Probation in the United States: Practices and Challenges

• NCJ Number: 184602
• Journal: National Institute of Justice Journal Issue: 233 Dated: September 1997 Pages: 2-8
• Author(s): Joan Petersilia
• Date Published: September 1997
• Length: 7 pages
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This article describes current probation practices and offers suggestions on meeting the challenges that probation agencies are experiencing.

Abstract

Probation departments are more extensively involved with offenders and their cases than any other justice agency and often start their involvement at the arrest. Probation officers interact with many criminal justice agencies and significantly affect a wide spectrum of justice processing decisions, including decisions on pretrial release, diversion, sentencing, the probation conditions to monitor most closely, probation violations, and the initial security classifications of offenders sentenced to prison. The average caseload in 1994 was 258 adult offenders per line officer; many regard 30 as the ideal caseload. Probation funding has long been recognized as woefully inadequate. Recidivism is currently the main outcome measure for probation and other corrections programs. Recidivism rates are low for adults on probation for misdemeanors and high for felony misdemeanants. Some probation departments have begun to report alternative outcome measures and believe that this practice is having a positive impact on staff morale, public image, and funding. In addition, the public’s understanding that not all criminals can be incarcerated has led to renewed attention to probation. Suggested actions to revive probation include implementing quality programs for appropriate probation target groups and making probation a priority research topic. Actions that can achieve greater crime control over probationers include providing adequate funding for treatment programs known to be effective, combining treatment and surveillance in probation programs and focusing them on appropriate offender subgroups, and convincing citizens that probation sanctions are punitive and in the long run are cost-effective. Additional recommendations and reference notes