Uncontrolled when printed
QUEENSLAND CORRECTIVE SERVICES
APPENDIX – SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AND PLACEMENT ASSESSMENT
GUIDELINES
Availability: Public
Implement Date: 27 May 2008
1.
Purpose
A security classification and placement assessment (SPA) may be raised to record either
or both a classification or placement decision.
2.
Classification
Section 12(2) of the Corrective Services Act 2006 is the legislative standard for decision
making in relation to an offender’s classification. Therefore, each factor outlined in section
12(2) should be addressed thoroughly in documents pertaining to classification. A number
of documents should be sourced when considering section 12 (2) factors. These include
but are not limited to:
a) criminal history (QLD and interstate, adult and juvenile – these are to be requested
if not on file);
b) sentence calculation/warrants etc;
c) transcripts of proceedings/sentencing comments;
d) ORNI-R;
e) escape risk assessments;
f) offender management plan;
g) violation history;
h) offender profile;
i) previous response to community/custodial supervision;
j) intervention and program reports;
k) case notes and reports; and
l) psychological/psychiatric reports.
Where all the required information may not be available, comments must still be made in
line with the following minimum standards. For example, where the standard requires
information regarding comments from the sentencing transcripts and the transcripts are
not available, the document should still include reference to the fact the transcripts are
unavailable.
CSA 2006 s12(2) factors:
a) the nature of the offence for which the prisoner has been charged or convicted;
b) the risk of the prisoner escaping, or attempting to escape, from custody;
c) the risk of the prisoner committing a further offence and the impact the commission
of the further offence is likely to have on the community; and
d) the risk the prisoner poses to himself or herself, and other prisoners, staff members
and the security of the corrective services facility.
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 1 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
3.
Considerations
When considering each of the factors listed in CSA s12(2), it must be determined which of
the factor/s will most influence the recommendation and decision and also the degree of
influence.
The recommendation and decision must therefore represent a balanced assessment of all
the relevant factors, be presented in a clear and coherent style and state the reasons for
the decision. Regard must be given to—
a)
The nature of the offence for which the prisoner has been charged or
convicted.
Consideration must be given to the nature of offence/s and the severity of the most serious
offence the offender has been charged or convicted of and is liable to serve during the
current period of imprisonment. The severity of the offence/s may be used as a guide in
determining the appropriate weight to be given to this factor.
A conviction for an attempted offence should be regarded as equal to carrying out the
offence. An offence of escape/attempted escape/unlawfully at large is also considered in
factor b).
If an offender received probation or a community service order or a partially suspended
sentence and is now serving a sentence for breaching the order or sentence,
consideration must be given to the original offence as well as the fact that the original
order was breached.
Refer appendix - Offence Severity Scale
b)
The risk of the prisoner escaping or attempting to escape from custody.
All offenders must undergo an Escape Risk Assessment (ERA) to establish a level of
escape risk.
An offender with an escape history may require higher levels of supervision than an
offender with no previous escape history.
Consider this factor after the administration of the ERA.
Refer appendix – Escape Risk Assessment Guidelines; administrative form – Escape Risk
Assessment
c)
The risk of the offender committing a further offence and the impact the
commission of the further offence is likely to have on the community.
Community risk is a term that refers both to an offender’s likely risk of re-offending and to
the potential impact that such re-offending is likely to have on the community. This may
include the potential impact the re-offending is likely to have on an individual, either
physically or psychologically or both. Consideration should be given to whether the
offender poses an acceptable or unacceptable risk to the community.
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 2 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
When determining risk to the community, notice must be taken of all factors associated
with the offender’s offending. This may include whether the offender has participated in
interventions/programs targeted to address offending behaviour and whether the offender
is considered to have developed and demonstrated a learning of the key concepts to
mitigate his/her risk to the community. An assessing officer should bear in mind that the
(ORNI-R) is a guide only and considers general recidivism and is only one consideration in
determining the overall risk to the community.
Consideration must be given to—
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
d)
the nature of the offences in the offender’s adult and juvenile criminal history
(e.g. abscond, property related, sexual or violent);
the number of convictions that an offender has recorded, including
convictions as a juvenile;
the offender’s pattern of offending (e.g. frequency, escalation of severity,
type of offending);
whether the offender has a nil/minimum/extensive contravention history;
whether the offender has a pattern of drug-related activity linked to his/her
offending and, if so, whether it is minimal/significant/extensive;
whether the offender has committed offences while in custody and if so
whether those offences were violent or non-violent;
the offender’s current family circumstances and whether they are stable or
unstable;
results of risk assessments; and
any psychiatric or medical reports/recommendations that would indicate a
possible risk profile.
The risk the prisoner poses to himself or herself and other prisoners, staff
members and the security of the corrective services facility.
Consideration must be given to the—
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
risk of the offender escaping or attempting to escape from custody;
risk the offender poses to himself or herself, other offenders and staff
members;
security of the corrective services facility;
offender’s willingness to be subject to lower levels of supervision and any
threats the offender has made if he/she was to be transferred to a facility with
lower levels of supervision;
offender’s previous conduct in a corrective services facility including
breaches of discipline, involvement in incidents or proven positive to a test
sample for restricted substances;
offender’s capacity to comply with behavioural standards and to self manage;
and
if relevant, the offender’s previous conduct when subject to community based
supervision.
Other
Any other factor/s considered to be relevant to security classification may be considered.
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 3 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
4.
Placement
Section 68 of the Corrective Services Act 2006 is the authority given to Queensland
Corrective Services to transfer offenders from one correctional facility to another
correctional facility or health institution.
The following are examples of reasons for change of placement centre to another
corrective services facility –
a) if the offender has been accepted at a program only offered in one location;
b) if the offender is currently attending intervention programs requiring him/her to
remain accommodated at current facility;
c) offender’s safety;
d) suitability for transfer to another centre or remain at current location;
e) capacity utilisation issues; and
f) medical, psychological or substance dependency examination or treatment (include
details regarding reasons for assessment (if applicable).
During the initial SPA process, consideration may be given to placing an offender in a
facility outside of the region that they reside due to capacity utilisation issues. Factors to
consider include —
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
the offender’s length of sentence;
the offender’s demeanour;
the offender’s ability to maintain relationships with family and support networks;
whether the offender is at-risk of self harm/suicide; and
availability of programs.
Section 4 of Corrective Services Regulation 2006 relates to the accommodation of
Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander offenders as close as practicable to the offenders
family unless the offender indicates otherwise. Where the offender is indigenous,
reference must be made to CSR 2006 s4 when considering placement. Familial support is
to be recorded when determining placement of the offender.
5.
Timeframes
Legislation and procedures provide for scheduled reviews to be undertaken at regulated
intervals. Refer to procedure – Review.
If an offender falls into more than one category then the order they appear in the table is
used to determine frequency. A good practice is to schedule the SPA and OMPR for the
same time/meeting. This will result in the decisions being made more efficiently as only
one panel will be required.
The following standards have been developed to identify a minimum standard of
information that is considered necessary for a quality document to be produced, which will
assist the decision maker in reaching a fully informed decision.
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 4 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
SPA GUIDE
(Identify all sources of information in this document where providing information sourced from other areas
e.g. from offender interview, from ORNI-R, from other reports).
Offender name:
ID:
DOB:
Sentence:
Classification:
Classification review factors
*Factor A:
Nature of the offence for which the offender has been charged or has
been convicted
Nature of offence/s:
[select from list]
Comments:
Where relevant, the following should be reported:








