Substance Involvement and Probation Outcomes: Evidence From a Cohort Study

Substance use disorders are common among justice-involved populations, the majority of whom are under community supervision in the form of probation. Substance involvement can amplify the challenges of complying with requirements of probation supervision, violations of which can lead to incarceration. In this study, we assess the role of substance involvement in violations of probation conditions across 47 counties representing 70% of individuals sentenced to probation in the state of Pennsylvania. We also consider the role of court-ordered treatment. We conclude by estimating the consequences of resentencing for substance-involved individuals in Pennsylvania (in incarceration and supervision days). Results suggest that individuals who are substance-involved are at greater risk of technical violations. However, treatment may reduce some negative outcomes for substance-involved individuals. Court-ordered treatment was associated with a reduction in the likelihood of being resentenced for a new offense relative to individuals who were substance-involved but not ordered to treatment.

Reducing Missed Appointments for Probation and Parole Supervision: a Randomized Experiment with Text Message Reminders

Research Question Can text message reminders reduce missed appointments with probation or parole officers by clients under community supervision? Data In collaboration with Arkansas Community Corrections (ACC), 4,000 clients under community supervision were selected and tracked for attendance at scheduled supervision meetings from October 1, 2018, through April 15, 2019, with a test sample of 3,470 clients scheduled to attend 14,135 appointments assigned at random to different conditions of appointment reminders. Methods Marquis Software, under contract to ACC, randomly assigned the test sample to one of four conditions of text messages generated by company software: control (no text messages before appointments), early text (2 days before the appointment), late text (1 day before the appointment), and two texts (both 1 day and 4 days before the appointment). Marquis then abstracted the records of appointment attendance by treatment group, for analysis by the academic co-authors. Findings During the 6-month experiment, the best attendance was found in the treatment group assigned to late text reminders 1 day before the appointment. That group had 29% fewer no-shows and 21% fewer cancelled appointments than the control group during the experiment. In a subsequent rollout of the late text treatment to all of the clients still under supervision, the entire remaining group had 30% fewer missed appointments compared to the control group during the experiment. Conclusions Text messages reminding clients to attend parole and probation officer meetings can reduce missed appointments, with potentially substantial reductions in imprisonment due to technical violations of community supervision conditions.

Public Support for Using “Second Chance” Mechanisms to Reconsider Long-Term Prison Sentences for Drug Crimes

Using a national sample of U.S. adults (N = 371), this study experimentally examines (1) public support for the use of strategies that provide early release (i.e., “second chance” mechanisms) to individuals serving long-term prison sentences for drug crimes; and (2) how levels of support, and reasons for support, may vary depending on the type of drug-related offense. Results show moderate levels of support for using second chance mechanisms, both generally and in relation to specific strategies commonly available across jurisdictions, for a range of drug offenders. Yet participants showed significantly more support for using presumptive parole, elimination of parole revocations for technical violations, second-look sentencing, and compassionate release in the cases of those incarcerated long term for serious trafficking of marijuana, as compared to serious trafficking of serious drugs. Data also suggest that the public finds a range of factors—including the original sentence being extreme by international standards, extreme due to racially biased practices, out of step with current sentencing values/practices, too costly, and continuing to incarcerate someone unlikely to be a public safety threat—as at least moderately important to their support for the use of second chance mechanisms across drug crimes, and the importance of these factors to that support does not appear to differ significantly based on the type of drug offense. The importance of these results for policy making and utilization are discussed, as well as implications for reducing our historical reliance on drug-related incarceration.

Using of biometric technologies in the electoral process: opportunities and limitations

The article examines the prospects, as well as the limitations associated with the possible use of biometric technologies in the electoral process of the Russian Federation, in particular, the inaccessibility of centers that collect biometric data, low awareness of citizens, failure of biometric technologies. The article analyzes the risks that can lead to unlawful deprivation of voters’ constitutional rights to participate in elections and referendums. In the end, it is concluded that it is necessary to provide legal guarantees for observing the electoral rights of citizens and the right to participate in a referendum, in particular, to establish a procedure for fixing the facts of technical violations that do not allow identifying voters and making a decision on admitting such voters to voting. This procedure is designed to guarantee the observance of the electoral rights of citizens in conditions of impossibility of biometric identification due to technical violations.

Probation Revocation

Probation revocation is an event in which the court, after finding that one or more probation violations have been proven, rescinds an individual’s probation sentence and executes a jail or prison sentence. Probation is a community-based sanction for criminal behavior, often represented as an alternative to incarceration. A person who is placed on probation serves a defined period in the community, during which the individual is subject to the supervision of a probation officer and must comply with and complete multiple conditions of probation. Probation conditions are requirements an individual is ordered to follow or complete during the period of probation. Conditions can include administrative requirements, such as reporting regularly to one’s probation officer; public safety requirements, such as no contact with the victim; and required programming or services, such as substance abuse treatment. If an individual fails to comply with or complete any of the conditions of probation, the probation officer can allege a probation violation to the court, detailing the noncompliant behavior. There are two main types of probation violations: new crimes and technical violations. When an individual commits a new offense while serving a term of probation, the offense can serve both as the basis for a probation violation and as a charge in a new criminal case. Violations of probation conditions that do not involve new criminal behavior are commonly referred to as “technical violations.” With the recognition of mass incarceration in the United States, attention has more recently been paid to the parallel growth of mass probation and the contribution of probation revocations to prison and jail populations. The Council of State Governments estimates that in 2017, 45 percent of prison admissions were due to probation and parole violations. Thus, more research and attention is being paid to determining how to reduce probation revocations. This article identifies points of discretion leading to probation revocation, discusses issues in defining probation outcomes, summarizes common predictors of probation revocation and recidivism, and discusses the impact of the form and intensity of probation on probation outcomes.

The Relationship Between Patterns of Change in Dynamic Risk and Strength Scores and Reoffending for Men on Community Supervision

Research is needed focusing on the predictive nature of dynamic risk and strength score changes. The current study includes 11,953 Canadian men under community supervision with Service Planning Instrument re-assessment data. Using a retrospective, multi-wave longitudinal design, hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) was conducted to assess patterns of change in total dynamic risk and strength scores across three to five timepoints over 30 months. Change parameters from the HLM were incorporated into regression models, linking change to three reoffending outcomes: technical violations, new charges, and new violent charges. Results indicated that total dynamic risk scores decreased over time and total dynamic strength scores increased over time, although the rate of change for both was gradual. Change in total dynamic risk scores was predictive of all outcomes, whereas change in total dynamic strength scores only predicted technical violations. Results demonstrated the utility of re-assessing dynamic risk and strength scores over time.

Recidivism and Cognitive Behavioral Therapies

Recidivism of criminal offenders has become a national problem in the United States. New criminal activity along with technical violations of conditions of probation or parole are the results of deficiencies in cognitive behaviorisms. Numerous studies have revealed that weaknesses in cognitive behavior are a common denominator among offenders. These studies have led to the development and implementation of treatment strategies that, when administered to criminal offenders, have proven to be effective in reducing recidivism. Therapeutic programs grounded in evidence-based practices are widely used throughout correctional facilities and probation-parole departments. However, this evidence-based approach in reducing recidivism is moot if correctional leadership is not supportive of rehabilitative programs for offenders. The efficacy and success of these programs are dependent on effective leadership along with professionals and paraprofessionals that are specifically credentialed or licensed and have the qualities and skillsets to provide these types of rehabilitative measures.

The Impact of a Community Supervision Officer Training Program on Client Outcomes: A Propensity Score Modeling Analysis by Officer Training Dosage

A growing body of research indicates officer training in correctional supervision programs is associated with improved use of evidence-based practices and lower rates of client recidivism. This scholarship also suggests larger reductions in recidivism can be achieved when officers implement program skills with higher quality. Despite their potential, research has shown standard training regiments alone are not sufficient in making all participants proficient users of skills. There is a need to determine what intensity of training produces the best results. In response, this study assessed the impact of federal probation officer training dosage in the Staff Training Aimed at Reducing Re-arrest (STARR) program on the outcomes of their clients. The results indicated clients of STARR-trained officers had fewer probation revocations and new arrests but more technical violations and positive drug tests. We also found clients supervised by officers with more versus less exposure to the STARR model had better outcomes.

Who Gets a Second Chance? Effectiveness and Equity in Supervision of Criminal Offenders

Most convicted offenders serve their sentences under “community supervision” at home instead of in prison. Under supervision, however, a technical rule violation such as not paying fees can result in incarceration. Rule violations account for 25% of prison admissions nationally and are significantly more common among black offenders. I test whether technical rules are effective tools for identifying likely reoffenders and deterring crime and examine their disparate racial impacts using administrative data from North Carolina. Analysis of a 2011 reform reducing prison punishments for technical violations on probation reveals that 40% of rule breakers would go on to commit crimes if spared harsh punishment. The same reform also closed a 33% black-white gap in incarceration rates without substantially increasing the black-white reoffending gap. These effects combined imply that technical rules target riskier probationers overall, but disproportionately affect low-risk black offenders. To justify black probationers’ higher violation rate on efficiency grounds, their crimes must be roughly twice as socially costly as that of white probationers. Exploiting the repeat-spell nature of the North Carolina data, I estimate a semiparametric competing-risks model that allows me to distinguish the effects of particular types of technical rules from unobserved probationer heterogeneity. Rules related to the payment of fees and fines, which are common in many states, are ineffective in tagging likely reoffenders and drive differential impacts by race. These findings illustrate the potentially large influence of ostensibly race-neutral policies on racial disparities in the justice system.