The purpose of the final project for this course is to establish an in-depth proficiency in the area of assessment within multiple domains of forensic psychology.

PSY 622 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric

Overview The purpose of the final project for this course is to establish an in-depth proficiency in the area of assessment within multiple domains of forensic psychology. The final project focuses on victimology, which examines the symptoms of trauma-related victims, such as survivors of child, domestic, or sexual abuse. It also looks at correctional psychology, which evaluates criminal responsibility and risk of re-offense in violent (e.g., those with assault charges) and non-violent offenders (e.g., those with substance abuse charges). The final project for this course is a collection of six separate forensic psychological reports based on provided scenarios. Each report is based on data from a distinct test and serves a distinct purpose within the court system. These reports are specific to risk assessment, and most of the reports will be reviewed by parties other than the forensic assessor’s client. These reports are considered consultative work. The project is divided into six milestones, which will be submitted at various points throughout the course to scaffold learning and ensure quality final submissions. These milestones will be submitted in Modules Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, and Eight. The final submission will occur in Module Nine. In this assignment, you will demonstrate your mastery of the following course outcomes:

 Assess the extent to which case study data sets meet the Daubert standard

 Develop reports based on forensic assessment standards and guidelines for informing decision making in criminal and civil proceedings

 Assess sources of collateral information for their credibility and appropriateness for informing decisions in criminal and civil proceedings

 Evaluate structured and semi-structured interviews for their impact on decision making in criminal and civil proceedings

 Promote ethical behavior in practice by employing ethical guidelines of a professional psychology organization in making recommendations

Prompt Imagine you have been hired as a consultant to conduct risk assessment in six separate domains of forensic psychology: mental health/diminished capacity, offender risk assessment, substance abuse potential, trauma symptoms among children, child abuse potential, and violence risk assessment. For each domain, you will be required to develop reports based on their associated scenarios (scenarios are located in each module that contains a milestone). You will need to assess the data sets from the objective tests used in each domain, as well as review the interview information and collateral information for each case, and create a subsequent recommendations report specific to each domain. You will be required to incorporate appropriate ethical guidelines in each of your recommendations reports. Ensure you save instructor feedback from this assignment as it will be used in future courses. Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

I. Mental Health/Diminished Capacity Assessment (Case Scenario 1) a) Assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard (psychometrics). In other words, what is the known or potential

error rate? Has the data been derived using reliable methods? Is the data valid and reliable with regard to the scientific method? b) Evaluate the interview information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. c) Evaluate the collateral information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. d) Create a recommendations report for risk management based on the above elements. Justify your position with specific scholarly research. e) Be sure your recommendations report aligns with the ethical guidelines of a professional psychology association. Note: You do not need to

belong to an organization, but rather may view the ethical guidelines on the website of the organization of your choice.

II. Offender Risk Assessment (Case Scenario 2) a) Assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard (psychometrics). In other words, what is the known or potential

error rate? Has the data been derived using reliable methods? Is the data valid and reliable with regard to the scientific method? b) Evaluate the interview information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. c) Evaluate the collateral information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. d) Create a recommendations report for risk management based on the above elements. Justify your position with specific scholarly research. e) Be sure your recommendations report aligns with the ethical guidelines of a professional psychology association. Note: You do not need to

belong to an organization, but rather may view the ethical guidelines on the website of the organization of your choice.

III. Substance Abuse Potential (Case Scenario 3) a) Assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard (psychometrics). In other words, what is the known or potential

error rate? Has the data been derived using reliable methods? Is the data valid and reliable with regard to the scientific method? b) Evaluate the interview information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. c) Evaluate the collateral information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. d) Create a recommendations report for risk management based on the above elements. Justify your position with specific scholarly research. e) Be sure your recommendations report aligns with the ethical guidelines of a professional psychology association. Note: You do not need to

belong to an organization, but rather may view the ethical guidelines on the website of the organization of your choice.

