NCJ Number
202160
Journal
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume: 72 Issue: 9 Dated: September 2003 Pages: 20-24
Date Published
September 2003
Length
5 pages
Annotation
This article discusses a program aimed at improving and intensifying monitoring of offenders to reduce criminal activity and recidivism.
Abstract
The Wausau (Wisconsin) Police Department and the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC)/Division of Community Corrections formed a partnership to develop a program to help increase rule compliance. Developed specifically to work with high-risk offenders, the two agencies called their effort Proactive Gang Resistance Enforcement, Suppression, and Supervision (PROGRESS). The program allowed probation/parole agents to conduct systematic home visits on high-risk offenders during the hours of least expectation. The program had two basic objectives: (1) for offenders to become aware of the increased certainty of detection of rule violations; and (2) for offenders to experience the immediate consequences of such violations. The agencies wished to emphasize the certainty of punishment, not the severity. The process of conducting home visits on high-risk offenders necessitated a creative, flexible, and adaptable partnership between the DOC and the police department. Probation/parole agents always led the home visits with the police officers available as support and to provide safety and immediate action if custodial detention or criminal activity was discovered. The PROGRESS team conducted nearly 130 nights of home visits during the 2 years of operation, October 1999 through September 2001. The team found roughly 200 offenders in violation of supervision. The majority of violations involved alcohol and curfew infractions followed by contact with unauthorized persons. The program achieved its ultimate goal of increasing rule compliance and has proven successful in other areas, such as the reduction in arrests by law enforcement officers for criminal offenses detected during home visits. PROGRESS has also had a positive effect on the relationship between the DOC and the police department. 3 endnotes