The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI) and the Youth version (YLS/CMI) generate an assessment of risk/need across eight domains that are considered to be relevant for girls and boys and for women and men. Aggregated across five data sets, the predictive validity of each of the eight domains was gender-neutral. The composite total score (LS/CMI total risk/need) was strongly associated with the recidivism of males (mean r = .39, mean AUC = .746) and very strongly associated with the recidivism of females (mean r = .53, mean AUC = .827). The enhanced validity of LS total risk/need with females was traced to the exceptional validity of Substance Abuse with females. The intra–data set conclusions survived the introduction of two very large samples composed of female offenders exclusively. Finally, the mean incremental contributions of gender and the gender–by–risk level interactions in the prediction of criminal recidivism were minimal compared to the relatively strong validity of the LS/CMI risk level. Although the variance explained by gender was minimal and although high-risk cases were high-risk cases regardless of gender, the recidivism rates of lower risk females were lower than the recidivism rates of lower risk males, suggesting possible implications for test interpretation and policy.

The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI) and the Youth version (YLS/CMI) generate an assessment of risk/need across eight domains that are considered to be relevant for girls and boys and for women and men. Aggregated across five data sets, the predictive validity of each of the eight domains was gender-neutral. The composite total score (LS/CMI total risk/need) was strongly associated with the recidivism of males (mean r = .39, mean AUC = .746) and very strongly associated with the recidivism of females (mean r = .53, mean AUC = .827). The enhanced validity of LS total risk/need with females was traced to the exceptional validity of Substance Abuse with females. The intra-data set conclusions survived the introduction of two very large samples composed of female offenders exclusively. Finally, the mean incremental contributions of gender and the gender-by-risk level interactions in the prediction of criminal recidivism were minimal compared to the relatively strong validity of the LS/CMI risk level. Although the variance explained by gender was minimal and although high-risk cases were high-risk cases regardless of gender, the recidivism rates of lower risk females were lower than the recidivism rates of lower risk males, suggesting possible implications for test interpretation and policy.