all offences as detailed on original warrants, not just listed as per offence code.
Differentiate between sentenced and remand. For offenders with numerous
offences, list main offences only and the number and type of remaining offences
e.g. armed robbery in company, burglary x 3 and 13 other property related
offences
severity of offences (sentenced and/or remand)
total period of imprisonment and eligibility date/s, time served to date e.g. served 4
yrs of a 10 yr sentence
relevant sentencing comments
if breaches of community orders or suspended sentence included, consider
original offence
any offence/s committed in custody?
offenders version if available (consistent/inconsistent)
any other relevant information
Summary/discussion of issues across factor “A”
*Factor B:
Risk of escape or attempting to escape
(1) Escape history
*During the past 5 years:
Absconded from lawful custody (including H/D/LOA)
(Note: H/D refers to Home Detention – now obsolete)
*During 5 years to 10 years:
Absconded from lawful custody (including H/D/LOA)
(Offence occurred between 5 to 10 years ago)
*Over 10 years:
(Over 10 years ago)
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 5 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
(2) Escape Risk Assessment:
*Deportation or extradition matters and the offender’s attitude towards deportation
or extradition
Where relevant the following should be reported:
For deportation:
 country of origin
 citizenship/permanent residency status
 immigration correspondence and any current outcomes
 attitude towards removal
For extradition:
 correspondence from interstate authority – formal request or interest only – and
confirmation/check of request with such interstate authority
 list interstate offences
 date of extradition i.e. at custodial end date or before
 attitude towards removal
Summary/discussion of issues for deportation and/or extradition
Escape Risk Assessment Required? Linked ERA: (Pre-populated hyperlink)
Comments:
Where relevant the following should be reported:






