Is Probation Working? A Guide for Managers and Methodologists

• NCJ Number: 79155
• Author(s): J S Albanese; B A Fiore; J H Powell; J R Storti
• Date Published: 1981
• Length: 188 pages
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Sale Source: University Press of America
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Based on a review of over 130 studies on adult and juvenile probation, this book assesses the effectiveness of probation and emphasizes the methodological shortcomings of previous research.

Abstract

In analyzing the criteria for measuring the success of probation, the authors find that universal criteria are nonexistent. Problems in the use of probation revocation and recidivism as criteria for failure and in causal interpretations of findings are also examined, and a summary describing the state of research on probation effectiveness and strategies for the future is presented. This summary includes studies conducted since 1950. The report also assesses the results of attempts to manipulate the size and type of probation caseloads to improve success rates. Fruitful research in this area, the report suggests, should not focus solely on the numbers and types of probationers, but rather the ways probationers are matched to probation staff and how probationers are managed. Efforts to use probation as an alternative to institutionalization are reviewed, and settings where this has been tested are examined. Results suggest the feasibility of this approach for certain offenders, with savings in both financial and human terms. The report assesses various counseling techniques, job placement, vocational training, and the use of volunteers, in improving the effectiveness of probation as a correctional alternative. Treatment in its relation to probation is viewed from the perspectives of both the law enforcement and therapeutic communtiies. The report describes attempts to apply prediction methods in probation settings. The utility of these methods in risk classification, determination of supervision levels, and program evaluation is assessed. Methodological shortcomings of previous studies are reviewed, as are the results of the few rigorous studies that have been conducted. The underuse of prediction instruments is demonstrated, although the report also shows that avenues for future applications already exist and remain to be explored. For example, the desirability of uniform probation reporting to standardize definitions of 'success' and 'failure' is widely recognized, and preliminary efforts in this area are now being made. Chapter notes are included. (Author abstract modified)