Static-2002R: Evidence, Interpretation, and Responsible Use

Assessment knowledge

Static-2002R: Evidence, Interpretation, and Responsible Use

Static-2002R is a static actuarial tool for estimating relative risk of recorded sexual recidivism in a defined adult population. Its conceptual organization can support careful description, but its results remain group-based evidence—not individual certainty.

Training and certificationView Static-2002R training

Understand the evidenceRead common questions

The instrument

What Static-2002R contributes

Static-2002R organizes historical and demographic information associated with recorded sexual recidivism into conceptually related domains. A qualified evaluator can use the overall result to describe relative standing and group-based evidence when the person, records, comparison group, and decision fit the supporting research.Static-2002R organizes comparatively fixed historical and demographic information. Its static risk factors are not intended to measure intervention-related change or to operate as complete explanations of an individual outcome. The domain structure can help organize discussion, but it does not transform short subscales into separate diagnoses or complete explanations of why an individual may reoffend. Static-2002R remains one component of a broader, context-sensitive assessment.

Interpretation

Separate the kinds of risk information

Relative risk

Relative risk compares the observed rate for one score group with a defined reference group. It does not by itself state an absolute probability.

Percentile and category

Percentile rank and evidence-based categories summarize relative standing. They should not be confused with an individual diagnosis or a personal outcome.

Absolute estimates

Estimated rates apply to specified groups, outcomes, samples, and follow-up periods. Their relevance depends on calibration and the fit between the person and the reference data.

Related static tools

Static-2002R, Static-99R, and BARR-2002R

Static-99R and Static-2002R address a similar broad question about recorded sexual recidivism, but they use different structures and are not interchangeable in every population or case. A difference between results calls for review of applicability, records, coding reliability, and interpretive sources—not automatic selection of the more favourable or more severe result.BARR-2002R uses a subset of Static-2002R information to address general and violent recidivism. It answers a different outcome question and should not be presented as a sexual-recidivism estimate.

What it cannot say

Structure is not an individual explanation

A result cannot determine whether one person will reoffend, establish guilt, diagnose a condition, or capture every dynamic, cultural, health, situational, treatment-related, or environmental factor. The conceptual domains may aid description and research, but their subscale results should not be treated as independent actuarial predictions unless current evidence and guidance support that use.

Evidence and quality

Reliability, structure, and predictive evidence

The included evidence supports the overall Static-2002R result as a structured actuarial measure and examines field reliability, construct validity, factor structure, predictive discrimination, percentiles, relative risk, and recorded-recidivism estimates. The same evidence also counsels restraint: short domain scales can have limited internal consistency, empirical structures do not always align perfectly with conceptual labels, and average predictive performance does not eliminate case-level uncertainty.Reliable use depends on correct population selection, complete records, current coding rules, evaluator competency, documentation of unusual decisions, and periodic review of agreement. An apparently exact total does not correct incomplete source information or inconsistent coding.

Population fit

Who is represented?

The supporting materials principally concern adult men with qualifying sexual-offence histories. Applicability to women, adolescents, people without a qualifying offence, or other populations outside the development and validation samples should not be assumed.Before interpretation, an evaluator should confirm the current eligibility rules and whether the person, setting, outcome, and comparison group are adequately represented.

Canadian evidence

Indigenous and White participants

One Canadian study examined five administratively high-risk or high-needs samples that included 653 Indigenous and 1,560 White adult men. The static tools showed useful discrimination in both groups, while calibration was not identical across groups and follow-up periods.The study combined First Nations, Métis, and Inuit participants, was concentrated geographically, and did not represent every person, community, or correctional context. It does not establish cultural neutrality or universal calibration.
Static-2002RSTABLEACUTE

Combination and context

A static baseline is only one layer

Static-2002R contributes comparatively fixed historical and demographic information; it is not intended to measure change through treatment or another clinical process. STABLE-2007 adds a different kind of measurement: more persistent factors that are potentially changeable and therefore may be reassessed. ACUTE-2007 focuses on recent functioning and circumstances.Formulation considers how those sources of information operate under the person’s conditions and context. Combination requires current professional guidance and should not be improvised by changing a static score, averaging unlike scales, or using a Venn diagram as a mechanical formula.
Comparatively fixed informationMore persistent changeable factorsRecent functioning and circumstances

Reporting

Communicate the reference frame

Reports should distinguish relative standing, relative risk, categories, and group-based absolute estimates. They should name the outcome, follow-up period, comparison sample, source version, uncertainty, and material limits.