escape related convictions
assigned ERA level
outstanding court matters
appeals
family circumstances (stable/unstable)
any other relevant information
Summary/discussion of issues across factor B
*Factor C:
Risk to the community
(1) Risk of re offending
(i) Criminal history
*Most serious offence:
[select from list]
(Note: select as per offence severity scale, not
length of sentence)
*Previous convictions (last 5 years): [select from list]
*Comments:
Where relevant the following should be reported:

nature of offences in adult and juvenile criminal history, e.g. property, sexual,
violent
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 6 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed











number of convictions, including juvenile
pattern of offending, e.g. frequency, escalation of severity, repetitive offending
contravention history – nil, minimal, extensive
community orders - successful/unsuccessful
drug related offending (minimal, significant, extensive)
offences in custody (violent/non-violent)
ORNI-R assessment (it is not appropriate to include actual score)
recommended programs
participation in interventions and short summary of outcomes
offences/breaches post program participation (current or previous sentences)
any other relevant information
Summary/discussion of issues across factor C(1) (i)
(ii) Psychological or psychiatric reports or other related report
*Comments:
Where relevant the following should be reported:






list any court recommendation for psychological/psychiatric treatment or
assessment and current status of such
psychiatric/psychological reports on file, issues identified therein and outcome of
assessments (may need to be accessed through professional staff)
list any other relevant report and issues identified e.g. accepts responsibility (none,
part, full), ability to participate in programs
identified goals and progress to date
do these issues impact on response to correctional environment
any other relevant information
Summary/discussion of issues across factor C(1)(ii)
*Factor D:
Institutional risk
*(1) Risk to self
e.g. any psychological or psychiatric assessment or history of self harm
Where relevant the following should be reported:





history of self harm
psychological/psychiatric reports indicating existing or past risk to self
circumstances where risk may increase
recommendations/actions to reduce/mitigate risk
any other relevant information
Summary/discussion of issues across factor D(1)
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 7 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
*(2) Risk to others
e.g. any psychological or psychiatric assessment or history of harming others
Where relevant the following should be reported:





history of harming others (check violation history)
psychological/psychiatric reports indicating existing or past risk to others
circumstances where risk may increase
recommendations/actions to reduce/mitigate risk
any other relevant information
Summary/discussion of issues across factor D(2)
e.g. previous conduct in a corrective services facility including whether the prisoner has committed an
offence or breach
Where relevant the following should be reported:






refer to previous custodial episodes as well as current
breaches and incidents, describe more recent events
remission lost due to poor conduct
detail employment record and response e.g. stable, industrious, work ethic,
terminations
note positive and/or negative behaviours in relation to conduct, attitude,
cooperation, communication
any other relevant information
Details may have been identified in other areas of this assessment, however, to indicate
the relevance of this issue, may refer to the same issue briefly here.
Summary/discussion of issues across factor D(2)
*(3) Risk to centre security
e.g. previous conduct in a corrective services facility including whether the prisoner has committed an
offence or breach, returned a positive test sample or escaped from custody
Where relevant the following should be reported:






