RoC*Rol Formula and Briefings
Joshua Grainger made this Official Information request to Department of Corrections
The request was partially successful.
From: Joshua Grainger
Dear Department of Corrections,
My understanding is that the Corrections department uses a program called 'RoC*Rol' in predicting the chance that an offender will reoffend. I would like to request under the Official Information Act the following information about this system:
1) the source code of the RoC*Rol program
2) if it isn't included in the answer to request (1); the formula that the RoC*Rol program uses to generate a score
3) if it isn't included in the answer to request (1) or (2), the different variables that RoC*Rol uses (the article 'Big Data is Watching You' on Stuff mentions 14 variables, but the 'What is RoC*RoI' section in the CPS operations manual only mentions 8)
4) any reports, memos, studies, briefings or other documents that analyse the effectiveness of RoC*Rol
5) any reports, memos, studies, briefings or other documents that analyse the relationship between RoC*Rol scores and the chances of the Parole Board granting parole (I'm guessing that the Parole Board may have some of this information, so I am sending an OIA request for this to them also)
If any documents are withheld from my request I would like to please know the titles and dates of those documents.
Although not required under the OIA, I understand it can sometimes be helpful to explain the reason for a request: I have two primary reasons.
Firstly, I am law student at Canterbury University with an interest in Criminal Law, and I would find it interesting to see what factors are assessed in determining whether an offender will reoffend, and the weights given to those factors. For example, it is often said that alcohol and other drugs have a strong relationship with crime: I'd be interested to know if attending a treatment program effects the RoC*Rol score at all. This is the reason for requests 1, 2, and 3.
Secondly, I find it a bit scary that a computer program is making this kind of assessment as opposed to a trained human. This is the reason for requests 4 and 5.
Feel free to contact me if you wish me to clarify my request.
Yours faithfully,
Joshua Grainger
From: STURMFELS, Emma (WELLHO)
Department of Corrections
Dear Mr Grainger,
Could you please advise of a postal address for this response to be sent
to? The documents included with the response are too large to be sent
via email.
Thanks
Emma Sturmfels
Ministerial Advisor | Office of the Chief Executive | Department of
Corrections
show quoted sections
From: Joshua Grainger
Dear STURMFELS, Emma (WELLHO),
I would much prefer to receive a scanned electronic response unless postal delivery is absolutely necessary. If the files are too large to send via email then there is an upload facility on the FYI website for submitting a response (I believe you can access it it at http://fyi.org.nz/upload/request/rocrol_...)
FYI is a public website, which means that others get to scrutinize and look over documents requested, increasing accessibility and advancing open government. This is along with the costs saved by not having to pay for postage and printing.
Yours sincerely,
Joshua Grainger
From: STURMFELS, Emma (WELLHO)
Department of Corrections
Dear Joshua Grainger
As previously advised, we will require a postal address in order to send
the documents.
Thank you
Emma Sturmfels
Ministerial Advisor | Office of the Chief Executive | Department of
Corrections
show quoted sections
From: Joshua Grainger
Dear STURMFELS, Emma (WELLHO),
My attention has been drawn to the Ombudsmen guidelines on this matter, which state:
"Where the information requested is contained in a document, section 16(2) requires that information shall be made available in the way preferred by the requester unless to do so would:
Impair efficient administration;
Be contrary to any legal duty in respect of the document; or
Prejudice the interests protected by sections 6, 7 or 9 of the Act and in the case of section 9 there is no countervailing public interest."
May I ask which of these criteria apply to the decision here?
It seems to me that if material is being photocopied or printed, then if this would be no harder than scanning the material: indeed often the same machine is used for both scanning and photocopying in many offices.
If this is a problem of technical difficulties due to the size of the file, I'd note that something other OIA officers have done when responding to FYI requests is to upload the file to a web service and then send the link, such as using the service https://www.yousendit.com/
I apologise for the difficulties: I am not trying to be difficult, it is just that if am trying to make these documents accessible to others who are interested.
Yours sincerely,
Joshua Grainger
From: STURMFELS, Emma (WELLHO)
Department of Corrections
Dear Mr Grainger
Further to your previous email, we will require a postal address in
order to send the documents covered under your OIA request, concerning
RoC*RoI.
We are not the copyright owner for one of the documents covered by your
request and it would therefore be a breach of the owner's copyright for
the Department to make a copy by providing you with an electronic
version, particularly as we are aware that emails sent to FYI are
automatically displayed online thus making certain multiple copies will
be made at each viewing of your site. Under the Copyright Act the
document cannot be reproduced, altered or disseminated to the public
(s16) without the express permission of the copyright owner. This Act
applies to you. We note that if we take any steps to facilitate any
possible breach of copyright by you we may be liable as a party in any
action taken against you by the copyright owner. Consequently we are
only sending a hard copy and drawing your attention to your legal
obligations and the rights and penalties for breach under the Copyright
Act.
The other documents we are providing are already in hard copy and once
scanned would be too large to send through the email system and as we
have a security locked electronic environment, we do not have access to
the web services you recommend.
Thank you
Emma Sturmfels
Ministerial Advisor | Office of the Chief Executive | Department of
Corrections
show quoted sections
Joshua Grainger left an annotation ()
Very interesting.
The issue of copyright has popped up on the UK version of this site, WhatDoTheyKnow, and the information commissioner ruled that they cannot refuse to release information just because it would breach copyright. To quote:
"The House has argued that supplying the information in the form requested deprives it of its intellectual property right (parliamentary copyright) to prevent republication. Further, the House has explained that some of the requested information is subject to third party copyright (i.e. copyright which it does not own). The House has argued that for these reasons the information will be exempt under section 43(2) if it is decided that the information should be disclosed to the website and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure."
