Assessment knowledge
STABLE-2007: Dynamic Factors, Change, and Context
STABLE-2007 organizes more persistent but potentially changeable risk-relevant propensities. It can inform formulation, treatment, supervision, and change monitoring, but it does not establish individual certainty or replace a comprehensive assessment.
Training and certificationView STABLE-2007 / ACUTE-2007 training
The instrument
What STABLE-2007 contributes
STABLE-2007 is a structured measure of stable dynamic risk factors: more persistent but potentially changeable risk-relevant information that is expected to endure longer than day-to-day circumstances while remaining capable of change. That change sensitivity is what distinguishes its measurement task from a static instrument. It can help organize information from records, interviews, and collateral sources for treatment planning, supervision, case formulation, and reassessment.
“Dynamic” does not mean that every score change is meaningful, that every measured factor is causal, or that changing a score will necessarily change offending. The result must be interpreted in the context of measurement quality, the person’s history, the decision, the conditions in which the factors operate, and current guidance.
Evidence at a glance
Predictive and incremental evidence
Across samples
A meta-analysis by Andrew E. Brankley, Kelly M. Babchishin, and R. Karl Hanson synthesized STABLE-2007 evidence across samples. The direct sexual-recidivism analysis included 12 samples and 6,901 participants.
Association
For recorded sexual recidivism, the fixed- and random-effects hazard ratios were both 1.12 per score point, with narrow confidence intervals in the reviewed data. This describes average association—not an individual probability.
Beyond a static score
STABLE-2007 added association information beyond Static-99R for several outcomes in the reviewed analyses. Incremental validity alone does not establish the complete estimate or the practical value for every decision.
Source: Brankley, A. E., Babchishin, K. M., & Hanson, R. K. (2021), Sexual Abuse, 33(1), 34–62 (published online first in 2019).
What a result can say
Risk-relevant functioning and needs
A qualified assessment can organize information about comparatively enduring problems and strengths that may be relevant to treatment, supervision, and case formulation. Reassessment may help document whether those patterns appear to have changed.
The result is most useful when the records, interview, collateral information, evaluator competency, and comparison framework are adequate.
What it cannot say
No individual certainty or causal proof
A result cannot determine whether one person will reoffend, establish guilt, diagnose a condition, prove that treatment caused change, or replace an immediate safety or clinical assessment. It should not be treated as a stand-alone absolute recidivism probability.
Observed change can reflect genuine change, measurement error, new information, rater differences, or regression toward the mean. Interpretation should consider the full assessment history.
Population and generalization
Fit matters before interpretation
The supporting evidence principally concerns adult men with sexual-offence histories assessed in correctional, forensic, or community-supervision contexts. Evidence should not be assumed to generalize to women, adolescents, institutional or pre-release use, non-adjudicative preventive services, or other settings not represented in the research.
Population-specific findings, including research involving contact, CSEM-exclusive, and mixed sexual-offending histories, require close attention to sample size, outcome definitions, follow-up, event counts, and whether the study examined a single assessment or change over time.
Combination and context
STABLE-2007 adds a different layer
A static tool summarizes comparatively fixed historical and demographic information and is not intended to measure change through treatment or another clinical process. STABLE-2007 measures a different kind of information: more persistent but potentially changeable risk-relevant factors. ACUTE-2007 focuses on recent functioning and circumstances that may fluctuate over days, weeks, or months.
Formulation considers how these sources of information operate under the person’s conditions and context. They are complementary, not interchangeable. Current official materials are needed to integrate them; the Venn diagram is not a combination formula.
Reassessment
Change needs a comparable frame
Repeated assessment is most defensible when information sources, time frames, decision context, and coding quality are sufficiently comparable. A single movement should not automatically be treated as durable improvement or deterioration.
Quality assurance
Reliability cannot be presumed
Evaluator training, current manuals, adequate interviews and files, collateral information where available, clear documentation, and periodic agreement checks are central safeguards. Differences should be investigated, not hidden by the apparent precision of a total.
Practical resource
Printable STABLE-2007 coding sheet
This ordinary static PDF supports professional documentation. It is not an interactive form, scoring lesson, or substitute for current official materials and appropriate competency.
STABLE-2007 coding form — March 2023
A one-page printable form for professional documentation.
Authorship is not stated because it was not verified from authoritative metadata. Confirm current status before use.For current materials, consult SAARNA’s STABLE-2007 resources and verify the date and status of each document.
Consultation
Questions about dynamic assessment or change?
Consultation may help with population fit, record and interview quality, integrating static and dynamic information, interpreting change, documenting uncertainty, quality assurance, agency policy, research design, or review of an existing assessment. Consultation is purpose-specific, does not guarantee an outcome, and is not legal advice.
Explore consultation and servicesFrequently asked questions
STABLE-2007 questions
What is STABLE-2007?
It is a structured measure of more persistent but potentially changeable risk-relevant factors. It can inform formulation, treatment, supervision, and reassessment within a broader assessment.
What does “stable dynamic” mean?
It refers to patterns that can change but are generally more enduring than day-to-day circumstances. “Dynamic” does not mean every observed change is meaningful or causal.
Who is represented in the evidence?
The evidence principally concerns adult men with sexual-offence histories in correctional, forensic, and community-supervision contexts. Generalization outside represented populations and settings requires caution.
Can STABLE-2007 predict what one person will do?
No. It summarizes group-based evidence and current assessment information; it cannot determine an individual outcome.
Does it provide a stand-alone probability?
No. STABLE-2007 was designed to complement broader risk information, not to supply a complete stand-alone absolute recidivism estimate.
What does the meta-analysis show?
Across the reviewed samples, higher STABLE-2007 results were associated with higher recorded recidivism, and the measure added association information beyond Static-99R for several outcomes. Those findings are averages and do not establish individual certainty.
Does a lower reassessment result prove treatment worked?
No. A change may reflect genuine improvement, measurement error, new information, rater differences, or other influences. Observational change does not by itself establish what caused it.
How often should it be reassessed?
The appropriate schedule depends on current official guidance, the setting, information quality, and the decision. A public page should not substitute a universal schedule for case- and policy-specific judgement.
How is STABLE-2007 different from ACUTE-2007?
STABLE-2007 concerns more persistent but changeable propensities. ACUTE-2007 concerns recent expressions and circumstances that may fluctuate more quickly.
How is it combined with a static tool?
A static baseline and STABLE-2007 provide different information. Integration should follow current official materials and should not be improvised by altering scores or averaging unlike scales.
Why do evaluator agreement and records matter?
Dynamic assessment depends on the quality of interviews, files, collateral information, definitions, and evaluator decisions. Training, documentation, and reliability checks help identify inconsistent application.
Is a coding form enough to use STABLE-2007?
No. A form is only a documentation aid. Correct use requires current official materials, appropriate competency, and quality assurance. Professionals needing formal competency development may also review STABLE-2007 / ACUTE-2007 training after consulting current resources.