reference to previous custodial episodes as well as current
breaches and incidents, describe more recent events
drug related incidents/behaviours
ERA issues if relevant
individual management plans
any other relevant information
Details may have been identified in other areas of this assessment, however, to indicate
the relevance of this issue, may refer to the same issue very briefly here.
Summary/discussion of issues within factor D(3)
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 8 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Recommendations
Uncontrolled when printed
Current
Security classification:
Recommended
Pre-populated
Select from list
Offender Management Group:
Placement recommendation:
Movement reason: [select from list]
Next review date: (a preset date – choose an alternate date if required)
Factors and reasons for recommendation
Summary of the offender and circumstances in custody. Extract of relevant factors from
A to D and discussion of their relevance to the recommended classification and/or
placement.
Statement which supports the reasons why the panel recommended that the
offender be classified XX, be placed at XX correctional centre and any additional
information the delegate should know.




note any comments or issues raised by the offender
note where offender advised of review process
note if suitable to maintain protection status
list names and titles of the sentence management team
Documents considered in reaching this recommendation
The documents considered in reaching recommendations are accessed through the
offender file and computer records, and may include:












sentence calculation/ warrants
court transcripts
adult and juvenile criminal history
Police Court Briefs
ORNI-R
offender management plan
escape risk assessment
violation history
probation and parole information
exit reports
psychological/psychiatric reports
any other relevant document – list
NB: Shortcut comments such as ‘all relevant documents’ will not be acceptable.
Approval
Name:
(pre-populates with delegates name)
Date:
(pre-populates with current date)
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 9 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
(NB: if proxy completes document on behalf of General Manager the above fields will state N/A)
Verified security classification: (select from list)
Factors and reasons for security classification:
Note the recommendation and the factor/s which contributed to the decision. The
reasons should provide a list of the factors considered most relevant to the decision.
Any additional considerations to those noted in the recommendation are to be
documented.
Where the delegate does not concur with the recommendation a detailed explanation as
to the reasons is required.
Name and title of the authorised delegate.
Documents considered in reaching this decision:
The documents considered in reaching classification decisions are accessed through the
offender file and computer records, and may include:












sentence calculation/ warrants
court transcripts
adult and juvenile criminal history
Police Court Briefs
ORNI-R
offender management plan
escape risk assessment
violation history
probation and parole information
exit reports
psychological/psychiatric reports
any other relevant document – list
NB: Shortcut comments such as ‘all relevant documents’ will not be acceptable.
Name:
(pre-populates with delegates name)
Date:
(pre-populates with current date)
(NB: if proxy completes document on behalf of GM the above fields will state N/A)
Verified transfer placement:
[select from list]
Verified transfer reason:
[select from list]
Factors and reasons for placement decision:
Consider and record information relevant to the following:


classification matched against centre infrastructure and facilities
offenders in a low security facility should be able to comply with behaviour
standards, be able to self manage and take responsibility for their actions
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 10 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed






offenders in a low security facility should be a minimal risk of escape
current offender management plan and where the offender would be best placed
to undertake recommended actions or goals, e.g. successfully engage in
criminogenic targeted intervention/s, and/or pre-release management activities,
eligibility dates for parole or discharge
conduct and behaviour
family circumstance
if an offender is eligible for transfer to more than one facility the identified
intervention/pre release management activities should be the determining factor
for placement decisions
Note any factors that may influence decision.
Note any features of the placement that will assist with the offender’s management.
Name and title of the authorised delegate.
Documents considered in reaching this decision:
The documents considered in reaching placement decisions are accessed through the
offender file and computer records, and include where relevant:












