NCJ Number
189601
Journal
Corrections Compendium Volume: 26 Issue: 7 Dated: July 2001 Pages: 1-5,18,19
Editor(s)
Susan L. Clayton
Date Published
July 2001
Length
7 pages
Annotation
This article reviewed the creation, development, and operation of the Community Partnership Councils initiated under the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Parole Division.
Abstract
The public’s distrust of community corrections is complex and has been impacted by the media’s lack of understanding of corrections, as well as the lack of regular contact citizens have with these agencies. In the past, advisory groups have been seen as providing citizens with insight into the operation of community corrections and can address many of the issues that might arise between the community and a correctional agency. This article presented one such State’s effort to incorporate community input into their probation/parole system. In 1995, the parole division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) initiated Community Partnership Councils. Initially, they were created to address concerns regarding insensitivity to minorities. Their roles broadened to include a variety of purposes determined by local agency needs and council concerns. Five steps were identified as necessary in establishing a Community Partnership Council: (1) representatives of local agencies and civic groups are invited to meet at the field office; (2) the council concept is explained to emphasize its autonomy; (3) a chair is selected and the degree of organization required to meet goals is decided by the council; (4) council members compose a mission statement to describe goals and priorities; and (5) the council works with local administrators and office supervisors to select a project and engage in ancillary activities. A survey was conducted using open-ended and fixed-choice responses and distributed to all non-clerical staff in the TDCJ Parole Division offices served by a council. Open-ended questions were used to determine the types of resources officers think they most needed to help their clients avoid committing new crimes. In addition, a statewide list of council projects were used to determine which efforts officers were aware of and believed most beneficial to their agency’s goals. Concern with sensitivity to minorities and victims lies at the core of the whole notion of the Community Partnership Councils and is of vital concern for ethical, legal, and practical reasons. One of the most remarkable findings of the study was that nearly half the respondents were unsure if their office was served by a council and one in four erroneously believed that their office was not served by one. City size was identified as having the largest impact on awareness, with small cities being more aware of the existence of their Community Partnership Council than those in large metropolitan areas. Texas parole officers saw treatment resources and job assistance as what they most needed under the current organization of services. While the service provision activities of these councils are welcomed, they do not directly address the needs defined as most critical by study respondents. Community Partnership Councils do not appear to do any harm and have made contributions to service coordination and public education in Texas. However, their goal of public education remains largely unfulfilled, according to the survey results. Tables and references