...
"The Commissioner considers that an exemption may only apply to the specific information in question and that the same conclusion must be reached regardless of the intended address for correspondence. As the House would not seek to apply the section 43(2) exemption to the information if disclosed to a different email address, it cannot apply to the information if this is to be communicated to the complainant via the whatdotheyknow.com email address. The Commissioner has therefore rejected the House’s application of section 43."
I am tempted to complain to the Ombudsmen here and see if I get a similar result.
From: Info@Corrections
Department of Corrections
Dear Mr Grainger
Thank you for your Official Information Act request of 18 August 2012
(C59531).
We seek an extension on the time limit for responding to your request
under section 15A(1)(b) of the Act, as the consultations necessary to make
a decision on your request are such that a proper response cannot
reasonably be made within the original time limit.
The extension is for an additional 13 working days. The response will
therefore be sent to you by 3 October 2012. Should it become available at
an earlier date, I will ensure it is sent to you.
You have the right to ask an Ombudsman to investigation the decision to
extend the timeframe for your request. Contact details are:
Office of the Ombudsmen
PO Box 10152
Wellington
Yours sincerely
Ministerial Servicing Team
show quoted sections
From: Info@Corrections
Department of Corrections
Dear Mr Grainger
Please find attached the Department's response to your request of 18
August, requesting information about RoC*RoI.
<<Response.pdf>>
Regards
Ministerial Services
Governance & Assurance
Department of Corrections
show quoted sections
From: Joshua Grainger
Dear Info@Corrections,
Thank you very much for your reply. I do appreciate it, in particular the information that static variables as are used, and the rather large sample size.
However, your reply seems to only address questions 4 and 5 of my request (reports about RoC*Rol), rather than 1-3 (the source-code, algorithm, and variables of RoC*Rol). Although your answer was useful, I am still hoping that I will receive a reply to questions 1 through 3 of my request.
Will more information be forthcoming in the future, or was this response anticipated to be an answer to the whole of my OIA request?
Yours sincerely,
Joshua Grainger
From: Info@Corrections
Department of Corrections
Thank you for your email.
If you are requesting information about an offender, please note that
Corrections requires the offender's consent before we can release
information. This will mean the offender will need to know who is making
the request. If you do not want the offender to know that you are asking
about them, please send a further email to cancel your request, or to
discuss further.
If you are a friend or family member of an offender, you will find useful
information on our website:
[1]http://www.corrections.govt.nz/community...
If you are looking for information about managing offenders in the
community, visit:
[2]http://www.corrections.govt.nz/about-us/...
If you are looking for information about managing offenders in prison,
visit:
[3]http://www.corrections.govt.nz/about-us/...
Please note that your request may be considered in accordance with the
Official Information Act 1982 and / or the Privacy Act 1993.
Kind regards,
[4][email address]
show quoted sections
From: Info@Corrections
Department of Corrections
Response to Joshua Grainger C59531.PDF.pdf
64K
Download
View as HTML
Attachment C59531.PDF.pdf
117K
Download
View as HTML
Good afternoon
Please find attached correspondence from the Department of Corrections.
Regards,
Ministerial Services Team
National Office
Department of Corrections
Mayfair House
44-52 The Terrace
Private Bag 1206
Wellington 6140
[1]www.corrections.govt.nz
show quoted sections
From: Joshua Grainger
Dear Info@Corrections,
Thank you very much for your response. It was what I was looking for. I did just have one follow up though: the algorithm mentions that several variables derive their data from the "Offence Seriousness table". Can I please request this table?
Yours sincerely,
Joshua Grainger
From: Info@Corrections
Department of Corrections
Dear Mr Grainger
Please find attached a letter dated 27 June 2013 advising of the extension
of the Department’s timeframe to respond to your request.
Margaret Noonan
Senior Advisor - Ministerial Services - Governance and Assurance |
Department of Corrections | Ara Poutama Aotearoa
Mayfair House | 44-52 The Terrace | Private Bag 1206 | Wellington 6140 |
NEW ZEALAND
DDI +64 4 819 1798 | ext. 68798 [1]www.corrections.govt.nz
show quoted sections
From: Info@Corrections
Department of Corrections
letter dated 3 July 2013.pdf.pdf
53K
Download
View as HTML
Part 2.pdf.pdf
2.2M
Download
View as HTML
Part 1.pdf.pdf
2.7M
Download
View as HTML
Part 3.pdf.pdf
2.2M
Download
View as HTML
Dear Mr Grainger
Please find attached the Department’s response to your email dated 29 May
2013. The Offence Seriousness Table is attached in 3 parts due to its
size.
Margaret Noonan
Senior Advisor - Ministerial Services - Governance and Assurance |
Department of Corrections | Ara Poutama Aotearoa
Mayfair House | 44-52 The Terrace | Private Bag 1206 | Wellington 6140 |
NEW ZEALAND
DDI +64 4 819 1798 | ext. 68798 [1]www.corrections.govt.nz
show quoted sections
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid requests for Official Information (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this request
Alex Harris left an annotation ()
The Ombudsman's advice is crystal clear: material should be released in the form requested by the requester, unless doing so would impair efficient administration, be contrary to an enactment, or threaten the interests protected by sections 6, 7, and 9 of the Act. And on the first point, if they're printing or photocopying it, then thats no harder than convertign it to PDF or scanning it, so they can hardly claim it would impair efficient administration.
Ombudsman time, I think.
Link to this