sentence calculation/ warrants
court transcripts
adult and juvenile criminal history
Police Court Briefs
ORNI-R
offender management plan
escape risk assessment
violation history
probation and parole information
exit reports
psychological/psychiatric reports
any other relevant document – list
NB: Shortcut comments such as ‘all relevant documents’ will not be acceptable.
Attachments
Ensure all relevant reports are attached. This may include:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
education report
psychological services report
case notes/reports
employment reports
health centre report
any other relevant report used in consideration of the recommendation and/or
decision
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 11 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
SAMPLE SPA
Offender name:
ID:
DOB:
Sentence:
Classification:
Classification review factors
Factor A:
Nature of the offence for which the offender has been charged or has
been convicted
Nature of offence/s:
Comments:
Offender Blank is serving a period of imprisonment of 8 years 6 months 14 days commencing
15/07/2004 (131 days PSC), with a fulltime discharge date of 19/09/2012 and eligibility for parole
on 29/12/2010. Offender Blank has served 2 years 5 months 4 days to date.
The offender is convicted of armed robbery x 8, burglary, break and enter, assault OBH, drugs,
breach Prisons Act and fraud. The most serious offence (armed robbery) is of a violent major
nature, as per the offence severity scale. Of these offences, a number relate to a breach of a
previously imposed suspended sentence. This order was re-activated by commission of the
offence of armed robbery during the currency of the operational period.
The offender was convicted of make, attempt to make, possess, conceal or knowingly consume a
prohibited thing, committed on 14/10/2004, during the current period of imprisonment.
Offender Blank has no outstanding remand matters. The sentencing transcript states “Mr Blank,
you have pleaded guilty to a number of offences…I was saying that you have pleaded guilty to a
number of matters, very serious matters, Mr Blank, and they come against, I have to say, a very
bad background. There are the 7 burglary and stealing matters, and then there are the robbery
matters the subject of the ex officio indictment. There are 8 of those… The total amount of loss
was $41,643.00. That takes account of the burglaries and the robberies.”
In comparing the offenders current offences to those contained within his criminal history it is noted
that the current offences appear to demonstrate an escalation in the nature of offending. The
offenders previous offences tend to relate to property matters with 3 assault offences recorded.
There is no recorded self report available but it was evident during discussion that offender Blank
accepts responsibility for his offending.
Factor B:
Risk of escape or attempting to escape
(1) Escape history
During the past 5 years:
■
During 5 years to 10 years: ■
Over 10 years:
■
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 12 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
(2) Escape Risk Assessment:
Deportation or extradition matters and the offender’s attitude towards deportation or
extradition
Deportation: offender Blank was born in Australia and identifies as ATSI. As such the offender will
not be of interest to DIMA.
Extradition:
extradition.
there is no information contained on file in relation to any other state seeking
■ Escape Risk Assessment required? Linked ERA:
Comments:
Offender Blank has no recorded escape convictions, and there are no escape related incidents
recorded whilst the offender has been in the custodial environment. He has been assessed as a
minimum escape risk.
Factor C:
Risk to the community
(1) Risk of re offending
(i) Criminal history
Most serious offence:
[select from list]
Previous convictions (last 5 years): [select from list]
Comments:
Offender Blank has a significant criminal history dating from 29/11/1992. His offences include:
unlawful assault, breach of Probation Order, UUMV, behave in a disorderly manner, stealing,
possession of a dangerous drug, breach of FOO, resist police, breach of Bail Act (contempt),
revocation of bail, assault police, break & enter, breach of suspended sentence, assault OBH,
contravene a direction, fail to properly dispose of needle/syringe.
The offenders pattern of offending indicates an escalation in the frequency and severity of
offending.
During the period under review, offender Blank incurred a major breach after returning a positive
urine test to Buprenorphine, resulting in 7 days separate confinement and a 3 month management
plan.
During the review offender Blank was adamant that he had not consumed any
Buprenorphine or any other substance that would have returned a positive result. He was
challenged regarding why he did not pursue a re-test. The offender felt that this was a pointless
avenue that would cost him $50.00, so he decided not to pursue a re-test.
Offender Blank was convicted of breach of the CSA 2000, being found guilty on 18/11/2004 of
make, attempt to make, possess, conceal or knowingly consume a prohibited thing and sentenced
to 14 days cumulative.
Offender Blank’s ORNI (01/09/2004) recommended Cognitive Skills and Anger Management
