Training Evaluation: Adolescent Sexual Offending: Fundamentals of Assessment and Treatment Practices


(OC104) Training Evaluation: Adolescent Sexual Offending: Fundamentals of Assessment and Treatment Practices

Training Name: Adolescent Sexual Offending: Fundamentals of Assessment and Treatment Practices
Presented by: David Prescott, LICSW, ATSA-F
Date: November 13th & 14th, 2025

Learning Objectives
As a result of this training, participants will be able to:
1) Summarize historical approaches to treating abusive sexual behaviors by youths.
2) Explain the importance of working with youths’ families.
3) Examine the role of abuse-related sexual interests, where applicable, in sex crimes by adolescents.
4) Explain the relevance of early-onset, as opposed to adolescent-onset, behavior problems.
5) Describe the difference between risk and protective factors.
6) Describe the core components of a comprehensive assessment (e.g., assessment tools and clinical interviewing considerations).
7) Compare the available assessment measures specific to youths who have abused.
8) Explain different domains that contribute to risk for offending.
9) Develop an intake interview with an adolescent with problematic sexual behaviors.
10) Describe the qualities of a high-quality assessment report.
11) Design treatment plans for adolescents.
12) Apply the “going upstream” method of finding personally meaningful client goals.
13) Differentiate “approach goals” in treatment planning.
14) Describe ten “primary human goods” or “good life goals” that appear to be relevant to all human beings.
15) Explain how these good life goals can be implicated in sexual abuse by adolescents.
16) Describe how early adversity can develop into risk factors.
17) Use scaling questions for assessing internal motivation to achieve good life goals.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I certify that I am the above-named person completing this form and that the information I submit here is accurate.
1. How much did you learn as a result of this CE program? 5 = Very much, 1 = Very little
2. Rate the quality of the program content 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
3. Rate how current/relevant the program content is 5 = Very current/relevant, 1 = Not current/not relevant at all
4. How useful was the content of this CE program for your practice or other professional development? 5 = Extremely Useful, 1 = Not Useful at all
5. Rate the instructor’s knowledge and expertise of the subject. 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
6. Rate the instructor’s teaching ability. 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
7.1. Would you agree that learning objective #1 was met?
Learning Objective #1: “Summarize historical approaches to treating abusive sexual behaviors by youths.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.2. Would you agree that learning objective #2 was met?
Learning Objective #2: “Explain the importance of working with youths’ families.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.3. Would you agree that learning objective #3 was met?
Learning Objective #3: “Examine the role of abuse-related sexual interests, where applicable, in sex crimes by adolescents.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.4. Would you agree that learning objective #4 was met?
Learning Objective #4: “Explain the relevance of early-onset, as opposed to adolescent-onset, behavior problems.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.5. Would you agree that learning objective #5 was met?
Learning Objective #5: “Describe the difference between risk and protective factors.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.6. Would you agree that learning objective #6 was met?
Learning Objective #6: “Describe the core components of a comprehensive assessment (e.g., assessment tools and clinical interviewing considerations).” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.7. Would you agree that learning objective #7 was met?
Learning Objective #7: “Compare the available assessment measures specific to youths who have abused.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.8. Would you agree that learning objective #8 was met?
Learning Objective #8: “Explain different domains that contribute to risk for offending.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.9. Would you agree that learning objective #9 was met?
Learning Objective #9: “Develop an intake interview with an adolescent with problematic sexual behaviors.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.10. Would you agree that learning objective #10 was met?
Learning Objective #10: “Describe the qualities of a high-quality assessment report.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.11. Would you agree that learning objective #11 was met?
Learning Objective #11: “Design treatment plans for adolescents.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.12. Would you agree that learning objective #12 was met?
Learning Objective #12: “Apply the “going upstream” method of finding personally meaningful client goals.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.13. Would you agree that learning objective #13 was met?
Learning Objective #13: “Differentiate “approach goals” in treatment planning.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.14. Would you agree that learning objective #14 was met?
Learning Objective #14: “Describe ten “primary human goods” or “good life goals” that appear to be relevant to all human beings.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.15. Would you agree that learning objective #15 was met?
Learning Objective #15: “Explain how these good life goals can be implicated in sexual abuse by adolescents.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.16. Would you agree that learning objective #16 was met?
Learning Objective #16: “Describe how early adversity can develop into risk factors.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
7.17. Would you agree that learning objective #17 was met?
Learning Objective #17: “Use scaling questions for assessing internal motivation to achieve good life goals.” 5 = Strongly agree, 1 = Strongly disagree
8. Rate how well the program met your expectations (according to the promotional materials) 5 = Very well, 1 = Not well at all
9. Rate the quality of the provided course materials 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
10. Rate the quality of the facilities (in-person) or technology (online). 5 = Very High, 1 = Very Low
11. Rate how well disability accommodations were met, if requested. 5 = Very well, 1 = Not well at all
12. Rate the ease of the registration process 5 = Very Easy, 1 = Very Difficult
13. Rate the instructor’s responsiveness to questions 5 = Very responsive, 1 = Not responsive at all
14. Rate the program staff’s responsiveness to questions 5 = Very responsive, 1 = Not responsive at all