CASE LOAD SIZE VARIATION AND DIFFERENCE IN PROBATION/ PAROLE PERFORMANCE

• NCJ Number: 16576
• Author(s): M G NEITHERCUTT; D M GOTTFREDSON
• Date Published: 1974
• Length: 39 pages
• Grant Number(s): 75-DF-99-0014
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice
• Sale Source: National Ctr for Juvenile Justice; National Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Best Practice/State-of-the-Art Review
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

THIS PAPER ANALYZES THE VALUE OF PAST RESEARCH ON CASELOAD SIZE, REVIEWS CLASSIFICATION AND MATCHING STUDIES, AND SUGGESTS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW MODELS MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEANINGFUL SUBSEQUENT RESEARCH.

Abstract

THE AUTHORS BEGIN THEIR STATE-OF-THE-ART REVIEW IN CALIFORNIA WITH A LOOK AT THE FOUR SPECIAL INTENSIVE PAROLE UNIT (SIPU) STUDIES THAT TOOK PLACE BETWEEN 1953 AND 1963. THE RESULTS, WHICH FOR THE MOST PART WERE EQUIVOCAL, ARE NOTEWORTHY FOR SEVERAL REASONS. THE PHENOMENON OF MORE VARIATION IN CONTROL GROUPS THAN IN EXPERIMENTALS WAS ENCOUNTERED. THOSE EXPERIMENTALS WITH THE HIGHEST VIOLATION POTENTIAL SEEMED TO PERFORM MORE POORLY THAN CONTROLS WHILE THREE OTHER EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS OUT-PERFORMED COMPARABLE CONTROLS. IT WAS ALSO FOUND THAT 15-MAN CASELOADS DID NO BETTER THAN 30-MAN CASELOADS. THE ONLY VARIABLE RELATED TO PAROLE OUTCOME AFTER THE FOUR SIPU STUDIES WAS, APPARENTLY, THE AMOUNT OF TIME THE OFFICER DEVOTED TO SUPERVISION. IN OTHER STUDIES, A POSTIVE CORRELATION WAS DISCOVERED BETWEEN INTENSITY OF SUPERVISION AND THE NUMBER OF TECHNICAL VIOLATIONS REPORTED. SOME STUDIES WERE HAMPERED BY THEIR INATTENTION TO FACTORS SUCH AS A LACK OF ADEQUATE CONTROLS (ADDICT EXPERIMENTALS WERE TESTED FOR DRUGS WHILE CONTROLS WERE NOT), OR A FAILURE TO CONSIDER THE DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AREA INTO WHICH THE PAROLEE OR PROBATIONER IS RELEASED. THE AUTHORS CONCLUDE THAT CASELOAD SIZE MAY BE ONLY MINIMALLY (AND TANGENTIALLY) RELATED TO VIOLATION RATES. THE RELATIONSHIP MAY BE NOTEWORTHY ONLY UNDER EXTREME CONDITIONS - SUCH AS THE INSTANCE WHERE A PAROLE/ PROBATION OFFICER HAS SO MANY CASES HE HAS NO CHANCE TO TREAT ANY OF THEM. AMONG THEIR SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH IN THIS AREA. THE AUTHORS SUGGEST THAT CASELOAD SIZES MIGHT BE DETERMINED ON A UNIT RATING BASIS. THIS WOULD INVOLVE ASSIGNING VALUES TO THE EXPECTED DIFFICULTY OF EACH CASE AND IT WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE NUMBER OF PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATIONS EXPECTED OF A CASEWORKER. A 71-ITEM BIBLIOGRAPHY IS INCLUDED.