NCJ Number
170829
Journal
Alternatives to Incarceration Volume: 4 Issue: 1 Dated: (January/February 1998) Pages: 18-21
Date Published
1998
Length
4 pages
Annotation
This paper examines policy responses to probation and parole violations in five States to determine the impact of using intermediate sanctions rather than incarceration for all but the most dangerous violators.
Abstract
A review of the revocation policy of the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services addresses the policy's impact on the risk to the community, on court resources, and on jail use. An assessment of the revocation policy of the Missouri Board of Probation and Parole considers the policy's impact on prison admissions. A review of the probation revocation policy of Macomb County (Michigan) considers its impact on jail use, and an evaluation of the North Carolina Department of Corrections' policy of probation and parole revocation addresses its impact on revocation rates. A review of Pima County's (Arizona) probation revocation policy focuses on how it has affected the reduction in delay in responding to violators. Some of these reviews highlight the available quantitative impact data, and other agencies present the available descriptive and qualitative information. The data suggest that in addition to measurable impact on revocation rates, admissions to prison, etc., new thinking about violations and revocations is having a significant effect on the way probation and parole agencies do their work. It is stimulating efforts to target resources, change offender behavior, and define agency missions and goals. 4 exhibits