NCJ Number
223581
Journal
Howard Journal of Criminal Justice Volume: 47 Issue: 3 Dated: July 2008 Pages: 275-296
Date Published
July 2008
Length
22 pages
Annotation
This paper reviews the public’s opinion in relation to the functions of probation and parole and how the probation and parole profession must establish and implement performance measures of policies and practices to provide evidence of public safety.
Abstract
The best way to assure professional viability is to rely on performance measures of policies and practices that derive from sound research or, in the absence of research evidence, are theoretically sound. What is needed in the probation and parole profession are measures of activities that are known or seriously believed to produce valued results. The public and their elected officials are interested in bottom-line outcomes that are self-evident with regard to public safety, not how busy probation and parole agencies are. Failure to adopt rational principles for producing and measuring meaningful results will keep the probation and parole profession unfocused with regard to its purpose. Probation and parole functions are viewed by many in the general public and other components of the criminal justice system as a ‘slap on the wrist’ as opposed to viable systems for delivering services that enhance public safety and justice. While some probation and parole agencies are exemplars of attempts to base their policies and practices in empirical research findings and sound theory and to punctuate their contributions to enhancing public safety and justice through results-driven management information systems, most are not. The probation and parole profession must come to a broad agreement regarding desired outcomes and establish evidence-based and/or theoretically-sound professional principles. The profession should focus on producing publicly-valued results and disseminating easily-understood information that justifies their important role within America’s criminal justice system. Notes, references