries A-Z
Subject index
Salient Factor Score
Parole risk instruments have become an integral part of the parole decision-making process. The majority of instruments follow a systematic format, collecting standard information about the offender. Generally, each risk item on the instrument is assigned a point value, and upon completion of the assessment, the offender is given a total risk score for future recidivism. Risk instruments also provide guidelines with recommendations about the specific amount of time to be served prior to release.
The Salient Factor Score (SFS) was created in the 1970s by the U.S. Parole Commission as a way of estimating an inmate's likelihood of recidivating following his or her release from prison. The SFS is an example of a second-generation parole risk instrument that is composed primarily of criminal-type variables with limited sociodemo-graphic factors.
Development of the Salient Factor Score
The SFS is an empirically validated risk assessment tool incorporating an objective scale developed by the U.S. Parole Commission. The U.S. Parole Commission first used the SFS and parole guidelines in 1972. The SFS was not the first predictive instrument; other measures were available, but they did not have a strong effect on parole decisions. The U.S. Parole Commission was the first paroling agency to employ the use of a risk instrument in a way that clearly affected decisions regarding parole.
The original 1972 SFS was composed of eleven items. The SFS has been revised several times since then, and most of these revisions have resulted in a reduction in the number of factors considered predictive in the decision-making process. Items regarding noncriminal history, heroin dependency, and status have been deleted from updated versions of the SFS. Additionally, in 1998 the Parole Commission revised the SFS by increasing the weight given to prior commitments and age at offense and deleted the drug-use item. The revised SFS was designated as SFS 98.
The U.S. Parole Commission's version of the SFS 98 contains six items that are weighted according to their importance to the total risk score. These factors include the offender's prior convictions, previous commitments for more than 30 days, the offender's age at the time of the current offense in conjunction with prior commitments, the length of time without commitments prior to current offense, whether the offender was on probation, parole, confinement, or escape status at the time of the current offense, and whether the offender is considered older. Statistically, reducing the number of items on the instrument has not been detrimental to its predictive power. The benefits of using the SFS 98 are that the items are objective, easily scored, few in number, and unable to be manipulated by offenders.
SFS Components, Scoring, and Guidelines
The first component that the SFS 98 examines is the frequency of prior convictions as an adult or juvenile. Offenders can receive between zero and three points on this item, and scores range from 3 for none to 0 for four or more convictions. The SFS 98 then looks at prior commitments of more than 30 days. Scores range from 2 for none to 0 for three or more commitments. The third component examines the offender's age in conjunction with the number of previous commitments. There are four age categories: 19 and younger, 20–21 years, 22–25 years, and 26 and older. Scores range from 0 to 3, depending on the individual's age and prior commitments.
...
- Actuarial Risk Assessment
- Classification Systems
- COMPASS Program
- Firearms Charges, Offenders With
- Hare Psychopathy Checklist
- Level of Service Inventory
- Offender Needs
- Offender Responsivity
- Offender Risks
- Prediction Instruments
- Predispositional Reports for Juveniles
- Risk and Needs Assessment Instruments
- Risk Assessment Instruments: Three Generations
- Wisconsin Risk Assessment Instrument
- Absconding
- Augustus, John
- Benefit of Clergy
- Boston's Operation Night Light
- Case Management
- Caseload and Workload Standards
- Circle Sentencing
- Conditional Sentencing and Release
- Conditions of Community Corrections
- Continuum of Sanctions
- Crime Control Model of Corrections
- Curfews
- Diversion Programs
- Drug Courts
- Faith-Based Initiatives
- False Negatives and False Positives
- Family Courts
- Family Group Conferencing
- Family Therapy
- Felony Probation
- Field Visits
- Investigative Reports
- Juvenile Probation Officers
- Manhattan Bail Project
- Mediation
- Mental Health Courts
- Neighborhood Probation
- Offender Supervision
- Pre-Sentence Investigation Reports
- Pretrial Detention
- Pretrial Supervision
- Probation
- Probation: Administration Models