programs. As these programs are no longer facilitated, the offender has been assessed as
suitable for the Making Choices program. He was also recommended to complete the Substance
Abuse Preventing and Managing Relapse program. The current recommendations are for
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 13 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
participation in Making Choices and Pathways. At the review it was recommended that the
offender be listed for participation in Pathways during the next review period. The offender
demonstrates a high level of motivation to participate in the recommended programs and was
frustrated during previous review periods when told that he was too far from his parole date to be
listed to participate in programs.
(ii) Psychological or psychiatric reports or other related report
Comments:
There is a psychological report on file (dated 28/05/2004, written by Dr XX – Forensic
Psychologist) which was provided in relation to assessing the prisoner’s health and adjustment
prior to sentencing. The report provides the following information of interest in relation to the
offender’s risks, and effective treatment in relation to his opioid dependence. The report states
“There are no magical psychiatric insights or revelations here, only the sad story of the decline of
an apparently ordinary young man into criminality associated with illicit drug use”. Further, and in
relation to risk, the report states that “should Fred resume drug taking, he would be certain to reoffend. That risk is high at present but would be considerably reduced by the passage of time and
by Fred’s taking part in drug rehabilitation programmes. Fred does express remorse about his
criminal behaviour and a wish to adopt a normal life”.
Factor D:
Institutional risk
(1) Risk to self
e.g. any psychological or psychiatric assessment or history of self harm
It is noted that offender Blank has no recorded history of self harm. There are no available
psychological or psychiatric reports which examine the prisoner’s risk of self harm.
(2) Risk to others
e.g. any psychological or psychiatric assessment or history of harming others
There are no available psychological or psychiatric reports assessing the offender’s history of
harming others. Offender Blank’s current offences including armed robbery involved the threat of
harm against attendants of stores which he robbed. He also has a number of prior convictions for
various assaults.
e.g. previous conduct in a corrective services facility including whether the prisoner has committed an
offence or breach
Since commencing this period of imprisonment the offender has incurred 9 incidents and 4
breaches. All breaches and most incidents are drug related, the most recent incurred during this
review period.
Offender Blank was convicted of an offence in custody during this sentence. He was found guilty
on 18/11/2004 of make, attempt to make, possess, conceal or knowingly consume a prohibited
thing and was ordered to serve a term of 14 days cumulative.
Offender Blank’s case summaries indicate that he is compliant, employed and there are no
interaction issues. Offender Blank is employed as the unit kitchen worker and receives reports that
indicate he demonstrates acceptable behaviour.
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 14 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
(3) Risk to centre security
e.g. previous conduct in a corrective services facility including whether the prisoner has committed an
offence or breach, returned a positive test sample or escaped from custody
Factors to consider:
Escape history: offender Blank has no recorded convictions in relation to escape, or attempted
escape, nor are there any recorded incidents in relation to escape related matters.
Violation history: offender Blank has a number of recorded incidents and breaches that relate
primarily to illicit drug usage. He has returned positive results on 4 occasions since imprisonment
commencing 15/07/2004.
Previous episodes: offender Blank has 3 prior custodial episodes. During the last period
(17/06/2002 - 13/03/2003) the offender incurred one breach for using insulting language. During
the offender’s second period (10/05/95 – 07/04/2000) he incurred 7 minor breaches, 9 major
breaches and 2 negative incidents. Overall the offender demonstrated unacceptable behaviour.
Community supervision: offender Blank has participated in two periods of probation and one fine
option order, on all three occasions the prisoner’s community orders have been terminated or have
expired without action finalised.
General behaviour: offender Blank’s general behaviour, as outlined in case reports, indicates he is
compliant to rules and directions, his interaction with staff is acceptable, however the offenders
continued use of illicit substances does indicate that he is not able to self manage.
Recommendations
Security classification:
Current
Pre-populated
Recommended
Select from list
Offender Management Group:
Placement recommendation:
Movement reason: [select from list]
Next review date:
Factors and reasons for recommendation
Offender Blank is a 32 year old offender who has served 2 years 5 months of an 8 year 6 month
14 day sentence for the main offences of armed robbery x 8.





