Washington State

Institute for
Public Policy
110 Fifth Avenue Southeast, Suite 214 • PO Box 40999 • Olympia, WA 98504-0999 • (360) 586-2677 • FAX (360) 586-2793 • www.wsipp.wa.gov

January 2006

SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE:

SPECIAL SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING ALTERNATIVE REVOCATIONS

The 2004 Legislature directed the Washington State

Institute for Public Policy (Institute) to conduct a SUMMARY
comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the
impact and effectiveness of current sex offender Washington State’s sentencing guidelines include an
sentencing policies.1 Because this is an extensive alternative for offenders convicted of a felony sex
topic, we are publishing a series of reports. offense: the Special Sex Offender Sentencing
Alternative (SSOSA). A SSOSA may be granted in lieu
Washington State’s sentencing guidelines include an of a prison sentence. If the sex offender fails to comply
alternative for offenders convicted of a felony sex with supervision, the SSOSA is revoked and the sex
offense: the Special Sex Offender Sentencing offender is sentenced to prison. This report examines
Alternative (SSOSA). A SSOSA may be granted in SSOSA revocations.
lieu of a prison sentence. If the sex offender fails to
comply with supervision, the SSOSA is revoked and Findings
the sex offender is sentenced to prison. • Of the SSOSA offenders whose sentences were
revoked within a 10-year follow-up period, 85
A previous report in this series examined how percent were revoked within three years of being
SSOSA offenders differ from other sex offenders.2 placed in the community on a SSOSA.
Approximately 95 percent of SSOSA offenders are • SSOSA revocations increased from an initial rate
child molesters, compared with 73 percent for sex of 15 percent in 1986 to a high of 25 percent in
offenders imprisoned. A second report found it is 1994, and then back to 13 percent in 2002.
possible to determine with high certainty which sex • Offenders who were revoked while on a SSOSA
offenders will not be granted a SSOSA based on are subsequently imprisoned, on average, for 4.4
the statutory eligibility criteria.3 However, there is years.
less certainty in determining who will receive a
• Based on demographic and criminal history
SSOSA. A third report found that SSOSA offenders
factors, it is not possible to predict with any degree
have substantially lower recidivism rates than other of accuracy which SSOSA offenders will be
sex offenders.4 A fourth report found that SSOSA is revoked.
being granted less often.5
• A 2001 Department of Corrections publication
indicated that most revocations are the result of
This report examines SSOSA revocations.
offender behavior while being supervised. This
report supports that conclusion by showing that
demographics and criminal history factors do not
account for SSOSA revocations.
1
ESHB 2400, Chapter 176, Laws of 2004.
2 • The five-year felony recidivism rates for SSOSA
R. Barnoski, 2005, Sex Offender Sentencing in
Washington State: Initial Sentencing Decision, Olympia: offenders who were revoked are higher than the
Washington State Institute for Public Policy, Document No. rates of those not revoked:
05-09-1202.
3
9 For felony recidivism, 15.2 percent for those
R. Barnoski, 2005, Sex Offender Sentencing in revoked compared to 3.1 percent for those not.
Washington State: Predicting the Initial Sentencing
Decision, Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public 9 For violent felony recidivism, 7.5 percent
Policy, Document No. 05-09-1203. compared to 1.9 percent.
4
R. Barnoski, 2005, Sex Offender Sentencing in 9 For felony sex recidivism, 3.8 percent
Washington State: Recidivism Rates, Olympia: Washington compared to 1.3 percent.
State Institute for Public Policy, Document No. 05-08-1203.
5
R. Barnoski, 2005, Sex Offender Sentencing in
Washington State: Special Sex Offender Sentencing
Alternative Trends, Olympia: Washington State Institute for
Public Policy, Document No. 06-01-1205.
The SSOSA decision is made by the court. The Exhibit 1
decision involves statutory eligibility criteria, as well Cumulative Percentage of
as an expert’s assessment of the offender’s SSOSA Sentences Revoked, by Month
amenability to treatment, and the offender’s ability 100%
to pay for the diagnostic and treatment costs. The

Percentage of Those Revoked

statutory eligibility criteria through 2004 were:
80%
• Convicted of a sex offense other than Rape 1 Of SSOSAs revoked, 85% are
or Rape 2; and revoked within 3 years
60%
• No prior convictions for felony sex offenses in
this or any other state; and
• Standard sentence range for the offense 40%
includes the possibility of confinement for less
than 11 years.
20%

The 2004 Legislature added the following additional

eligibility criteria: 0%

• No prior violent offenses within five years of 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84

Months to Revocation
96 108 120

the current offense; and

• The current offense did not cause substantial Therefore, when measuring SSOSA revocations we
bodily harm to the victim; and must wait three years to capture 85 percent of the
revocations. As a result, the study sample consists of
• The offender has an established relationship offenders receiving a SSOSA sentence from 1986 to
or connection to the victim. 2002.