Quality assurance

Agreement cannot be assumed

Training, access to current materials, double-coding or calibration exercises, and review of difficult decisions may improve consistency. Quality assurance is especially important when record definitions or unusual histories affect interpretation.

Practical resource

Printable Static-2002R coding form

Static-2002R coding form (2016)

Preview of the first page of the Static-2002R coding form
Preview of the printable Static-2002R coding form. Select the image to open the source PDF.
A static, printable two-page form for professional documentation.Open the Static-2002R coding form (PDF)Authorship is not stated here because it was not verified. Confirm the current version and use it only with current official materials and appropriate competency.

Current official materials

Coding rules, interpretation, and quality expectations change over time. Confirm the current manual and evaluator resources before relying on a worksheet or older workbook.Visit SAARNA’s Static/BARR-2002R resourcesA coding form is a documentation aid, not a stand-alone scoring guide.

Consultation

Questions about tool selection or interpretation?

Consultation may help with population fit, choosing between related static tools, reviewing a difference between results, record sufficiency, comparison groups, risk communication, cultural and jurisdictional limits, reliability procedures, policy, or research design. Consultation is purpose-specific, does not guarantee an outcome, and is not legal advice.Explore consultation and services

Frequently asked questions

Static-2002R questions

What is Static-2002R?It is a static actuarial tool that organizes historical and demographic information to estimate relative risk of recorded sexual recidivism in a defined adult population.
Who is represented in the evidence?The supporting materials principally concern adult men with qualifying sexual-offence histories. Applicability outside the development and validation populations should be verified rather than assumed.
How is Static-2002R different from Static-99R?Both address a similar broad sexual-recidivism question, but Static-2002R uses a different structure organized around conceptual domains. They are related, not interchangeable, and a difference between results requires careful review.
What is BARR-2002R?BARR-2002R uses a subset of Static-2002R information to address general and violent recidivism. It should not be described as a sexual-recidivism estimate.
Can the domain results explain why one person may reoffend?Not by themselves. The domains can organize information, but short subscales are not independent diagnoses or complete case formulations.
Can Static-2002R predict what one person will do?No. It summarizes group-based patterns and cannot determine whether a particular person will or will not reoffend.
Can Static-2002R measure change through treatment?No. Its static risk factors are not intended to measure intervention-related change. They provide a comparatively fixed baseline and do not, by themselves, explain why an outcome occurs. Changeable factors and the conditions in which they operate require other information, including appropriately selected dynamic measures and case formulation.
What is the difference between relative and absolute risk?Relative risk compares a group with a reference group. Absolute risk is a recorded-recidivism estimate for a specified group and period; it depends on calibration and population fit.
Why might two evaluators disagree?Differences can arise from incomplete records, definitions, unusual histories, or inconsistent application of current rules. Documentation, consultation, and reliability checks are important quality safeguards.
What does the Canadian evidence say about Indigenous participants?One study found useful discrimination in Indigenous and White high-risk or high-needs samples, with some calibration differences. Its combined identity groups, geography, selection, and event counts limit generalization.
How does Static-2002R relate to STABLE-2007 and ACUTE-2007?Static-2002R provides a historical baseline. STABLE-2007 and ACUTE-2007 contribute different forms of changeable and recent information. Combining them is a professional interpretive task, not a score adjustment.
Is the coding form enough to use the tool?No. The form is only a documentation aid. Correct use depends on the current manual and workbook, adequate records, appropriate competency, and quality assurance. Professionals needing formal competency development may also review Static-2002R training after consulting current official materials.