- Probation: Early Termination
- Probation: Organization of Services
- Probation: Private
- Probation and Judicial Reprieve
- Probation and Parole: Intensive Supervision
- Probation and Parole Fees
- Probation Mentor Home Program
- Probation Officers
- Probation Officers: Job Stress
- Project Safeway
- Recognizance
- Reparation Boards
- Restorative Justice
- Revocation
- Sanctuary
- Shock Probation
- SMART Partnership
- Specialized Caseload Models
- Teen Courts
- Victim-Offender Reconciliation Programs
- Wilderness Experience
- Attitudes and Myths about Punishment
- Attitudes of Offenders toward Community Corrections
- Bail Reform Act of 1984
- Banishment
- Beccaria, Cesare
- Bentham, Jeremy
- Certified Criminal Justice Professional
- Civil and Political Rights Affected by Conviction
- Community Corrections Acts
- Community Corrections and Sanctions
- Community Corrections as an Add-on to Imprisonment
- Community Corrections as an Alternative to Imprisonment
- Community Partnerships
- Cook County Juvenile Court
- Costs of Community Corrections
- Determinate Sentencing
- Employment-Related Rights of Offenders
- Ethics of Community-Based Sanctions
- Flat Time
- Front-End and Back-End Programming
- Goals and Objectives of Community Corrections
- History of Community Corrections
- Humanitarianism
- Indeterminate Sentencing
- Law Enforcement Administration Act Initiatives
- Long-Term Offender Designation
- Loss of Capacity to Be Bonded
- Loss of Individual Rights
- Loss of Parental Rights
- Loss of Right to Possess Firearms
- Loss of Welfare Benefits
- Net Widening
- Philosophy of Community Corrections
- Political Determinants of Corrections Policy
- President's Task Force on Corrections
- Prison Overcrowding
- Public Opinion of Community Corrections
- Public Safety and Collaborative Prevention
- Punishment
- Punishment Units
- Reducing Prison Populations
- Reintegration into Communities
- Second Chance Act
- Sentencing Guidelines
- Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative
- Split Sentencing and Blended Sentencing
- Temperance Movement
- Three Strikes and You're Out
- Victims of Crime Act of 1984
- Violent Offender Reconciliation Programs
- Volunteers and Community Corrections
- Boot Camps
- Community Service Order
- Community-Based Centers
- Community-Based Vocational Networks
- Day Reporting Centers
- Electronic Monitoring
- Financial Penalties
- Fine Options Programs
- GPS Tracking
- Group Homes
- Halfway Houses and Residential Centers
- Home Confinement and House Arrest
- NIMBY Syndrome
- Probation and Parole: Intensive Supervision
- Residential Correctional Programs
- Residential Programs for Juveniles
- Restitution
- Restitution Centers
- Absconding
- Brockway, Zebulon
- Discretionary Release
- Elmira System
- Firearms and Community Corrections Personnel
- Furloughs
- Good Time and Merit Time
- Graduated Sanctions for Juvenile Offenders
- Irish Marks System
- Maconochie, Alexander
- Pardon and Restoration of Rights
- Parole
- Parole Boards and Hearings
- Parole Commission, U.S.
- Parole Commission Phaseout Act of 1996
- Parole Guidelines Score
- Parole Officers
- Pre-Parole Plan
- Prisoner's Family and Reentry
- Probation and Parole: Intensive Supervision
- Reentry Courts
- Reentry Programs and Initiatives
- Salient Factor Score
- Truth-in-Sentencing Provisions
- Victim Impact Statements
- Work/Study Release Programs
- Addiction-Specific Support Groups
- Correctional Case Managers
- Counseling
- Crime Victims' Concerns
- Cultural Competence
- Disabled Offenders
- Diversity in Community Corrections
- Drug- and Alcohol-Abusing Offenders and Treatment
- Drug Testing in Community Corrections
- Effectiveness of Community Corrections
- Elderly Offenders
- Environmental Crime Prevention
- Evaluation of Programs
- Female Offenders and Special Needs
- Job Satisfaction in Community Corrections
- Juvenile Aftercare
- Juvenile and Youth Offenders
- Liability
- Martinson, Robert
- Motivational Interviewing
- Offenders with Mental Illness
- Public Shaming as Punishment
- Recidivism
- Sex Offender Registration
- Sex Offenders in the Community
- Sexual and Gender Minorities and Special Needs
- Sexual Predators: Civil Commitment
- Therapeutic Communities
- Therapeutic Jurisprudence
- Thinking for a Change
- Victim Services
- “What Works” Approach and Evidence-Based Practices
- Women in Community Service Program
- Loading...
Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL
-
Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
-
Read modern, diverse business cases
-
Explore hundreds of books and reference titles
Sage Recommends
We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.
Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches