intensive supervision probation
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

13
(FIVE YEARS 1)

H-INDEX

5
(FIVE YEARS 0)

Author(s):  
Geoffrey C. Barnes ◽  
Jordan M. Hyatt

Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) is a form of community supervision that employs smaller caseloads, more frequent contacts, and a variety of other mechanisms to increase the level of surveillance and control for those on criminal probation. While this approach has seen successive waves of research interest, the evidence on its effectiveness seems relatively disappointing. Most existing studies have shown that ISP produces very little reduction in recidivism, while also being more costly to deliver. In addition, ISP’s surveillance mechanisms result in more frequent detection of technical violations, leading to a greater use of incarceration. Despite these disappointing findings, however, there is some potential for ISP to be used in a positive way. Recent developments in assessing both the risk of offending and the criminogenic needs of individual probationers, combined with shifts in the philosophical foundations of community supervision, suggest that ISP could prove to be a useful and productive tool when targeted at the most advantageous population of criminal offenders.


Author(s):  
Jessica Bouchard ◽  
Jennifer S. Wong

Community correctional sentences are administered to more juvenile offenders in North America than any other judicial sentence. Particularly prominent in juvenile corrections is intensive supervision probation and aftercare/reentry, yet the effects of these supervision-oriented interventions on recidivism are mixed. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to determine the effects of intensive supervision probation and aftercare/reentry on juvenile recidivism. An extensive search of the literature and application of strict inclusion criteria resulted in the selection of 27 studies that contributed 55 individual effect sizes. Studies were pooled based on intervention type (intensive supervision probation or aftercare/reentry) and outcome measure (alleged or convicted offenses). The pooled analyses yielded contradictory results with respect to outcome measure; in both cases, supervision had a beneficial effect on alleged offenses and negatively affected convicted offenses. These patterns across intervention type and outcome measure, as well as recommendations for future research, are discussed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan M. Hyatt ◽  
Geoffrey C. Barnes

This article reports the results of an experimental evaluation of the impact of Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) on probationer recidivism. Participants, who were assessed at an increased likelihood of committing serious crimes and not ordered to specialized supervision, were randomly assigned to ISP ( n = 447) or standard probation ( n = 385). ISP probationers received more restrictive supervision and experienced more office contacts, home visitations, and drug screenings. After 12 months, there was no difference in offending. This equivalence holds across multiple types of crimes, including violent, non-violent, property, and drug offenses, as well as in a survival analysis conducted for each offense type. ISP probationers absconded from supervision, were charged with technical violations, and were incarcerated at significantly higher rates. Policy implications for these results are discussed.


2002 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Giblin

This study presents an evaluation of the Anchorage Coordinated Agency Network (CAN) program. The program combined the capacities of both the Anchorage Police Department and the Anchorage Office of Juvenile Probation to enhance the overall levels of supervision that juvenile probationers received. Consistent with research from intensive supervision literature, the CAN evaluation found that juveniles participating in the program were more likely to have new technical violations but no more likely to have new charges when comparedto juveniles on regular probation. These findings support intensive supervision probation literature suggesting that increased supervision and surveillance lead to increased levels of probation violations.


1992 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 539-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Turner ◽  
Joan Petersilia ◽  
Elizabeth Piper Deschenes

This article reports results from a recently completed randomized field experiment testing the effects of intensive supervision probation/parole (ISP) for drug-involved offenders. The ISP demonstration project, funded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, included five jurisdictions: Contra Costa, California; Seattle, Washington; Des Moines, Iowa; Santa Fe, New Mexico; and Winchester, Virginia. Jurisdictions developed ISP programs tailored to their own contexts, using the general ISP model developed by Georgia and New Jersey in the early 1980s. Results show that ISP offenders were seen more often, submitted more often to drug testing, received more drug counseling, and had higher levels of employment than their counterparts on routine probation/parole supervision. With respect to 1-year recidivism outcomes, a higher proportion of ISP offenders had technical violations (primarily for drug use), but there was no difference between the two study groups in new criminal arrests. At the end of the 1-year follow-up, more ISP offenders had been placed in jail or prison (mostly for technical violations). This policy drove up system costs, which for ISP averaged just under $8,000 per year per offender versus about $5,500 per year per offender for routine supervision. The article concludes with a discussion of how these results can be used to inform future ISP research and policy discussions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document