How Are Sex Offenders Managed on Probation and Parole? A National Survey, Final Report

• NCJ Number: 159765
• Author(s): K English; S Colling-Chadwick; S Pullen; L Jones
• Date Published: 1995
• Length: 116 pages
• Grant Number(s): 92-IJ-CX-K021
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services; Colorado Dept of Public Safety
• Publication Type: Survey
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The management of sex offenders by probation and parole departments across the United States was studied based on a content analysis of sex offense statutes, a telephone survey of 732 probation and parole supervisors, and a review of the theoretical and research literature on victim trauma and sex offender management and treatment. Data set archived by the NIJ Data Resources Program at the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data, located at URL http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/nacjd.

Abstract

The study also involved a systematic document review of manuals and department policies and field research with site visits to many jurisdictions in Arizona, Colorado, Ohio, Louisiana, Oregon, and Texas. Findings revealed 78 percent of probation supervisors reported their departments included a written victim impact statement in the sex offender's case file, compared to 63 percent of parole supervisors. About 30 percent of probation supervisors and 19 percent of parole supervisors said officers had contact with the assault victim, and 31 percent of probation supervisors and 30 percent of parole supervisors said their departments had a system for informing victims of significant changes in the status of the sex offender's case. Court-ordered or officer-ordered treatment requirements and no contact provisions were the most commonly reported special conditions of probation and parole. More than 85 percent said treatment was always or often a condition for sex offenders receiving community supervision. Fewer than 10 percent of departments reported the routine use of electronic monitoring of sex offenders. Sanctions that could be imposed immediately, in less than 24 hours, were the most likely sanctions short of revocation to be used by probation and parole officers supervising sex offenders. More than 80 percent of respondents reported some form of mental health treatment was required of sex offenders placed under supervision. Two-thirds of respondents indicated they had received training in the area of sex offender management. Appendixes contain additional information on study methods and findings, as well as sample forms. References and tables