eligible for parole on 29/12/2010
has incurred 1 conviction in custody for Breach Prisons Act (make, attempt to make, possess,
conceal or knowingly consume a prohibited thing
has a significant criminal history dating from 29/11/1992 including offences of violence and
breaches of orders
has not yet completed the recommended programs of Making Choices and Pathways.
has demonstrated unacceptable behaviour during the period under review being placed on
separate confinement and a management plan for returning a positive urinalysis to
Buprenorphine. The offender disputes the positive result
Offender Blank receives very irregular visits from his mother, who is elderly and suffers some
medical conditions that make it very difficult to facilitate the travel and the physical walking to the
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 15 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
visits area. Offender Blank requested that the panel consider him for transfer to Borallon CC.
Classification: in summary, having regard to the serious nature of the offences, length of time
remaining to earliest release date, nil completion of programs to address offending behaviour and
continued use of illicit drugs in custody indicating the offenders risk to the community remains
elevated, the sentence management team recommend offender Bank be classified high security.
Placement: in recommending placement the sentence management team note the offender’s
preference, nature of offence, proximity to eligibility dates, criminal history and other noted
factors. Offender Blank is assessed as suitable for placement at Woodford CC.
The offender has been advised that upon receipt of medical information supportive of the
concerns raised in relation to his mother, negotiations may be undertaken with Borallon CC.
The prisoner was afforded the opportunity to comment on any perceived inaccuracies or include
further comments on the information provided at the time of this classification review.
The prisoner acknowledges:
a) that no pertinent or relevant information was excluded from the review; and
b) that the information contained within the report was accurate.
The prisoner has been notified of his right to a review of classification within 7 working days from
the date he receives notification of the decision, as per Corrective Services Act 2006 s16, if:
a) the chief executive increases a prisoner's security classification; and
b) the prisoner is dissatisfied with the decision.
The review panel comprised: A Nutt (Adviser, Sentence Mgt), B Cool (Psychologist), C Saw
(CCO)
Documents considered in reaching this recommendation
 sentence calculation/ warrants
 court transcripts
 criminal history
 Police Court Briefs
 ORNI-R
 offender management plan
 escape risk assessment
 violation history
 probation and parole information
 exit reports
 psychological/psychiatric reports
Approval
Name:
(pre-populates with delegate’s name)
Date:
(pre-populates with current date)
Verified security classification:
[select from list]
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 16 of 17
106730605 Version 04
Uncontrolled when printed
Factors and reasons for security classification:
In determining offender Blank’s classification, notice was taken of the relevant legislation and
procedures, together with all aspects of the offender’s case, information contained within the
document and the comments of the sentence management team. After considering all factors I
gave particular regard to the nature of the offenders offences, escape risk, risk to the community,
criminal history, the recency of the offender demonstrating continued drug use and his
institutional risk and was of the opinion that in accordance with s12(2) of the CSA 2006, that
offender Blank is suitably classified as high.
The Boss, General Manager, XX Correctional Centre
Documents considered in reaching this decision:



offenders IOMS file
escape risk assessment
violation history
Name:
(pre-populates with delegates name)
Date:
(pre-populates with current date)
Verified transfer placement:
[select from list]
Verified transfer reason:
[select from list]
Factors and reasons for placement decision:
In determining offender Blank’s placement, notice was taken of the relevant legislation, procedure
and escape risk together with all aspects of the offenders case, information contained within the
document and the comments of the sentence management team. Following the determination of
the offenders classification, I then gave consideration to the offenders placement in accordance
with s68(1)(a) of the CSA 2006 and decided that offender Blank is appropriately accommodated
at XX Correctional Centre.
The Boss, General Manager XX Correctional Centre.
Documents considered in reaching this decision:



offenders IOMS file
escape risk assessment
violation history
Security Classification and Placement Assessment Guidelines
Page 17 of 17
106730605 Version 04