IV. Trauma Symptoms Among Children (Case Scenario 4) a) Assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard (psychometrics). In other words, what is the known or potential

error rate? Has the data been derived using reliable methods? Is the data valid and reliable with regard to the scientific method?

b) Evaluate the interview information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process. Substantiate your claims with specific research.

c) Evaluate the collateral information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process. Substantiate your claims with specific research.

d) Create a recommendations report for risk management based on the above elements. Justify your position with specific scholarly research. e) Be sure your recommendations report aligns with the ethical guidelines of a professional psychology association. Note: You do not need to

belong to an organization, but rather may view the ethical guidelines on the website of the organization of your choice.

V. Child Abuse Potential (Case Scenario 5) a) Assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard (psychometrics). In other words, what is the known or potential

error rate? Has the data been derived using reliable methods? Is the data valid and reliable with regard to the scientific method? b) Evaluate the interview information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. c) Evaluate the collateral information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. d) Create a recommendations report for risk management based on the above elements. Justify your position with specific scholarly research. e) Be sure your recommendations report aligns with the ethical guidelines of a professional psychology association. Note: You do not need to

belong to an organization, but rather may view the ethical guidelines on the website of the organization of your choice.

VI. Violence Risk Assessment (Case Scenario 6) a) Assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard (psychometrics). In other words, what is the known or potential

error rate? Has the data been derived using reliable methods? Is the data valid and reliable with regard to the scientific method? b) Evaluate the interview information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. c) Evaluate the collateral information contained in the scenario for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process.

Substantiate your claims with specific research. d) Create a recommendations report for risk management based on the above elements. Justify your position with specific scholarly research. e) Be sure your recommendations report aligns with the ethical guidelines of a professional psychology association. Note: You do not need to

belong to an organization, but rather may view the ethical guidelines on the website of the organization of your choice.

Milestones

Milestone One: Case Scenario 1 In Module Three, you will submit Case Scenario 1: Mental Health/Diminished Capacity Assessment. Review Case Scenario 1. In the Assessment Data section, review the raw data of the MMPI-2. Appropriately interpret the scores. Based on your review of Therapeutic Risk Typologies, provide a one to two page recommendations report for child protective services. This milestone is graded with the Milestone One Rubric.

Milestone Two: Case Scenario 2 In Module Four, you will submit Case Scenario 2: Offender Risk Assessment. Review Case Scenario 2. In the Assessment Data section, review the raw data of the IORNS. Appropriately interpret the scores. Based on your review of Therapeutic Risk Typologies, provide a one to two page recommendations report for parole. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Two Rubric. Milestone Three: Case Scenario 3 In Module Five, you will submit Case Scenario 3: Substance Abuse Potential. Review Case Scenario 3. In the Assessment Data section, review the raw data of the SASSI-3. Appropriately interpret the scores. Based on your review of Therapeutic Risk Typologies, provide a one to two page recommendations report for child protective services and probation. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Three Rubric. Milestone Four: Case Scenario 4 In Module Six, you will submit Case Scenario 4: Trauma Symptoms Among Children. Review Case Scenario 4. In the Assessment Data section, review the raw data of the TSCYC. Appropriately interpret the scores. Based on your review of Therapeutic Risk Typologies, provide a one to two page recommendations report for child protective services. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Four Rubric. Milestone Five: Case Scenario 5 In Module Seven, you will submit Case Scenario 5: Child Abuse Potential. Review Case Scenario 5. In the Assessment Data section, review the raw data of the CAPI. Appropriately interpret the scores. Based on your review of Therapeutic Risk Typologies, provide a one to two page recommendations report for child protective services. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Five Rubric. Milestone Six: Case Scenario 6 In Module Eight, you will submit Case Scenario 6: Violence Risk Assessment. Review Case Scenario 6. In the Assessment Data section, review the raw data of the SARA. Appropriately interpret the scores. Based on your review of Therapeutic Risk Typologies, provide a one to two page recommendations report for probation. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Six Rubric. Final Submission: Summative Forensic Case Report (Cases 1-6) In Module Nine, you will submit the final project, containing all six completed case scenarios. It should be a complete, polished artifact containing all of the critical elements of the final project. It should reflect the incorporation of feedback gained throughout the course. This submission will be graded using the Final Project Rubric.

Deliverables

Milestone Deliverables Module Due Grading

1 Case Scenario 1 Three Graded separately; Milestone One Rubric

2 Case Scenario 2 Four Graded separately; Milestone Two Rubric

3 Case Scenario 3 Five Graded separately; Milestone Three Rubric

4 Case Scenario 4 Six Graded separately; Milestone Four Rubric

5 Case Scenario 5 Seven Graded separately; Milestone Five Rubric

6 Case Scenario 6 Eight Graded separately; Milestone Six Rubric

Final Submission: Summative Forensic Case Report (Cases 1-6)

Nine Graded separately; Final Project Rubric

Final Project Rubric

Guidelines for Submission: Submit all six completed case scenarios. Your submission should be a complete, polished artifact containing all of the critical elements of the final project. It should reflect the incorporation of feedback gained throughout the course and be formatted with one-inch margins, 12-point Times New Roman font, and appropriate APA format. Instructor Feedback: This activity uses an integrated rubric in Blackboard. Students can view instructor feedback in the Grade Center. For more information, review these instructions. Ensure you save instructor feedback from this assignment as it will be used in future courses.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Mental Health/Diminished Capacity: Daubert

Meets “Proficient” criteria and connects the assessment to specific components of the Daubert standard

Comprehensively assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

Assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard but with gaps in accuracy or detail

Does not assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

2.5

Mental Health/Diminished Capacity: Interview

Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates interview information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate interview information

2.5

Mental Health/Diminished Capacity: Collateral

Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates collateral information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates collateral information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate collateral information

2.5

Mental Health/Diminished

Capacity: Recommendations

Meets “Proficient” criteria and proposed recommendations provide suggestions for optimal performance

Proposes appropriate recommendations and justifies with research

Proposes recommendations that are not appropriate to the situation, or does not justify with research

Does not propose recommendations

4.5

Mental Health/Diminished

Capacity: Ethical Guidelines

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates professionalism in promoting the welfare of the client and the legal system

Employs appropriate ethical guidelines of a professional organization in making recommendations

Employs ethical guidelines but guidelines are not appropriate to the situation or are not supported by a professional organization

Does not employ ethical guidelines

4.5

Offender Risk Assessment:

Daubert

Meets “Proficient” criteria and connects the assessment to specific components of the Daubert standard

Comprehensively assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

Assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard but with gaps in accuracy or detail

Does not assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

2.5

Offender Risk Assessment:

Interview Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates interview information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate interview information

2.5

Offender Risk Assessment:

Collateral Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates collateral information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates collateral information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate collateral information

2.5

Offender Risk Assessment:

Recommendations

Meets “Proficient” criteria and proposed recommendations provide suggestions for optimal performance

Proposes appropriate recommendations and justifies with research

Proposes recommendations that are not appropriate to the situation, or does not justify with research

Does not propose recommendations

4.5

Offender Risk Assessment:

Ethical Guidelines

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates professionalism in promoting the welfare of the client and the legal system

Employs appropriate ethical guidelines of a professional organization in making recommendations

Employs ethical guidelines but guidelines are not appropriate to the situation or are not supported by a professional organization

Does not employ ethical guidelines

4.5

Substance Abuse Potential: Daubert

Meets “Proficient” criteria and connects the assessment to specific components of the Daubert standard

Comprehensively assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

Assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard but with gaps in accuracy or detail

Does not assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

2.5

Substance Abuse Potential: Interview

Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates interview information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate interview information

2.5

Substance Abuse Potential: Collateral

Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates collateral information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates collateral information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate collateral information

2.5

Substance Abuse Potential:

Recommendations

Meets “Proficient” criteria and proposed recommendations provide suggestions for optimal performance

Proposes appropriate recommendations and justifies with research

Proposes recommendations that are not appropriate to the situation, or does not justify with research

Does not propose recommendations

4.5

Substance Abuse Potential: Ethical

Guidelines

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates professionalism in promoting the welfare of the client and the legal system

Employs appropriate ethical guidelines of a professional organization in making recommendations

Employs ethical guidelines but guidelines are not appropriate to the situation or are not supported by a professional organization

Does not employ ethical guidelines

4.5

Trauma Symptoms Among Children:

Daubert

Meets “Proficient” criteria and connects the assessment to specific components of the Daubert standard

Comprehensively assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

Assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard but with gaps in accuracy or detail

Does not assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

2.5

Trauma Symptoms Among Children:

Interview Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates interview information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate interview information

2.5

Trauma Symptoms Among Children:

Collateral Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates collateral information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates collateral information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate collateral information

2.5

Trauma Symptoms Among Children:

Recommendations

Meets “Proficient” criteria and proposed recommendations provide suggestions for optimal performance

Proposes appropriate recommendations and justifies with research

Proposes recommendations that are not appropriate to the situation, or does not justify with research

Does not propose recommendations

4.5

Trauma Symptoms Among Children: Ethical

Guidelines

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates professionalism in promoting the welfare of the client and the legal system

Employs appropriate ethical guidelines of a professional organization in making recommendations

Employs ethical guidelines but guidelines are not appropriate to the situation or are not supported by a professional organization

Does not employ ethical guidelines

4.5

Child Abuse Potential: Daubert

Meets “Proficient” criteria and connects the assessment to specific components of the Daubert standard

Comprehensively assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

Assesses the extent to which case study data set meets the Daubert standard but with gaps in accuracy or detail

Does not assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

2.5

Child Abuse Potential: Interview Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates interview information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate interview information

2.5

Child Abuse Potential: Collateral Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates collateral information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates collateral information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate collateral information

2.5

Child Abuse Potential: Recommendations

Meets “Proficient” criteria and proposed recommendations provide suggestions for optimal performance

Proposes appropriate recommendations and justifies with research

Proposes recommendations that are not appropriate to the situation, or does not justify with research

Does not propose recommendations

4.5

Child Abuse Potential: Ethical Guidelines

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates professionalism in promoting the welfare of the client and the legal system

Employs appropriate ethical guidelines of a professional organization in making recommendations

Employs ethical guidelines but guidelines are not appropriate to the situation or are not supported by a professional organization

Does not employ ethical guidelines

4.5

Criminal Risk Assessment: Daubert

Meets “Proficient” criteria and connects the assessment to specific components of the Daubert standard

Comprehensively assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

Assesses the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard but with gaps in accuracy or detail

Does not assess the extent to which the case study data set meets the Daubert standard

2.5

Criminal Risk Assessment: Interview

Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates interview information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate interview information

2.5

Criminal Risk Assessment: Collateral

Information

Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses industry-specific language to exhibit expertise

Evaluates collateral information appropriately for its implications in the risk assessment and recommendations process and substantiates claims with specific research

Evaluates collateral information but evaluation is not appropriate to the situation, or does not substantiate claims with research

Does not evaluate collateral information

2.5

Criminal Risk Assessment:

Recommendations

Meets “Proficient” criteria and proposed recommendations provide suggestions for optimal performance

Proposes appropriate recommendations and justifies with research

Proposes recommendations that are not appropriate to the situation, or does not justify with research

Does not propose recommendations

4.5

Criminal Risk Assessment: Ethical

Guidelines

Meets “Proficient” criteria and demonstrates professionalism in promoting the welfare of the client and the legal system

Employs appropriate ethical guidelines of a professional organization in making recommendations

Employs ethical guidelines but guidelines are not appropriate to the situation or are not supported by a professional organization

Does not employ ethical guidelines

4.5

Articulation of Response Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy to read format

Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization

Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas

Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas

1

Earned Total 100%