The 2004 Legislature also expanded what the judge Exhibit 2 displays the percentage of SSOSA
is to consider in the SSOSA decision: sentences revoked within three years from the date of
• A report provided by a treatment provider. the sentence. SSOSA revocations increased from an
initial rate of 15 percent in 1986 to a high of 25
• The opinion of the victim. percent in 1994, and then back to 13 percent in 2002.
• Whether the offender and the community will
It is clear from Exhibit 2 that the percentage of SSOSA
benefit from the SSOSA.
offenders whose sentences were revoked has
• Whether the offender had multiple victims. changed substantially over time. It is not clear if these
changes are a result of shifts in policy and practice or
• Whether the offender is amenable to
changes in SSOSA offender characteristics.
treatment.
• The risk the offender poses. We next use multivariate analysis to determine if
offender characteristics can predict which offenders’
• Whether the SSOSA is too lenient in light of SSOSA sentences will be revoked.
the circumstances.

To discuss SSOSA revocations, we must first

determine the SSOSA revocation follow-up
period—the period between being granted a
SSOSA and a time far enough in the future to know
whether a person is likely to be revoked.

Exhibit 1 displays the cumulative percentage of

SSOSA offenders who had a revocation within the
10-year period following their initial sentencing. Of
the SSOSA offenders whose sentences were
revoked, 85 percent were revoked within the first
three years following initial sentencing.
 Exhibit 2 We next compare the recidivism rates of SSOSA
Percentage of SSOSA Sentences Revoked offenders who were revoked with those not
Within Three Years of Sentencing revoked. Measuring sex offender recidivism
100% requires a five-year time period in the community,
and one additional year for processing in the
courts.8 As a result, trends in sex offender five-
80% year recidivism rates can be calculated for
offenders placed in the community up to 1999.
Percentage Revoked

60%
Offenders who were revoked while on a SSOSA
are subsequently imprisoned, on average, for 4.4
40% years.9 For those revoked, recidivism is measured
from the time of placement back in the community
following the revocation.
20%

Exhibit 3 displays the three types of recidivism

0% rates of SSOSA offenders who were revoked and
1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 not revoked. The five-year felony recidivism rates
for SSOSA offenders who were revoked are higher
than the rates of those not revoked:
Multivariate analyses are used to find a set of
• For felony recidivism, 15.2 percent for those
demographic and criminal history factors that
revoked compared to 3.1 percent for those
predict which SSOSA sentences will be revoked.6
not revoked.
The year an offender was granted a SSOSA is also
included in the analyses. The best results achieved • For violent felony recidivism, 7.5 percent
only a weak association with a SSOSA revocation. compared to 1.9 percent.
That is, based on demographic and criminal history
factors, it is not possible to predict with any degree • For felony sex recidivism, 3.8 percent
of accuracy which SSOSA offenders will be compared to 1.3 percent.
revoked. This implies that changes in the
revocation rate may result from changes in policy or Exhibit 3
practice. Five-Year Felony Recidivism Rates for SSOSA
Sentences Revoked and Not Revoked
In 2001, the Department of Corrections published a
Type of 5-Year Felony Recidivism
survey of the reasons given by criminal justice
professionals for SSOSA revocations.7 The Number of Violent Felony
Offenders Felony Felony Sex
publication indicated that most revocations are
attributed to the offender’s willful violation of the Revoked 652 15.2% 7.5% 3.8%
SSOSA court order. The publication includes Not Revoked 3,658 3.1% 1.9% 1.3%
additional information describing the rationale and
history of SSOSA.

This report supports the DOC survey conclusion

that factors other than demographics and criminal
history may account for SSOSA revocations.

6 8
Logistic regression. R. Barnoski, 2005, Sex Offender Sentencing in
7
D. Keegan, 2001, Survey of Criminal Justice Washington State: Measuring Recidivism, Olympia:
Professionals: Reasons for Special Sex Offender Washington State Institute for Public Policy, Document No.
Sentencing Revocations, Olympia: Washington State 05-08-1202.
9
Department of Corrections. Available at Based on SSOSA offenders revoked and then released
http://www.doc.wa.gov/BudgetAndResearch/studies.htm from prison between 2000 and 2005.
For further information, contact Robert Barnoski at
(360) 586-2744 or barney@wsipp.wa.gov Document No. 06-01-1206

Washington State
Institute for
Public Policy
The Washington State Legislature created the Washington State Institute for Public Policy in 1983. A Board of Directors—representing the legislature,
the governor, and public universities—governs the Institute and guides the development of all activities. The Institute’s mission is to carry out practical
research, at legislative direction, on issues of importance to Washington State.