Juvenile Probation Supervision Contacts in a Reforming State: Rise of the Street-Level Expert?

2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 332-353
Author(s):  
Joel Miller ◽  
Courtney S. Harding

We examined juvenile probation officers’ use of evidence-based principles in routine supervision contacts in five counties of a reforming state, focusing on relationship quality, attention to criminogenic needs, and the use of structuring activities. We did this using ethnographic observations of 112 routine supervision contacts, supplemented by qualitative interviews and a practitioner survey. Analysis showed officers typically applied some evidence-based principles in supervision meetings, though encounters varied in their focus on rehabilitation, and whether rehabilitative work used specialized techniques. Variations were shaped by client circumstances and meeting contexts. They also reflected officers’ affinity for specialized approaches, with evidence suggesting the existence of a group of “experts” within the officer population committed to using specialized techniques. The presence of experts was related, in part, to offices’ leadership, organizational practices, and history with evidence-based reforms. Findings offer cautious optimism about the prospects for mainstreaming these evidence-based principles within community corrections agencies.

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Sydney N. Ingel ◽  
Lynnea R. Davis ◽  
Danielle S. Rudes ◽  
Taylor N. Hartwell ◽  
Tess K. Drazdowski ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mickey D. Stein ◽  
Bryan T. Forrester ◽  
Hannah Holt ◽  
Larry E. Beutler

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina M. Vincent ◽  
Laura S. Guy ◽  
Samantha L. Fusco ◽  
Bernice G. Gershenson

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura M. White ◽  
Matthew C. Aalsma ◽  
Evan D. Holloway ◽  
Erin L. Adams ◽  
Michelle P. Salyers

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 252-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Viglione ◽  
Danielle Rudes ◽  
Vienna Nightingale ◽  
Carolyn Watson ◽  
Faye Taxman

The role of juvenile probation officers (JPOs) involves a balancing act between “child saving” and community safety activities. In this study, we examine JPOs’ supervision strategies and how these fit within a juvenile justice framework. Using surveys and latent class analysis, we examine the extent to which JPOs engage in a variety of case management and supervision strategies. Findings reveal little evidence supporting a purely law enforcement role and identified a new class of JPOs that does not fit within the traditional role definitions but focuses on a pro forma role that was nonengaged in case management and supervision activities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document